SinoTexas

Yirong, While I rarely visit here anymore, I am saddened by the loss yet happy that you two made such good memories. May peace be with you and that you feel his warmth in the morning sun. May God bless you and your family. As aye, Jim

flexible and adaptable As aye, Jim

China's population policy is based on political judgements, not the ability of the planet to support increased population. The carrying capacity of Earth is far beyond today's population. Most famine is caused by political repression. Most "drought" is a direct result of misallocation of resources. Malthusian propaganda aside, let's not turn this into a political thread, OK? P.S. Planet Earth doesn't possess a "self", it's an inanimate object. It's doesn't "heal", it is a constantly changing eco-system of almost unimagineable dimension. Every human on earth could live in an area the size of the state of Texas. Population density would be approximately that of the City of San Francisco. This would include streets, stores, parks, government buildings, residential lots.... all of it. Our planet is HUGE, as anyone who has travelled overseas should know. Yes our planet is huge. Texas has a land area of 2000 square miles. I don't think the math would support this. Sorry, Charles, Texas has a land area of 268,601 square miles. If you divide the estimated population of China, 1,300,000,000 by that number, you end up with 4839 people per square mile. At 27,880,000 square feet per mile, you end up with about 5,761 square feet per person, enough for a 1500 square foot home on a 4000 square foot lot with room left over for streets, shopping centers, etc. This population density wouldn't be to my liking, but it isn't outrageously overcrowded, either. Population densities of some American cities are: New York City, 23,705 per square mile; San Francisco, 15,502; Jersey City, 15,338; Salinas, CA, 5848; Long Beach, CA, 8589; Evanston, IL,9389; Los Angeles, 7427; Springfield, MA, 4890; even little Lodi, CA (remember the Creedence Clearwater song, "Stuck in Lodi"?) has a density of 4894! (Stats from demographia.com) The point isn't that such a place would be pleasant to live in. I think MY town is too crowded, but.... there is so much mis-information about this topic that people need to hear the truth and recognize that almost ALL of our problems are political in nature. China's family and population policies are based on something other than gross population and/or population growth. It has to do with economic growth, productivity, the governments ability to control the population and factors of that nature. China may or may not be able to feed it's population (I don't know how much of their food they have to import, nor do I know how much of their land is viable from an agricultural point of view) but I do know that they are capable of generating enough economic activity to provide for themselves. I also know that limiting their population growth will make it easier for the government to control the population in the "countryside", which is where most of the poor live. Thanks for listening. Please resit the math portion of the GREs. Your claim was "every human on earth," not the population of China. That would give each and every person a grand total of 1,134 sq. ft. If that's not outrageously overcrowded, pigs can fly. Your truth is moronic. As aye, Jim

China's population policy is based on political judgements, not the ability of the planet to support increased population. The carrying capacity of Earth is far beyond today's population. Most famine is caused by political repression. Most "drought" is a direct result of misallocation of resources. Malthusian propaganda aside, let's not turn this into a political thread, OK? P.S. Planet Earth doesn't possess a "self", it's an inanimate object. It's doesn't "heal", it is a constantly changing eco-system of almost unimagineable dimension. Every human on earth could live in an area the size of the state of Texas. Population density would be approximately that of the City of San Francisco. This would include streets, stores, parks, government buildings, residential lots.... all of it. Our planet is HUGE, as anyone who has travelled overseas should know. As aye, Jim

Exactly. It's the height of cultural arrogance for people in this country to expect an emerging economy to live by "our" rules. What would we do, have China build more coal fired power generation plants? Maybe nuclear power would be preferable? It's even more amazing to read the stuff some of the more "environmentally conscious" among us post. It seems that NOBODY can do ANYTHING that will allow any kind of move towards progress, and progress is what we're talking about when we look at China. My wife isn't that old. She moved to Nanning about 20 years ago. She remembers growing up in a small hut with no electricity and no indoor plumbing. I would have a very hard time explaining to her that she should have continued to live that way so as to soothe the sensibilities of those who can't stand progress. While I deeply sympathize with those who are being displaced, sometimes things like that are necessary. Just a reminder, in OUR country, local government can now condemn property through emminent domain for the benefit of whatever development that government deems to be "important", whether the development be for public or private purposes. I put rural electrification a little higher on the scale than any of the eminent domain cases I've read about lately. Best Regards P.S. I remember a breathless panic over the silt buildup behind Grand Coulee and Hoover Dams back in the '60's. Wow, the silt was going to be so deep that the water would just spill over the top of the dams!!! Problem was, it was never a problem. Never happened. As aye, Jim My Daddy used to say: "You can always tell a Texan, you just can't tell 'em much!" As aye, Jim

Dennis...my good buddy....and I can't sing, so you are spared, "Come ride the little train that is rolln' down the track to the Junction. Forget about your care, it is time to relax at the Junction. Lots of curves you bet, even more when you get, to the Junction". Amtrak time... As aye, Jim

Gads! I have passed through Roger's town???? As aye, Jim

CONGRATULATIONS DON!! Welcome to the CFL class of '07! http://i8.tinypic.com/52f1tzk.jpg As aye, Jim & Ji

Exactly. It's the height of cultural arrogance for people in this country to expect an emerging economy to live by "our" rules. What would we do, have China build more coal fired power generation plants? Maybe nuclear power would be preferable? It's even more amazing to read the stuff some of the more "environmentally conscious" among us post. It seems that NOBODY can do ANYTHING that will allow any kind of move towards progress, and progress is what we're talking about when we look at China. My wife isn't that old. She moved to Nanning about 20 years ago. She remembers growing up in a small hut with no electricity and no indoor plumbing. I would have a very hard time explaining to her that she should have continued to live that way so as to soothe the sensibilities of those who can't stand progress. While I deeply sympathize with those who are being displaced, sometimes things like that are necessary. Just a reminder, in OUR country, local government can now condemn property through emminent domain for the benefit of whatever development that government deems to be "important", whether the development be for public or private purposes. I put rural electrification a little higher on the scale than any of the eminent domain cases I've read about lately. Best Regards P.S. I remember a breathless panic over the silt buildup behind Grand Coulee and Hoover Dams back in the '60's. Wow, the silt was going to be so deep that the water would just spill over the top of the dams!!! Problem was, it was never a problem. Never happened. As aye, Jim

Maybe Edward Abbey and the Monkey Wrench Gang could help out. As aye, Jim

An interesting read (for those with an open mind). Chicago Tribune As aye, Jim

Well this has been a very interesting and thoughtful thread. Jim sounds like you have the best solution. I hope you find that burger. We did Dan and it was great sharing that $100 hamburger with my daughter and Jiangyi. "Hunting for the $100 hamburger" is an aviation term my daughter taught me. As aye, Jim

We obviously have the "experts" to solve China's environmental problems right here on this thread. I'll leave ya'll to it. It's a beautiful and clear fall day and I'm going with my daughter hunting for the $100 hamburger. As aye, Jim

CONGRATULATIONS! http://i8.tinypic.com/52f1tzk.jpg As aye, Jim

CONGRATULATIONS! http://i8.tinypic.com/52f1tzk.jpg As aye, Jim

you had me until this point... So... if it's not done by american standards, it's harmful around the world? That reminds me of the 'lead' issue in the items imported... I finally read that the lead is not harmful, just illegal David, come on....lead is not harmful??? As aye, Jim

Lance, your statement is valid as to the time frame but you are looking at it in a very narrow scope. In the 25 years that you talk about, the technology that could have prevented or at least had a major impact in reducing the environmental issues facing China, was globally available. Additionally, environmental regulations could have been implemented based on what was happening with the global community. That road was not taken by China for a variety of issues of which I'll not take the time to comment. Environmentally Lance, it's done a lousy job and is doing nothing to improve the situation At this point, I'll step off my soap box and I'll leave it to the experts here to deal with it. Good luck. As aye, Jim

While I was in Southern California a few weeks ago, I had a chance to talk with a few folks about the environmental issues and project that I have been working on for the past few years. We will wrap the research up this December and the final report will be ready for the 2008 Summer Olympics. My part of the project involved the heritage tourism side if the pre-planning for the Olympics but was part of a larger team that also included the environmental side of things. The project was funded by the Chinese government and they provided the direction which was to evaluate urban or rural areas for western tourism opportunities in connection with the Olympics. The project is being coordinated through several Chinese universities and the research done by Chinese researchers, students and environmental and historic preservation agencies. The environmental side of the project was to look at how "environmentally safe" (the Chines government words, not mine) it was for western visitors to be in China. One of the major areas of focus was food and how Westerners would respond. Over the course of several years, tens of thousands of random samples of food were obtained. They came from vegetable markets, meat markets, various price ranged restaurants in urban and rural areas across China (I'm leaving out the methodology for samples as it is a long process to explain). The prepared foods in restaurants were ordered and then samples of vegetables, meats, fish, poultry, etc. were taken for analysis for poisons, toxins, heavy metals, chemicals, etc. Of the tens of thousands of random samples analyzed, not one, I'll repeat NOT ONE sample met the minimal standards as set by the US FDA (which was the bench mark for food analysis). Pretty scary stuff. In part, the report will ultimately say that in the amounts and for the short term, we see know harmful affects of the food to Western visitors. But that's only because they will probably eat few meals and only be in China for not more than three weeks on average. I'm sure the report will never see the light of day once it is turned over to the Chinese government or what has been reported will be taken out of context. Our findings and studies will all be handed over so that it cannot be leaked. And the next Chinese environmental issue? WATER...stay tuned. Ya'll can ramble on about the Chinese environment and put your spin and be defensive, but it aint a good place to be. Yep, America has it's problems, but they ain't nuth'n like what is about to happen. As aye, Jim

The US will always hide behind the curtain of profit driven economy... they are the #1 abusive nation in emissions but don't want to do anything about THEIR own problem. Blowing same old smoke... The first day in our hotel in Los Angeles, Jiangyi wanted me to run water through the coffee pot so that she could drink water. I put a glass under the bathroom tap and drank from it. I repeated it three times and her mouth was on the floor. Now she drinks tap water wherever we are at. I think we have come a long way in cleaning up our act. Try that in China. As aye, Jim

Somewhere, someone missed the point that 77% of China's pollution is caused by industrialization for it's own use. We are dwelling on the wrong figures. That's like saying that 1% of Roger's brain is functional and focusing on that number for the story, while forgetting what the remainder of the equation says about the big picture. As aye, Jim

Congratulations and all the best. As aye, Jim

You are right on with this one, as much as I hate to say it Roger. The heritage tourism and envoronmental issues project that I have been involved with is based out of Three Gorges University in Yichang. I know the area and the environmental genocide of the region very well. A lot of this has already happened and life is not fun there. The folks that have been relocated certainly have better houses/apartments than what they used to live in, but they also don't have any jobs either in their new cities... As aye, Jim As aye, Jim

You can to that in the French Quarter in New Orleans. The even have drive through daquri shops throughout the city. As aye, Jim

Congratulations! http://i8.tinypic.com/52f1tzk.jpg As aye, Jim

CONGRATULATIONS DAVE!! ALL THE BEST! http://i8.tinypic.com/52f1tzk.jpg Sorry this is late, but I have been busy As aye, Jim