GLR Forum

GLR News and Information => Geography, Economy & GLR Politics => Topic started by: Mogul on Mon, Nov 06, 2006, 12:42

Title: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Mon, Nov 06, 2006, 12:42
The following article illustrates, how a new city can be built from the scratch in the middle of nowhere:

JEC to Usher In a New Era in Jizan Development (http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1&section=0&article=77699&d=6&m=11&y=2006&pix=kingdom.jpg&category=Kingdom)

EDDAH, 6 November 2006 — Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah laid the foundation for Jizan Economic City (JEC) on Saturday night after announcing plans to establish a city designed to attract more than SR100 billion in investment.

Malaysian company MMC and Saudi Binladin Group are leading partners in the Kingdom’s fourth economic city project which is set to usher in a new era in Jizan’s development. The city will have a port, an industrial zone, a logistic service center, an energy/desalination plant and a residential zone. Many international companies have already shown their interest in investing in the city.

According to informed sources at Saudi Arabian General Investment Authority (SAGIA), the main facilitator of the project, three giant factories will be established at a cost of SR15 billion by Chinese firms.

King Abdullah, who is on his first visit to Jizan since ascending the throne in August 2005, announced plans to establish the city while attending a popular reception held in his honor by the people of the region.

The king said JEC would attract more than SR100 billion in investment and create some 500,000 new jobs. He also said that SR375 million worth of free shares in the SR15 billion JEC company would be allocated to the region’s limited income people. He also disclosed plans to establish an oil refinery in Jizan. The Ministry of Petroleum and Minerals has been instructed to conduct a feasibility study on the refinery project.

The new economic city will be located about 50 km north of Jizan city and will spread over an area of 100 million square meters. About 12 km of this land is situated close to Jizan coast while eight kilometers are inland.

“JEC will focus on heavy industries that require intense use of energy, which is readily available in the Kingdom,” SAGIA said in a statement. Jizan is located in a strategic position close to international maritime routes in the Red Sea as well as the Indian Ocean. “This will facilitate marketing of JEC products in Asia, Africa and Europe,” the statement said.

The city will also have secondary industries related to agriculture and fisheries and a full-fledged research center to support them. A regional center for the distribution of iron ore will also be established. The developers will bear all the cost for building the city’s required infrastructure.

MMC is one of the largest companies in Malaysia specializing in engineering, construction, mining, transportation, logistic services, energy and power generation. It owns and manages the main ports in Malaysia. Saudi Binladin Group has built several industrial and residential cities around the world. It employs more than 55,000 people.

SAGIA chief Amr Dabbagh said the king’s announcement concerning JEC and his support for the project were in line with the government’s strategy to achieve balanced development in all regions. He said JEC would focus on industries that needed more manpower. There will be advanced centers to train the people of the region.

King Abdullah, who is on the last leg of his tour of the south, yesterday received prominent Islamic scholars and senior civilian and military officers in Jizan. He later distributed deeds and keys for 372 low-cost houses built in Daheema village to deserving people.

The King Abdullah Charitable Housing Foundation carried out the project at a cost of SR100 million which includes mosques, schools, health, social and cultural centers and public utility facilities.

Later in the day, King Abdullah launched a number of welfare projects in Jizan including the first phase of Jizan University campus. An exhibition of the models of projects to be implemented in JEC is being held at King Faisal Sports City. The king has instructed officials to continue the exhibition for two weeks in order for the people of Jizan to become familiar with the projects and plans for the city.


Certainly, the enterprize is not of the easiest kind, but it is not that difficult too.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Feral on Tue, Nov 07, 2006, 06:14
A fascinating project. It would be interesting to see other examples that were not so dependent on heavy industry and, of course, the oil-wealth of Saudi Arabia. Most of us are so used to  old and well-established cities that it is easy to forget that it is quite possible to create them.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Wed, Nov 08, 2006, 20:10
Well, Hong-Kong and Macau might be the most striking examples, perhapts. These two cities developed breathtakingly quickly from smaller towns (for Chinese scale) to megapolices within vew decades, all thanks to immigration. They didn't start, however, right from the scratch.

What I actually wanted to demonstrate by quoting this article, is both the possibility of a new city project, and the territorial scope of such an enterprise - some 100 km2 seem to be appropriate. It is clear, however, that every city developes in pace with the number and demands of its citizens. This does not necessarily mean, that the citizens must limit themselves in comforts while living in a smaller town - all the new-founded Jewish cities (like Herzliya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herzliya)) are good examples for this approach. The latter developed from some 7.000 in 1948 to currently 84.000. At the end, building cities is a problem which is reduced to 1) planning city quarters, 2) calculating communal infrastructure and 3) building houses, streets and canalization. The velocity of actual realization of all the high-flying plans depends mostly on the number of acters involved: many autonomous projects will accomplish their goals probably much more quickly than a bureaucratical monstrum of a state-controlled agency.

The question of industries/business remains always one of the central points of every society. It belongs, however, to the competencies of the local governments and the citizens themselves to find some suitable income sources - and the experience shows that they manage this task usually rather well. Societies, which have no possibility to posess heavy industries, have to search fortune in other ways - tourism, finances, trade, shipping etc. I doubt that an entire city can live from writing and programming, but if a couple of banks, pharmaceutical companies and a few private hospitals etc. come to this, one can have some basis for a living. We shall not forget, that people themselves create consume and thus jobs - with or without heavy industry.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Athrael on Tue, May 01, 2007, 01:06
It is still the "old design" dusted off and wrapped in new ribbon and presented as "new". There are in the Southwest 'ghost towns', they surrounded the gold mine and as long as the mine produced they lived, as soon as the mine was tapped the city/town faded to abandonment as people moved on.  Although secondary sources of employment, saloons, brothels, doctors, churches, schools, etc were in place, once the main business shut down the rest closed as well.

Detroit based in auto manufacture did rather well, as soon as the auto-industry started closing factory doors the "rich" and middle class moved away in search of jobs while the poor and marginal remained. Detroit is considered a terrible failure when it comes to city planning.  Other towns dependent upon the corporation and the fickleness of the owners of the corporations stand as ruined testimony as to the economical realities of what happens when the interests of stock-holders take precedence over the workers. ruined financially, becoming ghettos of poverty where a widening deepening circle of welfare and crime spiral out of control. Poverty breeds crime, social injustice, bigotry and more.

Further It still depends on mega-corporations, mega-government and still creates classes within the framework - in other words somebody is still a ditch digger while somebody grows wealthy of that ditch. The rich get richer while the poor remain poor. The inequality of this situation needs to balanced, mostly by making the rich a little poorer so there is money for the poor. The elite still rule, the politics still remain. Yes it looks pretty on the outside, but the reality is that this a continuation of the old way of doing things.

If you are seriously considering a "Gay Nation" a Gay Society then we must examine carefully the straight way of doing things and immediately discard a great majority of those notions. We are given an opportunity to not only change the way a society views it members, we are also being given a chance to change and improve the way that that society conducts business, governs itself and to some degree establishes itself in the ecology. As far as I can tell this "new city" as laid out is much the same thing, it produces a great amount of waste, carries on the traditions of societal intolerance, is dependent upon the greed of a few rich men and takes from the land and the natural order more than it puts into that ecology.

The dependence upon foreign investors is a bad idea.  It may work, in part, for the straight aligned world, it will not work for the non-straight aligned society. However there are plenty of examples of how such a system can fail.

Investors should be mostly gay, all nationals and also workers for that corporation or series of corporations that sustain the local economy. Anything else puts you at the mercy of the fickle foreigners who will be swayed by the majority who will, as has been shown time and time again, stomp on anything remotely "gay" and seek to destroy it as soon as possible. Corporate Investors are promoters of self interest, if the majority threaten that self interest they will cave to the "popular" opinion of others.

Since you can not change the self interest of the investors, then you must make certain that the self interest of the investors will be aligned with the city/town/nation/providence in which that corporation is placed.

The Gay Community can be a powerful force, if motivated. I suspect that our GNP (Gay National Product) Is most likely in the billions even those we make up less than one percent of the population (By more modern, biased estimates not by the Kinsey Report of 10%) We already are told that Gays in the western "free" world have a larger pool of fundage not put to use in the family rearing process simply because most of us live in areas where adopting children if not directly prohibited by law is such a process we give up the notion of a family and proceed to accumulate our wealth and invest it in bed and breakfast's or spend it on gay cruises or some such.

A good corporation sells its product to the people and to its investors. Even if it is selling something that actually is useless, it makes it appear that its product is worthwhile not only as an investment but as a much needed product that the consumer must have. If you need money then you need to sell your corporation to gay investors.

In recent times we find a sudden growth of gay oriented commercialism. Trust me on this corporations realize that we gays are an untapped well spring of wealth. Although those self-same corporations have done NOTHING to promote our needs prior, they are jumping through hoops to get us to buy what ever it is they are selling.  This trend is very important and should not be dismissed out of hand. Corporations are self interested and always go after the market that will reward them with the most money. They rarely, if ever target insignificant or poor groups.

As for territory, I gave you an alternative to land. Again I point out that people are not interested in having a gay city in their back yards, their counties, their states. They will scream "Not in My Back Yard!". Further the future is sort of grim, with a predicted rise in sea levels of 12 to 17 inches in the next 50 years of feet by the end of this century. That means land will become more valued as less of it remains above water.

Going back to what I said above, this provides us with an opportunity to slough off the old way of doing things and build, really build a society, government and business model that reflects a more enlighten society.

If you are going to look at the old models, then look at them as experiments that are basic failures and seek ways to improve upon, or better those ideas.

cheers


Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Sun, May 27, 2007, 19:41
Going back to what I said above, this provides us with an opportunity to slough off the old way of doing things and build, really build a society, government and business model that reflects a more enlighten society.

If you are going to look at the old models, then look at them as experiments that are basic failures and seek ways to improve upon, or better those ideas.

Sure, all the past and existing societies should serve as examples only - good or bad - on construction of society and living areas. Thinking of a Gay society, we should take the good ideas and abandon bad ones, like any sensible people would do. I would applaud any pragmatic approach where we are open to new perspectives but also aware of our possibilities. If a swimming nation is not (yet) possible due to high coast, and any "back-yard" land-locked project is politically unviable, so may be an insular solution with extended sea farms and a merchant navy is a good middle way?

Forgive me my scepticism on social engineering, but I grew up in conditions of the "real socialism" and thus have not very good memories of societies motivated by high goals, but neglecting human nature...  Industries and economic activities can be influenced by the government to some degree, but it seems to me that this influence is better kept low. Wherever the governments attempted to dictate to the economy what it needs to produce, the result was poor and mostly provided shortages in supply even with basic goods, not to speak of more complex products. Any future Gay government should not try to influence the economy out of ideological reasons, but instead precisely look at the effects to be expected from some regulation. Then you have right, we should be open-minded to choose the ways promising the best results for the society as a whole.

Now something entirely different: I stumbled upon this report recently:

Entire Tuscan village falls to invasion of German tourists (http://timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1838437.ece)
Quote
Tuscany is about to lose one of its picturesque villages to tourist development, inevitably, but not in the usual sense. Tenuta de Castelfalfi, a hamlet in the heart of Chiantishire, will be wiped off the map, to be replaced by Toscana Resort Castelfalfi, owned outright by Germans.

TUI, Europe’s largest tour operator, has bought the entire village, 11 sq km (eight square miles) in all, boasting a medieval castle, a three-star hotel, an 18-hole golf course, and cottages and farm houses in various states of dilapidation. The Germans intend to build another hotel for their choosier customers, an adventure resort and yet another golf course.

TUI is paying €250 million (£170 million) for this highly desirable piece of real estate northwest of Siena. It says that it will offer 3,200 customers a genuine rural experience.

Locals were relieved to discover that not everything was for sale. The village church will remain Italian, and will be renovated by the Germans. (AP)
Emphases mine.

This much to the foolish argument of the folks roistering around with the "there is no free place anymore" argument. If TUI is able to purchase 11 km2 inmidst of the highly populated Italy, Gay State would be able to purchase an equally large area somewhere in less densely populated place. Taking a density of 20.000 persons per km2, those 11 km2 can give home to 220.000 persons. Considering that in Brazil (and elsewhere) more extended areas could be purchased without evicting many inhabitants, and that population density in modern city districts easily can reach some 40.000 persons per km2, what doubts can someone have that a territorial Gay State can be realistically established somewhere? As one can see, the price for the area was rather acceptable.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Athrael on Sun, May 27, 2007, 23:20

This much to the foolish argument of the folks roistering around with the "there is no free place anymore" argument. If TUI is able to purchase 11 km2 inmidst of the highly populated Italy, Gay State would be able to purchase an equally large area somewhere in less densely populated place. Taking a density of 20.000 persons per km2, those 11 km2 can give home to 220.000 persons. Considering that in Brazil (and elsewhere) more extended areas could be purchased without evicting many inhabitants, and that population density in modern city districts easily can reach some 40.000 persons per km2, what doubts can someone have that a territorial Gay State can be realistically established somewhere? As one can see, the price for the area was rather acceptable.

A tourist trap is more acceptable to the public and political mind than a Gay Nation. We may be able to purchase the land, even setup an initial base - but once the public is aware of what is going on there will be a huge outcry.

And yes there is a lot of land out there for the taking, in snow country to where you can only raise crops part of the year. In desserts where water resources are limited, on islands where water and land is limited, in many areas.  The good arable land with basic resources is owned and claimed.

Yes the population density of a city can be pretty high. Take San Francisco - in a 25 square mile area (5 miles by 5 miles) you have 739,426 people (living - more who work there every day).

The problem is not the ability to put a lot of people on a small plot of land - the problem is that you still need a lot of land in order to grow food, provide industry, provide power, provide sewage and provide trash removal, fresh water and all of that.

San Francisco imports water from the Hetch Hetchy reservoir which is a glacial valley in Yosemite National Park in California. The water is piped/canaled 150 plus miles (241 KM) to S.F.

Food is imported not only from the central valley of California (50 to 100 miles/80 to 160 km), but also globally. Each person requires 600 square meters (6458.346 square feet) of land to raise food, supply roads to the city, for electrical, sewage and landfill (That is the minimal, many people actually have more land for their use)

Using San Francisco as example: although it sits on 5 miles x 5 miles (25 square miles/65 square kilometers), it uses 171.3 square miles (443.66 square km) (13 miles by 13 miles roughly on top of the 5x5) to supply all of those people. That is assuming the bare minimum of land use per person. The reality is more like twice to three times the amount of land since we are talking about a people who want a lot more than what they need.

Increase the density of the urban setting and you need more supporting land.

Unless you desire to have the GLBT nation at the mercy of supporting nations (for imports of basics like food and water) then you need to rethink buying land and claiming it as a Nation. 

We can cut some of those numbers down if we rethink how crops are grown, if we place the amount of proteins in the diet off of cattle/meat and into other sources. The best I can get from land is 250 square feet (23.2 square meters) per person for food only (small animals, organic intensive year round crop production of agricultural (land based) produce substantially backed by other food resources (fish). I am basing these numbers on my ability to raise a year supply of vegetables on a small plot of garden (18' x 16') for two people along with my estimated land use for each person for chicken, grains (wheat, rice, etc) and some (like half of the usual diet) of beef. Even then we are talking of a spartan diet - one that most people would not like or even desire. Filling and good for you, but not heavy in meats and dairy.

My actual garden does not supply fruits (oranges,  peaches, berries) with the exception of one grape vine which produces a lot of grapes and in reality has less growing land since I use raised beds with a center path for tending the garden.  I use organic, intensive, successive planting - 3 season growing methods (living in warm sunny California we have a much longer growing period) I raise mostly seasonal vegetables. I can/preserve some of the crop, but usually we live on fresh straight out of the garden food.

This is the extreme method of living off of the minimal amount of land - it would not work on a large population - not unless you want everybody working a garden to raise most of their own foods.

And it does not include  supply roads from the farms, wells or fresh water supplies, sewage treatment, land fill/recycling facilities, energy production etc. Nor any of the luxuries like plastics, metals, etc.

Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Mon, May 28, 2007, 19:14
The problem is not the ability to put a lot of people on a small plot of land - the problem is that you still need a lot of land in order to grow food, provide industry, provide power, provide sewage and provide trash removal, fresh water and all of that. [..] Unless you desire to have the GLBT nation at the mercy of supporting nations (for imports of basics like food and water) then you need to rethink buying land and claiming it as a Nation. 

My expectation towards the Gay country is that it will be not an agrarian society, yes. Sure, in an ideal case it is desireable to have an autarc supply for every ressource, but honestly in the today's world it's not possible anyway. I am comfortable with the prospective to buy food from other states - in exchange for other goods that the economy of the Gay country would produce. The same with cotton, leather, beef and computer chips -- I do not see the urgent necessity to produce everything from flour to TFT displays by ourselves. More important is to find some sort of income to make all those desired goods available - tourism, literature, medicines production, whatever. Mind you, setting up an "independent nation" doesn't mean to isolate oneselve from the global economy. Every nation would have significant difficulties to maintain its wealth in case of an economical blocade. The challenge is actually not to ensure that one posesses all the necessary stuf on one's territory, but to secure supply by means of diplomacy and establishing mutual dependencies. 

The other objections concerning the communal infrastructure are noticed. On any given territory (and this will be possibly the case), the city planners will have to calculate all these necessary facilities to support the population. Clean water is a majour problem almost everywhere, and if it must be imported, a kind of depository will be required to guarantee the supply in times of crisis. Water can be rationated, in really bad times, too. 
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Athrael on Tue, May 29, 2007, 01:21
My expectation towards the Gay country is that it will be not an agrarian society, yes. Sure, in an ideal case it is desireable to have an autarc supply for every ressource, but honestly in the today's world it's not possible anyway. I am comfortable with the prospective to buy food from other states - in exchange for other goods that the economy of the Gay country would produce. The same with cotton, leather, beef and computer chips -- I do not see the urgent necessity to produce everything from flour to TFT displays by ourselves. More important is to find some sort of income to make all those desired goods available - tourism, literature, medicines production, whatever. Mind you, setting up an "independent nation" doesn't mean to isolate oneselve from the global economy. Every nation would have significant difficulties to maintain its wealth in case of an economical blocade. The challenge is actually not to ensure that one posesses all the necessary stuf on one's territory, but to secure supply by means of diplomacy and establishing mutual dependencies. 

The other objections concerning the communal infrastructure are noticed. On any given territory (and this will be possibly the case), the city planners will have to calculate all these necessary facilities to support the population. Clean water is a majour problem almost everywhere, and if it must be imported, a kind of depository will be required to guarantee the supply in times of crisis. Water can be rationated, in really bad times, too. 

Then why even bother with creating an independent Gay nation?  Why even worry about a military either - if you are going to depend upon global imports for necessities like food and water any war is already over. Politically the state will be at the mercy of the threat of sanctions making it politically impotent and just a puppet to the international world that feeds it, waters it and supplies it.

California raised 1/4 of the food that the USA uses - that more than enough to feed the population of California - it is not an agrarian society, in fact we are pretty much cutting edge technology and very urban and suburban.

California learned the hard way on how dependence upon outside sources for a main necessity like Energy can really lead to problems. The Power Crises of 2000-2001 still impacts us, is still costing us - so much we went from 5th world economy to 8th world economy in less than 5 years. And that was just business, it wasn't an act of war. We are still at the mercy of exterior energy suppliers, we are still on the verge of rolling black-outs and still paying through the nose for electricity.

The GLBT nation will be the most loathed and hated - so much so that dependence upon exterior sources for anything poised a great risk to its survival. People can live without computer chips, TV's, Computers, and stuff like that - they can not live without food and water. Those two critical elements must be produced within the homeland - failure to do so and the GLBT nation will be powerless, political impotenant and readily destroyed.

Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Feral on Tue, May 29, 2007, 05:06
Isn't "powerless, politically impotent and readily destroyed" what the Gay people are right now? More powerful, more politically potent, and less readily destroyed would be a considerable improvement. Omnipotent and indestructible I will leave to those who are more ambitious. I do, however, agree with you in principle... there are limits to the feasibility of depending on others. That said, there are also limits on the attainability of self-sufficiency. Few countries are entirely self-sufficient in all things (or even some things). Most consider this issue to be a matter of some interest in terms of state security, which it naturally is.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Athrael on Tue, May 29, 2007, 20:54
Isn't "powerless, politically impotent and readily destroyed" what the Gay people are right now? More powerful, more politically potent, and less readily destroyed would be a considerable improvement. Omnipotent and indestructible I will leave to those who are more ambitious. I do, however, agree with you in principle... there are limits to the feasibility of depending on others. That said, there are also limits on the attainability of self-sufficiency. Few countries are entirely self-sufficient in all things (or even some things). Most consider this issue to be a matter of some interest in terms of state security, which it naturally is.

I'm not saying self sufficiency in all things, I know that that would require a lot more. But food, water, Energy should be produced at home.

Few countries are made up of people who are hated/feared by all people they can afford the luxury of depending on other states.  The GLBT nation will not have that luxury. We plan to set up a GLBT nation to have political power due to the hatred/bigotry/persecution and the inequalities visited upon GLBT globally. It should be set up in a manner and form where those pressures that create it can not mold it into yet another hetero-centric society ran by exterior powers.

It will never be omnipotent and indestructible as long as it is based on earth. Perhaps in future when mankind reaches for the stars the distances between stellar systems will afford that I leave that musing to the future. However it should strive to be as strong, as resilient as possible. It should quickly move toward sustainable living to where it does not depend upon the hetero-world for goods and products which amount to leverage against it.

* * * *

If it desires more power over other nations then it must develop leverage over other nations.

When we look at countries like North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, India, USA, USSR, etc - the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction serve two purposes.

1. As a defensive posture that will cause any nation intent on attacking first think of the greater consequences - nobody desires to trigger a nuclear war.

2. Holding a WMD gives you leverage over other nations politically - you can "threaten more" out of other nations.

I'm not saying that the GLBT nation should seek to be a nuclear power, I'm only pointing to examples which show that nations work best with some form of leverage to attain more power.  The principle applies in reverse, the less leverage a nation has the more it must depend on a sponsoring nation.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Tue, May 29, 2007, 23:46
I think we all agree that the Gay settlement should posess as much territory as possible, and have as much power as it can gain. But it is also clear that 400 km2 in Mongolia will not necessarily serve us better than 20km2 in Thailand. Ressources must be awailable - whether they are located on our territory or can be purchased easily. Good relationships to countries which are not homophobic are important, and diversification is probably even more important.

Thus, a sea port would be really necessary. BTW, have you seen pictures of Tel Aviv? The architecture is simply awesome. :)

(http://static.flickr.com/76/208515131_b006e05af5.jpg)
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Wed, Jun 20, 2007, 05:12
Conservancy Buys Large Area of Adirondack Wilderness (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/19/nyregion/19adirondacks.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion&oref=slogin)
Quote
The last big piece of privately owned timberland in the Adirondacks — a craggy 161,000-acre wilderness of hardwood forests, 80 mountain peaks, 70 crystal-clear lakes and ponds, undammed rivers, white water gorges and secluded bogs — has been sold for $110 million to the Nature Conservancy, in a move intended to protect the land from future development. [..] The conservancy will also continue to pay $1.1 million in local property taxes to the 31 towns in 6 counties where the land is situated.

If my calcilations are correct, 161,000 acres make some 651 km², right? 110 million USD for 651 km² isn't extraordinary much, even considering 1.1 million USD per year in taxes. Somebody tell me, "there is no free land"...
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Feral on Thu, Jun 21, 2007, 04:42
;) Close enough. What's 543,884 square meters between friends? It's not like anyone has seriously measured the place. I'm fairly certain the deed will say 'approximately' 161,000 acres. This swath of land is costing someone €0.74 per square meter. I seriously doubt one can buy even ugly carpeting for that price.

Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Mon, Aug 06, 2007, 11:20
China bans crude family planning slogans (http://www.thestar.com/DesiLife/News/article/243447)
Quote
China has banned crude and insensitive slogans promoting the country's "one-child" family planning policy, such as "Raise fewer babies but more piggies," which have stoked anger in rural areas, state media said Sunday.

China's 28-year-old family planning policy limits most urban couples to just one child and allows some families in the countryside to have a second child if their first is a girl.

Critics say that has led to forced abortions and sterilizations and a dangerously imbalanced sex ratio due to the traditional preference for male heirs, which has prompted countless families to abort female fetuses in hopes of getting boys.

The policy continues to engender anger and resentment, especially among farmers in the countryside, because of the sometimes brutal methods used to enforce it, such as heavy fines and the seizure of property. Local authorities themselves face demotions, criticism or the loss of jobs if they fail to achieve population targets.

The National Population and Family Planning Commission said it was striking insensitive slogans promoting the policy in order to dispel the impression the government was "simply forcing people to give up having more babies, causing misunderstanding (of) the policy and even tarnishing the image of the government," the official Xinhua news agency reported.

Xinhua said uncouth slogans also threatened to undermine China's efforts to keep the population under control. It paraphrased the family planning commission as saying such "low-quality slogans" could lead to "public complaint and resentment."

Among the slogans that were forbidden were "One more baby means one more tomb" and "Houses toppled, cows confiscated, if abortion demand rejected." Such slogans are often found painted on roadside buildings in rural areas.

The planning commission issued a list of 190 acceptable slogans, such as "Mother Earth is too tired to sustain more children" and "Both boys and girls are parents' hearts."

The government contends the one-child policy has helped prevent at least 300 million births – about the size of the U.S. population – and aided China's rapid economic development.

But it has also been the cause of recent protests.

In May, thousands of farmers in southern Guangxi province rioted to protest fines they said were imposed "arbitrarily and brutally" against people who had more children than allowed under the policy, state media reported. Authorities detained 28 people after the incident.

Media reports said all public servants in the province's Bobai county had been ordered to collect fines from people who violated the policy. If violators failed to pay within three days, their homes would be demolished and their belongings seized.

One villager said some fees were equivalent to $1,300 (U.S.) – an unmanageable amount for an area where most annual incomes were only $130.

I leave this without comment.  :L My favourite is, though: "Houses toppled, cows confiscated, if abortion demand rejected." Gives one to think, hugh?
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Feral on Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 00:48
There is a great, muddled tangle of issues in that story, but I can only bring myself to address one. If failure to comply with the policy will, in fact, result in the toppling of one's house and the confiscation of one's cows, then just what misunderstanding is being generated by the slogan "Houses toppled, cows confiscated, if abortion demand rejected"? Some might well view the toppling of a family's house and confiscation of their goods as a harsh and draconian measure on the part of the government and this view might well tarnish the image of the government. Frankly, if the truth tarnishes a government's image, the government should look to changing its ways, not to changing what people say about it. If they find that this is not possible, then they are stuck with the tarnished image.

For myself, I don't see ten year's income as that remarkable a fine -- civil judgments in the US often amount to many times as much. I could, however, see cutting it in half -- provided the fines were changed from some arbitrary monetary amount to an amount relative to the income of the person fined. There is no reason for people who violate this government policy in urban areas to suffer a lesser penalty in relation to their financial status than violators in rural areas suffer.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Athrael on Sat, Aug 11, 2007, 21:56
I'm all for population controls. I think China is heading in the general right direction, yet at the same time I believe they need to recognize that their abortion laws have to be redefined to stop the killing of fetuses based on gender alone. If the global population continues the way it is going then the rest of the world will have to do "something" to fix the problem. Hopefully by the time the rest of the world needs to do something China will have worked out all the details and provide us with a model that works fairly to limit if not decrease population numbers.

6.5 billion people on earth is too many people. in 2050 when the population hits 9 or 10 billion we will be in even worse shape. The other problems we have from undrinkable water to global warming is due to how many of us are here taking up space and using resources.  Population is humanity's biggest problem - solve that the rest becomes more manageable.

Extraordinary laws require extraordinary punishments to the law breakers.  It is impossible to go into every bedroom and watch to make certain that the couples do play safe, however there should be a strong message in the punishment that makes it clear that "unlawful" pregnancy is not 'worth' the risk to play unsafe.

China is fully aware that its "small" land area (compared to its population) can not sustain a population in excess of 1 billion people. Although its population control laws appear draconian, I believe it is the most logical and sane approach to dealing with a problem that should have been addressed earlier. 

Earth is not enough to sustain our present numbers. We are using way too many technological and artificial processes to feed, cloth and supply the basics for the people we do. And still we have starving/hungry children in even the richest country on earth (USA). We need to fit our numbers to what a planet can sustain - not force the planet to sustain more through artificial methods which in some cases does more harm than good and has already resulted in the collapse of ecosystems (corals) has resulted in the loss of irreplaceable life support (Amazon Basin) and has lead to far reaching damages to the natural order that leads to loss of land (Louisiana) or results in catastrophic failures of systems when Mom nature gets in a huff (Broken levees - flooding, etc)

As for slogans. I find none of them to be "crude" compared to the truth: "More hungry mouths kill more cruelly"... Hunger is not a nice way to die... etc.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Mon, Aug 13, 2007, 02:27
6.5 billion people on earth is too many people. in 2050 when the population hits 9 or 10 billion we will be in even worse shape. The other problems we have from undrinkable water to global warming is due to how many of us are here taking up space and using resources.  Population is humanity's biggest problem - solve that the rest becomes more manageable.

Hm, I beg to disagree slightly... There seems to be less real lack of ressources on this planet, but rather a very, very bad management on most of the planet. It is very well true that in some regions the land can't support the local population, but it is certainly unlikely the Earth has reached its limits of human population.

Not only are wast areas of North and South America and Russia criminally underpopulated, but with modern recycling and purification technologies it is possible to make life pleasant and healthy even in totally overcrowded areas. If people would cease eating dead animals, the amount of vegetarian food would suffice for a much larger population than what we have now. Much of the environmental pollution is caused by all those pig farms and cattle farms. You can count how much biomass is attributed to all those vertivrates designated to land on the dish, and calculate how many people could be afforded if humanity gave up its carnivory lifestyle.

Anothere shortage in food supply seems to come near us by the insane plans of using sugsr cane, mais and oil for production of ethanol and "bio-diesel". If people in poor countries will be forced to compete with cars in rich counties, there will be a next starwation well, caused wilfully and artificially.

In principle, population control is a good thing, thince every system has its maximum load. I am solely not convinced that humanity actually has reached that point. Urban life indeed might demand more energy and technology, but neither energy nor technologie are not limited goods. With energy, drinkable water and food can be produced in significant amounts. Instead of reducing the population, we can slightly change our habits - e.g. using public transportation and bikes in urban centers is a most reasonable proposal.

For our own purposes, the biological procreation might or might not constitute a problem, in future. Since Gays do not "get" children unintentionally (what is mostly the case eith straights), there is always a purposefull action necessary for getting children. Should "breeding" ever become a problem or be unwanted from political reasons in the Gays country, this behaviour might be most effectively targeted by liability life support and education costs etc. A criminal persecution, for such a reason is quite unimaginable.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Mon, Sep 10, 2007, 06:19
This gives one to think about proper immigration and naturalization procedures:

Arrest of Israeli neo-Nazi gang shocks Jewish State (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article2418221.ece?token=null&offset=0)
Quote
Israeli police have broken up a neo-Nazi cell that had been carrying out attacks on religious Jews, homosexuals, drug addicts and workers, in a case that has shocked the Jewish State.

The youths, who had Nazi tattoos and allegedly celebrated Adolf Hitler’s birthday, belonged to Soviet Jewish families who had immigrated to Israel under its law of return, which allows people with at least one Jewish grandparent to become Israeli citizens.

Under strict religious rules, however, many of the former Soviet immigrants are not actually considered to be Jewish.

“It is difficult to believe that Nazi ideology sympathisers can exist in Israel, but it is a fact,” said Major Revital Almog, the police officer in charge of the year-long investigation that began when vandals daubed swastikas and Hitler’s name on synagogues in Petah Tikva, near Tel Aviv.

I admitt that I was obviously wrong about the improbability of straight homophobes desiring to live in a Gay country. If there is such a thing in this world as neo-Nazis emigrating to the State of Israel, then anything is possible. I am eager to get to know what the State of Israel is going to do with these its enemies.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Feral on Tue, Sep 11, 2007, 12:40
When immigrants from anywhere bring very young children with them, indeed -- anything is possible. While the situation is not entirely parallel, it does rather underscore an old suggestion (a rather forcefully made one) by K6: if a Gay state is to grant anything resembling a "right of return," then the Gay state really must define what, specifically, is meant by the word "Gay."
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Athrael on Thu, Sep 13, 2007, 23:37
Seems to be a problem of parenting, not of political or definitions of what ________ (fill in the blank) is.

I would imagine that there is a difference between Israel and the Gay Nation on who it takes in. We already know that Gay has nothing to do with your grandparents, its is not 100% hereditary and is more on the level of a personal thing. Jews extend "Jewishness" back to grandparents. The Gay Nation would focus more on the sexual orientation of the individual, not the racial or genetic links to past gays.

Obviously these kids displayed signs of antisemitism or Nazi leanings at home. Can the state be responsible for the way the parents notice or fail to notice what their children are doing or which way they were going?

It is expected that gay parents will arrive upon the Shores of the Gay Nation with children in tow. Many of those children will not be GLBT.  It will be up to parents and the society to teach the children tolerance of other peoples.

Kids, teenagers of even well adjusted homes will "act out" and do things which later on in life they would not dream about doing. The rebellion of teenager against parent is as old as our species. Teen rebellion is not unknown for being too much.

Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Sun, Sep 16, 2007, 11:47
Obviously these kids displayed signs of antisemitism or Nazi leanings at home. Can the state be responsible for the way the parents notice or fail to notice what their children are doing or which way they were going?

Yes. It is within the responsibility of the state to regulate immigration and naturalization processes. It is also within the responsibility of the state to ensure that children are educated and supervised by qualified individuals only. Certainly, the state can't supervise each and every family, but children don't grow up in a vacuum -- they go to school, they have neighbours and they most assuredly spread their views to a sufficient number of people to make the society become alerted at an early stage. The state has the responsibility to encourage parents, teachers, neighbours and school psychologists to give full attention to children with antisocial behaviour and mindset. 

As for immigrants, the established policies vary from country to country -- some governments accept (or ship in) everybody, even felons, while others are very picky and accept only skilled workers and business people. The interests of some would-be immigrants quite often run contrary to the interests of the state, and of course any good government will upheld the interests of the state.

The irony in the reported case is that those "kids" grew up not somewhere in a "normal" country, but in Israel, and to people who claim themselves to be Jewish. Those people came to Israel pretending their being persecuted, while they indeed were Russians tolerating anti-Jewish opinions. We are not talking here about revolting teenagers who paint graffities on bridge pillars, we are talking about young men who purposefully and repeatedly physically assaulted vulnerable members of society. Aggressive and dangerous criminals must be removed from society, whatever has caused them to become criminals. In that particular case, deprivation of citizenship status and parachuting them over Syria woud be an option.

Gay people who will arrive in the Gay State from some Christian or Muslim country with their reluctant teenager sons, will probably put others in danger. Also, the children born and raised in the Gay country, can non the less grow up homophobes. This will not necessarily be the case in all or even most of these families, but there will be a sufficiently large numbers of them. Thus there probably will be a need for additional supervision of children and, if neccessary, deportation of those straights who turn out to be homophobes.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Mon, Nov 19, 2007, 02:22
This one operates as a "private club": (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2896782.ece)
Quote
It is America’s wealthiest postcode – 216 acres of tropical gorgeousness and palatial living reachable only by private ferry, yacht or helicopter. Surrounded by sand imported from the Bahamas, planted with orchids and palms brought from the Indian Ocean and South Pacific, and a-twitter with the sound of caged toucans and macaws that enjoy daily outings with a bird walker, Fisher Island is known as Fantasy Island. [..] The public are not allowed on to the island unless invited and the privacy of its mainly white residents – largely financiers, corporate executives and property barons with little public name recognition who live there part-time – is fiercely guarded. [..] The latest census, in 2000, gave the population as 467 and the island operates as a private club where cash is not required, just a membership card. It has eighteen tennis courts, two marinas and a heliport.

Apart from the irrelevant social issues, a "private club" might be a workable scheme in some legislations. www.fisherisland.com (http://www.fisherisland.com/)
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Fri, Dec 21, 2007, 06:47
Not yet successful, but a nice try in the US-context:

Lakota Sioux Indians Declare Sovereign Nation Status (http://www.lakotafreedom.com/media.html)

Quote
Threaten Land Liens, Contested Real Estate Over Five State Area in U.S. West

Lakota Satisfies Treaty Council Mandate of 33 Years, Drafted by 97 Indigenous Nations

Dakota Territory Reverts back to Lakota Control According to U.S., International Law


Washington D.C. – Lakota Sioux Indian representatives declared sovereign nation status today in Washington D.C. following Monday’s withdrawal from all previously signed treaties with the United States Government. The withdrawal, hand delivered to Daniel Turner, Deputy Director of Public Liaison at the State Department, immediately and irrevocably ends all agreements between the Lakota Sioux Nation of Indians and the United States Government outlined in the 1851 and 1868 Treaties at Fort Laramie Wyoming.

“This is an historic day for our Lakota people,” declared Russell Means, Itacan of Lakota. “United States colonial rule is at its end!”

“Today is a historic day and our forefathers speak through us. Our Forefathers made the treaties in good faith with the sacred Canupa and with the knowledge of the Great Spirit,” shared Garry Rowland from Wounded Knee. “They never honored the treaties, that’s the reason we are here today.”

The four member Lakota delegation traveled to Washington D.C. culminating years of internal discussion among treaty representatives of the various Lakota communities. Delegation members included well known activist and actor Russell Means, Women of All Red Nations (WARN) founder Phyllis Young, Oglala Lakota Strong Heart Society leader Duane Martin Sr., and Garry Rowland, Leader Chief Big Foot Riders. Means, Rowland, Martin Sr. were all members of the 1973 Wounded Knee takeover.

“In order to stop the continuous taking of our resources – people, land, water and children- we have no choice but to claim our own destiny,” said Phyllis Young, a former Indigenous representative to the United Nations and representative from Standing Rock.

Property ownership in the five state area of Lakota now takes center stage. Parts of North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming and Montana have been illegally homesteaded for years despite knowledge of Lakota as predecessor sovereign [historic owner]. Lakota representatives say if the United States does not enter into immediate diplomatic negotiations, liens will be filed on real estate transactions in the five state region, clouding title over literally thousands of square miles of land and property.

Young added, “The actions of Lakota are not intended to embarrass the United States but to simply save the lives of our people”.

Following Monday’s withdrawal at the State Department, the four Lakota Itacan representatives have been meeting with foreign embassy officials in order to hasten their official return to the Family of Nations.

Lakota’s efforts are gaining traction as Bolivia, home to Indigenous President Evo Morales, shared they are “very, very interested in the Lakota case” while Venezuela received the Lakota delegation with “respect and solidarity.”

“Our meetings have been fruitful and we hope to work with these countries for better relations,” explained Garry Rowland. “As a nation, we have equal status within the national community.”

Education, energy and justice now take top priority in emerging Lakota. “Cultural immersion education is crucial as a next step to protect our language, culture and sovereignty,” said Means. “Energy independence using solar, wind, geothermal, and sugar beets enables Lakota to protect our freedom and provide electricity and heating to our people.”

The Lakota reservations are among the most impoverished areas in North America, a shameful legacy of broken treaties and apartheid policies. Lakota has the highest death rate in the United States and Lakota men have the lowest life expectancy of any nation on earth, excluding AIDS, at approximately 44 years. Lakota infant mortality rate is five times the United States average and teen suicide rates 150% more than national average . 97% of Lakota people live below the poverty line and unemployment hovers near 85%.

“After 150 years of colonial enforcement, when you back people into a corner there is only one alternative,” emphasized Duane Martin Sr. “The only alternative is to bring freedom into its existence by taking it back to the love of freedom, to our lifeway.”

We are the freedom loving Lakota from the Sioux Indian reservations of Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Montana who have suffered from cultural and physical genocide in the colonial apartheid system we have been forced to live under. We are in Washington DC to withdraw from the constitutionally mandated treaties to become a free and independent country. We are alerting the Family of Nations we have now reassumed our freedom and independence with the backing of Natural, International, and United States law. For more information, please visit our new website at www.lakotafreedom.com.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Feral on Tue, Jan 08, 2008, 07:52
It is an interesting game, to be sure. We have seen precisely this sort of maneuver in the area of Gay nationalism as well. I do not know how much weight to give to a source like Wikinews (http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Lakota_Freedom_Delegation_says_spokesman_Russell_Means_%27hijacked%27_organization), but this reporting from a different viewpoint is familiar.

Quote
Despite the claim Means has made, Naomi Archer, liaison of Lakotah Oyate stated to Wikinews that Means took control of the organization and hijacked it and its website on December 29. Archer also said that Lakotah Oyate or the delegation are not a government entity and do not make decisions for the Nation.

"The legitimate actions of the Lakota people are not determined by one person [Russell Means] or even one group, but by the [Lakota] people themselves," added Archer.

...

Since the Delegation's press conference, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe and the Cheyenne River Reservation have rejected Means's and the delegation's declaration of secession.

"They're individuals acting on their own. They did not come to the Rosebud Sioux tribal council or our government in any way to get our support and we do not support what they've done. We do not support what Means and his group are doing and they don't have any support from any tribal government I know of. They don't speak for us," said Rosebud Sioux Tribe president, Rodney Bordeaux.

Despite those rejections, Archer said that the Pine Ridge Reservation's council will "consider the proposal." A representative for the Standing Rock Reservation's council has said that that reservation is also considering Lakotah Oyate's proposal.


Wild declarations of independence seem to be thought of as a sure means to quick news coverage. They are... but not to positive coverage. It seems to be thought that, if one heroic figure will come forward, the masses will rise up and follow. No examples of the successful use of this strategy come to mind.

Mr. Means appears also to have more reasonably suggested the formation of a power company, a bank, and similar institutions. That would be an entirely sane approach. It is possible to create autonomous institutions. Having done so, it is possible to create even more autonomous institutions. In due course, ever-growing autonomy becomes an accomplished fact. The flags, the logos, the lines on maps -- these are quite insubstantial things. If one really must have them, then an autonomous people can produce them. It is a simple matter. The state of Alaska solicited the aid of school children to assist them with the acquisition of these symbols -- an indication of the relative gravity and importance of such things. Imagining that these insubstantial things have the magical power to bring real autonomy into existence (rather than being simple expressions of an accomplished autonomy) supposes that symbols possess somewhat more magic than they really have.

In my view, this event really must be seen as a lesson in how not to proceed.
Title: Re: How things are made by others
Post by: Mogul on Tue, Aug 30, 2011, 09:41
Never thought the land in Iceland was ever so cheap... They have a Lesbian Prime Minister, btw.

Source: http://www.france24.com/en/20110830-china-tycoon-buy-part-iceland-ft

Quote
China tycoon to buy part of Iceland: FT

A Chinese tycoon is trying to buy a huge tract of land in Iceland for a $100 million eco-tourism project that will include a golf course, the Financial Times said Tuesday.

Huang Nubo, a real estate investor and former government official, has sealed a provisional deal to acquire 300 square kilometres (about 200 square miles) of Icelandic territory, the newspaper said.

Iceland occupies a strategically important location between Europe and North America and has been touted as a potential hub for Asian cargo should climate change open Arctic waters to shipping.

Forbes ranked Huang as China?s 161st richest man in 2010, with a net worth of $890 million. His company, Zhongkun Group, owns resorts and tourist facilities across China and around the world.

The Financial Times said he had previously worked at China?s Central Propaganda Department and the Ministry of Construction.

The Iceland Review Online reported last week that Huang signed a deal with land owners including the Icelandic government last Wednesday, and that the deal was dependent on approval by both China and Iceland.

Iceland's booming economy collapsed in 2008 when its hugely overstretched banking sector plunged suddenly into crisis and its three major banks collapsed within a matter of weeks.

Since then, the country has gone through much soul-searching and a string of painful changes to put its house in order, helped by an International Monetary Fund rescue.

On Friday last week, the IMF approved the final release of funds in its $2.25 billion bailout programme for Iceland.