• NateNate60@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m not going to pretend that I know the whole picture as to why this project is so severely over budget and behind schedule (there is likely nobody on Earth who does), but let me give some pointers as to why countries like China have built hundreds of thousands of kilometres of high-speed rail while California struggles to build a few hundred.

    For one, the legal environment in China is one of the prerogative state. “Rights” in China are whatever the Government suffers you to have or deems it expedient to honour. So if you “own” a piece of land in the middle of the planned rail route, the Government will just kick you out. What are you going to do, sue? In the US, environmental laws, land rights laws, and legal procedural law mean that anyone who can spend $50,000 on a lawyer can cause $1 million worth of headaches for the high speed rail authority using the American legal system, which believe it or not, actually sometimes holds the State accountable to the law.

    Secondly, in China, the Government has an unprecedented control over the economy that allows it to offer carrots and sticks to a degree that American politicians could only dream of. Yes, you have no say on whether the Government will order your house demolished to make way for an expressway, but in return, if you go quietly, you’ll get a flat in a high-rise in exchange and generous monetary compensation. Raise a stink, and you’ll be paid three strawberries and a steamed bun for your house instead.

    Thirdly, under Chinese property law, all land in the country belongs to the State. Everyone else can only lease it from the State.

    • rImITywR@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      if you “own” a piece of land in the middle of the planned rail route, the Government will just kick you out.

      That’s how the interstate system and urban highways were built. But people being displaced were mostly black and/or poor and/or immigrants, so it wasn’t seen as a bad thing at the time.

      • NateNate60@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        In the United States, the Constitution states that in order to take your land for this purpose, you must be compensated fairly. Of course, “fairly” in terms of market value did not amount to very much, but compensation was paid and even dilapidated housing in so-called “blighted” neighbourhoods were still worth something and the cost does add up when you’re knocking hundreds of houses down and having to pay thousands for each one.

        • someguy3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          Pretty sure China still pays out people but they don’t have any real court challenges. No court that says “do you really need this project, mathematically prove it”, “did you do x y and z study. Yes? Do it better.”, “did you have public consultation and address their concerns. Not good enough do it again.” Etc. That shit costs a lot.