Why should China control the population of first-tier cities, obviously a lot of land can build a house?

Concept of concept

China has been promoting the population crisis in the last 30 years, and has been very popular with its own people, so the city planning is very intensive (10,000 people / square kilometer). But in fact the Chinese people never reflect on these ideas is not right.

We take Beijing for example: Beijing area of ​​16,000 square kilometers, while the actual built area of ​​about 2000 square kilometers, the land development rate of only 12.5%, than the land development is not known as 25% of Hong Kong is also low.

In fact, Beijing is too big, people are not a problem to live in the villa. We calculate, Beijing by 25 million people, if people live in small foreign buildings need 25 million * 30 / 0.5% = 1500 square kilometers. This residential area is only 1/10 less than the area of ​​Beijing area. Can be the same as the daily Tokyo as most families live house, but in fact the vast majority of land in Beijing is still in the rural state, even if the urban area has been crowded head (if Beijing completely by 1 million square kilometers of the Chinese planning standards, all Built to accommodate 160 million people).

Figure 1: Beijing area satellite map. Even if the mountain area is removed, Beijing still has 7,000 square kilometers of plains. A large number of agricultural land between Beijing and Langfang. This is in Tokyo, Los Angeles, such a super city is basically not see.

Some people say that Beijing is a big city! All rings and rings! Super city, no longer big. We compare to see the facts:

Figure 2: Beijing (outside the rings) and Tokyo built urban area comparison

Figure 3: Tokyo built city is about 4 to 5 times that of Beijing. Basically equivalent to Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, these built-up area directly spliced ​​up so much. That China’s urban planning world’s leading friends, you can compare the next map under the satellite map.

We and the land and China, like the vast US comparison, it is simply a perfect abuse:

And Los Angeles giant city circle compared to Beijing this area is simply built the baby in general.

Answer: Los Angeles is a kind of city? – Know almost

Los Angeles night view. Can only be used to describe the mighty.

NASA Asia East Night Light. This is very intuitive. We look at the so-called cosmic center of Beijing, its urban area with South Korea’s Seoul, Tokyo, Nagoya, and even Osaka have a considerable gap. While China’s largest city of Shanghai, its prosperity and Japan’s Osaka only has no advantage.

China’s construction land accounted for the proportion of land area is far lower than the developed countries, even lower than many developing countries.

From this chart can be seen, China’s urban and rural construction land ratio is too low compared to developed countries. We have no need to make the city so crowded.

Beijing house prices is how to rush to the sky?

Take Beijing as an example. From the above picture we can clearly see that after 2004, Beijing residential land supply significantly reduced, which is the root cause of real estate prices soaring.

(A friend said that my map is too old, I find the new data: 2016 Beijing supply of residential land you guess how much? 38.9 hectares … … you do not miss the decimal point, is 39 hectares! This price is not flying on the genius strange!)

So, as a comprehensive flow into one of the most populous cities, why Beijing to significantly reduce the supply of residential land? Is this for it? Everyone’s own brain fill

So why is the north wide of the restrictions on the population? Self-imposed.

Why are we so frightened about the size of big cities?

This is even ridiculous, why are we so afraid of the size and size of the city? Why should we restrict the development of big cities, mega-cities and super cities? To sum up, nothing more than the following argument:

1, urban population explosion theory. Everywhere are crowded, and then allow people from all over the country to come here, we have room to heaven, bus, school to burst burst.

2, the collapse of the environment. Big city population is too much, “beyond the limits of environmental carrying”;

3, balanced development theory, small and medium cities continue to decline, so the resources should be tilted to small and medium cities, to maintain “balanced development.”

4, cultivated land protection theory. Urban development occupies “a lot of arable land”, must be stopped, otherwise we will famine.

We have to analyze one by one to cause the big city phobia of these popular arguments.

I, Urban Population Explosion Theory. In the past 10 years, the prices of big cities have skyrocketed, the traffic has been crowded, the traffic jam, the children are difficult to get into school, the medical treatment is difficult. The serious urban pollution has seriously troubled us. We have easily blamed these problems with too many people and the city is too large. From an early age to accept such education: the population is a burden, is the consumption of resources consumers. We have experienced a variety of our life quality seriously affected by the big city disease, the urban population has reached the upper limit of this argument we firmly believe that.

But is that so? We are still in Beijing for example, we assume that if Beijing is an independent country, an area of ​​only 1,400 square kilometers, population 20 million, then you really have reason to worry about urban congestion, but in fact Beijing is only a city, urban area area 16,000 square kilometers, and as long as we are willing to extend the Beijing area to 160,000 square kilometers are no problem, a law and the resolution can be, even so this is not a fraction of China’s territory. We have 1,400 square kilometers of urban area to live 20 million people, this is too crowded, why can not we expand the urban area?

Why we can not buy the farmland and open space around the city to expand the urban area, we can expand the urban area 3 times, so that our living density just like Tokyo, if we expand the urban area 4 times, Then our living density just like the US low-density city of Los Angeles almost, then most of the people of Beijing can live in the villa. Even if the Beijing area to expand 4 times to 5600 square kilometers, nor is the area of ​​Beijing now a fraction of the area. What is the reason to stop the city’s large area expansion? You guessed it, is “cultivated land protection”, which is the so-called 18 million mu of arable land red line. For this reason, here I ask two questions:

1, why should adhere to 18 million mu of arable land red, arable land is not enough? The red line of cultivated land is a false proposition, but it is very market in China. The important reason is that China’s history has always been an agricultural country. The nightmare of famine has not been how long we have left us. We have overlooked the great development of mankind in the 1950s and 1970s, and the food problem is no longer the main problem of mankind. In developed countries, only about 5% of the population engaged in agricultural production, that is, as long as 5% of people are engaged in agriculture Labor, in modern science and technology conditions, will be able to meet the national needs of national food.

We look at the grain yield and the number of population direct relationship: 1900 wheat yield 50 kg, population 1.65 billion, 2010 wheat per mu has exceeded 500 kg, population 7 billion. A hundred years in the wheat yield increased by 10 times, while the population increased by only 4.2 times. Although now 7 billion people, but the demand for arable land is less than a hundred years ago. This suggests a law: productivity gains from population growth, productivity gains have increased food products, far faster than population growth, and humans will never be short of food because of the high population, as more people The ability to solve the problem more powerful.

2, where farming can not? Can the arable land in the outskirts of the city be sacrosanct? Can be seen, one side is the big city people in the crowded city of hard life, one side is sacred and invincible city suburban land corn and millet, the other side is a large number of small and medium-sized city recession, rural, rural large number of land due to the city And the livelihood of the population caused by the plummeting, no one to cultivate land in the wilderness weeds from the students, this is not man-made reasons caused by the absurd dilemma? China’s annual disappearance of 60,000 natural villages, many of these people are living in the city to live, this is a good thing: scattered in rural areas living not only poor living standards, and low resource utilization, land use rate is low. But people have moved to the city, why not allow the city, especially the big city free expansion to the nearby rural areas The Why should we set our policy to keep our city in a cage?

3, children and difficult to get medical treatment difficult problem. Many people are difficult to enroll their children and medical treatment is difficult to blame the city population too much, robbed the child’s degree and hospital beds, then, with the city’s population increase, the city should not synchronize the expansion of the scale of schools and hospitals?

For education and medical care, it is to serve the city’s affiliated service agencies, if the foot and shoes metaphor, the foot is the population, education and medical services are shoes, only shoes to adapt to the foot of the truth, absolutely no let Feet to adapt to the truth of the shoes, the education and medical investment caused by the difficulties caused by the city is too much population is enough to cut the absurd truth. (A few years ago, we have been able to drive new people away, but our education and medical conditions will not be improved because we are off The population, that is, human resources, labor, and labor reductions, have led to a reduction in the number of products and services that cities have access to, resulting in a decline in urban living standards.

4, the collapse of urban environment. We often hear such a statement, a certain city has reached the limit of environmental carrying, can no longer allow more people to enter, it sounds like high-sounding, but we analyze the argument which there is any substantive content? 1. If the urban area of ​​the city is dead, assuming that Beijing is only 1400 km area, can not do any expansion, then with the population density growth, living density of more than 1 million square kilometers, in China’s current technological conditions and Urban construction and management level, traffic jams, automobile exhaust pollution, high prices and other large urban diseases will become more serious.

But we do not forget that China is a vast expanse of land, with 9.6 million square kilometers of land, of which 5 million square kilometers of livable land, ranking second in the world. If the population of 5,000 square kilometers in accordance with the relaxed living density, 1.3 billion people living in the city, then the city occupies land area of ​​280,000 square kilometers, accounting for about 3% of China’s land area, 5% of the livable area. While the actual living density of Beijing and Shanghai reached 1.4 to 2 million people / square kilometer, if the country 1.3 billion people living in Beijing Shanghai living density, only need 95,000 square kilometers of land will be able to live, just a little bigger than the Chongqing Area, accounting for 1% of China’s land area, livable area of ​​2%, we do not need such a crowded living. Beijing, if one of the 10,000 square kilometers of all areas into urban areas, in accordance with the density of 5,000 square kilometers of living density can live 50 million people.

5. The so-called lack of resources. In addition to the air, water, land, any other resources can be people to create, the land of the problem we have discussed, we absolutely no shortage of air is infinite circulation, water is infinite cycle. Water crisis is the most serious topic of speculation in recent years, but in fact water is also an infinite cycle, but we pollute too much water, so that the use of water resources can be reduced, even so, the water is still not a problem. The current cost of desalination has been reduced to 6 to 7 yuan, plus transportation and sewage treatment costs, to the hands of the city, the price will not exceed 20 yuan, according to the city per capita annual water 50 tons, Expenditure is 1,000 yuan, so the water problem is only an economic issue. Is there any other resource problem? Is the crust not bear the weight of many people will collapse?

6. Area is small, the population density is really not low. This situation is not common, such as Shenzhen, Shenzhen area of ​​only 2,000 square kilometers, while the resident population reached 12 million, plus a large number of factories, so Shenzhen population density ranks first in China, 6,000 square kilometers Beijing, Shanghai, more than 4 times, even so, Shenzhen, the big city disease is not worse than Beijing and Shanghai, because the land use and development of Shenzhen, a higher degree of land development rate of more than 50%, the real built area is not much smaller than Beijing.

In view of the above, if the size of the city is limited and the city is not allowed to expand, the urban quality of the city will become serious as the urban population grows, and the quality of life of the public may indeed decline under the existing technological and urban management If the city allows free expansion and construction, then there will be no problems, the city will be the scale of development, urban living standards will increase. To achieve this goal, must allow large cities from the protection of arable land, land approval constraints, to the city to expand the freedom of space.

Remove our demons: why do we not be logical and common way hostile to urban development. We can see that the development of the city should be the scene we are happy to see, but our demons caused the policy to restrict the city to follow the expansion of population expansion, the resulting urban congestion problems and large urban diseases, and further strengthened the city Too much population is too large is the idea of ​​disaster, which we limit the development of the big city on the error to go back, deeper and deeper.

So why would we be so irrational thinking? Its roots, “more people thin” – meaning that people are more of a problem. “Less per capita resources” – meaning that the resources are falling from the pie, not the fruits of human labor. “Fewer” – people will be richer – in fact this completely violates the most basic economic common sense. “The population is the burden” – as if people would only eat, and not the production of waste, even if the labor, but also can not compensate for the resources he consumed – it is incredible, is now a highly developed human society is falling from the sky? These ideas are repeated in the textbooks, we have formed a conditioned reflex on the above theory, completely lost the ability to rethink, if anyone put forward the opposite views, we will first refute, rather than reflection, because Humans are always used to dominate the animals.

In recent years, the rise of Europe’s extreme environmentalism and the left-wing control of the United States, Hollywood, but also through various media to us to transfer similar ideas, like the “Matrix” in the lines: humans are viruses, they are constantly Eroding the earth’s mother until the destruction. The roots of these extreme thoughts are the decline of traditional religious beliefs in the West and East Asia, and both the West and East Asia have lost the fear of nature and the ignorance of their own, the result of self-expansion – they begin to judge this from the point of view of God The world, they think they already have enough ability to decide the future of the earth. For this question, I simply mentioned here, if in-depth discussion, it will be another huge topic.

2. is the problem of urban planning and land property rights

Even if you do not have this self-imposed sense, but the land and urban planning power is not in your hands, the city management authorities to insist on an acre to sell you eight million, you build a pigeon cage, but also what to build? So this is a very good question: why have the world’s most suitable human habitation of the geographical location, the vast territory of the superpower we have to limit the size of first-tier cities?+