Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Great Point here. It is very hard to say whether Canada will go. It looks like English speaking part of Canada can be absorbed? What will happen at that time?
there has been posts in the Canadian forum, and 99.9% Canadians are against it. It is never a A is better off under B scenario here.
Some economists made strong case that Canada and US should merge, but Canada's false sense of national pride will make it impossible. If merged, this country will be unthinkably strong. Canada has so much land and resources that the country is simple unable to tap and make use of, on the other hand, America's large population will help Canada to get out of its small economies of scale. Plus, the two countries have the same origin, eat the same food, watch the same TV, close to zero cultural barrier.
there has been posts in the Canadian forum, and 99.9% Canadians are against it. It is never a A is better off under B scenario here.
Some economists made strong case that Canada and US should merge, but Canada's false sense of national pride will make it impossible. If merged, this country will be unthinkably strong. Canada has so much land and resources that the country is simple unable to tap and make use of, on the other hand, America's large population will help Canada to get out of its small economies of scale. Plus, the two countries have the same origin, eat the same food, watch the same TV, close to zero cultural barrier.
Well, I know why: Because Canada is too liberal and Alabama is too conservative. Alabama folks will feel worse off when they see numerous liberals down in south..Lol...Just kidding...
French speaking part of Canada may be 100% against it, but if North America want to keep superpower on this planet, there maybe a possibility.
Well, I know why: Because Canada is too liberal and Alabama is too conservative. Alabama folks will feel worse off when they see numerous liberals down in south..Lol...Just kidding...
French speaking part of Canada may be 100% against it, but if North America want to keep superpower on this planet, there maybe a possibility.
If Massachusetts and Alabama can be in the same country, so can Canada.
The Canadians oppose it not because it makes no sense, or that they don't see the huge benefit, but because they think the idea Canada will disappear and that hurts their pride.
so? what's your point? Kenya might be better of under British rule too, doesn't mean it should be. Canada is better off under the US too.
Accept the fact that HK is not a part of Britain any more. The tie has been cut and it is part of China now.
I know HKers still feel somewhat superior now, such sentiment will diminish over time. Once upon a time in the 1970/1980, mainland Chinese adore Hong Kong greatly, all the glamour, the movies/TV shows, fashion, music. Now HK is quickly eclipsed by Shanghai, and the admiration toward Hong Kong has died down very quickly. Now most will view HK and Shanghai almost equally.
Shanghai is really not interesting at all compared to HOng Kong.
But, Beijing has been siphoning off the wealth from HK since they took it back, and pumping all that money into Shanghai and Beijing. So, it makes sense that it APPEARS to be equal.
But anyone who has spent some good time in both cities, Shanghai is way less desirable from most point-of-views. It's just the money/opportunity that Beijing is making happen in Shanghai, that is the only real attractive thing. In my opinion.
If Massachusetts and Alabama can be in the same country, so can Canada.
That's a good point!
I've long felt that much of Northern U.S. is very similar to Canada. Canadians speak of Canada in comparison to Alabama/Texas. But if you compared it to Seattle/Boston/Chicago/New York/etc....Canadian cities have a lot in common.
Shanghai is really not interesting at all compared to HOng Kong.
But, Beijing has been siphoning off the wealth from HK since they took it back, and pumping all that money into Shanghai and Beijing. So, it makes sense that it APPEARS to be equal.
But anyone who has spent some good time in both cities, Shanghai is way less desirable from most point-of-views. It's just the money/opportunity that Beijing is making happen in Shanghai, that is the only real attractive thing. In my opinion.
that's not a fair assessment.
How did Beijing siphon off Hong Kong? If anything, Beijing's policy made sure HK could keep its status and that will probably change as Shanghai is building its deep water port as well and the pilot free trade zone （HK has been lobbying heavily to prevent that from happening because it knows it can't compete with Shanghai in the long term). Back in the days, Shanghai was the Paris of east Asia, China's premier city for centuries and HK in comparison was nothing but a village until not long ago. Shanghai declined for decades and is bouncing back strongly and will surely challenge HK directly - it is not completely there yet but it is just a matter of time. Shanghai's port, being closer to the mainland China, Japan and Korea market, has a better location than HK. HK like Singapore is all about its port. Without the importance of which it will quickly decline.
If you argument is Shanghai is happening because Beijing is making it, well, do you really think HK can make it without the favourable policies from Beijing as well? If not for the China market, what makes HK one of the business port in the world? Now Shanghai is becoming a free port as well, and let's wait and see who will win in the end. Don't forget Shanghai's population is more than 3 times that of Hong Kong, and is surrounded by China's most important manufacture bases, blessed with highly educated workforce and has China's most efficient and transparent government. China is intending to make Shanghai an international shipping and financial center, exactly the same rule HK is playing.
HK may be glamourous from Victoria Harbour, and its extent of westernization makes westerners feel more at home, but as a city of 7M with hardly any potential to grow, it simply can't compete with Shanghai. With all due respect, HK has peaked in its importance and Shanghai is rapidly rising, although HK still largely has the edge. Eventually Shanghai will be more at par with Tokyo (mostly at the expense of HK's relative decline) while HK more like Toronto and Frankfurt.
If you don't believe it, look at Pudong 15 years ago and now. It turned from a largely rural area to a vibrant district of over 5 million residents (60% more than 2000). Pudong alone has similar land area of HK. How much did HK grow since 2000?
While I do think Shanghai will inevitably exceed Hong Kong in pretty much all measures, Hong Kong is far from finished. It is still of course a major financial, shipping, transportation hub, last year it was the most visited city in the world by international visitors, and is still an attractive place to do business. It is also strategically located in the Pearl River Delta region, with over 50 million people.
Shanghai is still Mainland China, have the same laws and policies as the rest of Mainland China, and filled with locals and less educated people from poorer parts of China. Shanghai is still a developing place as opposed to well developed Hong Kong. English will never be an official language in Shanghai or any places in Mainland China. Unless Shanghai built a border fence around it and check every person entering and leaving, it will never be pretty similar to HK. Hong Kong has visa-free entry for most foreigners, is a sepearate custom area with no control on the flow of money into it, easy to do business policies, policies of economic freedom, well established fair legal systems etc. Few places can copy the model of Hong Kong and Singapore. Taiwan tried recently but failed. They don't have the conditions to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiger Beer
Shanghai is really not interesting at all compared to HOng Kong.
But anyone who has spent some good time in both cities, Shanghai is way less desirable from most point-of-views. It's just the money/opportunity that Beijing is making happen in Shanghai, that is the only real attractive thing. In my opinion.
While I do think Shanghai will inevitably exceed Hong Kong in pretty much all measures, Hong Kong is far from finished. It is still of course a major financial, shipping, transportation hub, last year it was the most visited city in the world by international visitors, and is still an attractive place to do business. It is also strategically located in the Pearl River Delta region, with over 50 million people.
Agree with that. Of course HK will remain a very powerful city, all I am saying is it has peaked and Shanghai is bound to replace it as the most important business, shipping and financial centre. Maybe in 20-30 years time. That being said, there is definitely a lot Shanghai can learn from HK, which is more mature.
Not sure about the crown of "most visited city in the world" - if you look at the statistics in more detail, it is mostly because mainland Chinese visitors are considered "international" and made up 63% of the total number, and that includes a lot of day trip from nearby Shenzhen. Not really something to boast about.
Shanghai is still Mainland China, have the same laws and policies as the rest of Mainland China, and filled with locals and less educated people from poorer parts of China. Shanghai is still a developing place as opposed to well developed Hong Kong. English will never be an official language in Shanghai or any places in Mainland China. Unless Shanghai built a border fence around it and check every person entering and leaving, it will never be pretty similar to HK. Hong Kong has visa-free entry for most foreigners, is a sepearate custom area with no control on the flow of money into it, easy to do business policies, policies of economic freedom, well established fair legal systems etc. Few places can copy the model of Hong Kong and Singapore. Taiwan tried recently but failed. They don't have the conditions to do so.
I fail to see how the availability of low skilled workers and not using English as the official language can be an obstacle for Shanghai's rising.
A city needs labour of various skill levels. In terms of education, in case you didn't know, in the international PISA test, Shanghai ranks the first on each of the three categories (math, reading, science). HK ranks 4, 4, 5; Singapore 2, 2, 2.
I don't know why China needs to adopt English as an official language. Japan didn't. Switzerland didn't. Germany didn't. S Korea didn't. And they are all highly developed countries. There is no correlation between English and economic prosperity/affluence. English is India and the Phillippine's official language on the other hand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
