“One of my fav Millennial writers Morley Winograd and Michael Hais had a great Millennial Fact Sheet article come out this week that dispels some annoyingly frequent assumptions about young people – particularly ones about politics.”
Blog
-
Executive Editor JOEL KOTKIN quoted in The Malaysian Insider
“Its two biggest cities, Beijing and Shanghai, are poised to overtake leading global centres of today, says the magazine in a report by its columnist Joel Kotkin.”
-
Positively Fifth Street
The title of this essay is taken from a book by Jim McManus about his adventures as a poker player. The lingo for Texas Hold ‘Em mirrors Vegas geography: three cards are placed face up – together called “the flop” – and betting ensues. Then comes the “turn” card, otherwise known as Fourth Street. Finally one gets to “The River”, or Fifth Street, after which it is payday for somebody.
Of course in most towns, the River is adjacent to First Street, not Fifth. And more, Las Vegas doesn’t have a river; it has a railroad, which as we’ve pointed out in Part 1 serves as a good substitute (best you’re going to get in a desert). So the analogy isn’t perfect, but there is a neat connection.
As this 1952 map of Las Vegas shows, Main St. (then US 91) runs directly along the tracks. The train station was where the Golden Nugget casino is today. Parallel to Main St. are First, Second and Third Streets (should we call them “Flop Streets?”). These are followed by Fourth St. and Fifth St., and so on, as one might expect. But Fifth is significant because it is the next important N-S traffic thoroughfare.
To be a N-S traffic thoroughfare in Las Vegas in 1952 meant that you somehow had to connect up with Main St. And sure enough, in the North the two meet at Harrison (now Owens). The southern intersection occurred at St. Louis Ave., where it still is.
Now pay attention to the inset in the upper left corner of the map. Here we see the incipient “Strip” – “continuation of S. 5th St., US Highway 91, or LA Highway.” A pretty pathetic Strip by today’s standard, but surely it needed a better name than “continuation of S. 5th St.”
Positively Fifth Street my rear end! Positively Las Vegas Blvd. (LVB) is much more like it. Payday, big time. And today, LVB runs the entire city from the Motor Speedway in the northeast, to Jean in the far south – about 40 miles. Main St., a mere shadow of its former self, only extends for about 3 miles. I don’t know when Fifth Street was renamed, but it can’t be long after this map was made.
There is absolutely, positively no Fifth St. in Las Vegas.
The Strip was built before the city grew up around it, and it made sense to name the major cross streets after the casinos of the day: Sahara, Sands/Spring Mtn., Desert Inn, Flamingo and Tropicana. Then comes the I-215 freeway, followed by Russell and Warm Springs. These are each about a mile apart.
At Flamingo, LVB no longer follows the railroad, but instead heads due south. For the southern half of the Valley, LVB and Main St. constitute the meridian from which house numbers are measured. North of downtown the road angles too far to the northeast to be an effective meridian. As best I can tell, Commerce St. in North Las Vegas serves that purpose.
West of Main St., the baseline is Bonanza Road, or it would be if the street went through. But Bonanza has mostly been replaced by the US 95 freeway, which is convenient. Effectively, US 95/Summerlin Pkwy serves as the baseline. East of Main St., Fremont St. is a lousy baseline downtown, but for most of the east side, Charleston Blvd. does a perfectly good job. In my own mind (since I rarely use freeways) I’ve always thought of Charleston as dividing north and south.
For all practical purposes, the Las Vegas zero-point is the I-15 exit 42. House numbers count from there. That’s just across the tracks (west) from the corner of Main & Bonanza.
There is no rush hour in Las Vegas, there being no 9 to 5 industry of any note. However, LVB along the Strip is very busy at all times except early morning. The key to getting around by car is to avoid crossing or driving along the Strip.
Avoid Spring Mtn., Flamingo and Tropicana at all costs! Sahara, at the northern end of the Strip, works pretty well. But the best is Desert Inn, which no longer intersects the Strip, but instead passes as a viaduct underneath. It also goes under the interstate and the railroad tracks – it will take you from Paradise Road (west of the Strip) to Valley View (a mile to the east) nonstop. It’s the best way across town. Otherwise take the freeway if you must.
Industrial Road, directly along the railroad tracks and parallel to the strip to the west, is an excellent thoroughfare from Charleston to Flamingo. (Quiz: why doesn’t it work well south of Flamingo?). On the east side, Paradise Rd. starts at McCarran Airport (Tropicana), about a mile from LVB. Paradise goes due north, and thus would intersect LVB at about Charleston; in practice, the street ends at St. Louis. Still, this is the best way north on the east side.
On the west side, the main streets (about a mile apart) are Valley View, Decatur, Jones, Rainbow, Buffalo and Durango. They all go through except where River Railroad interferes. Hence Valley View ends at Flamingo, and Decatur won’t get you past Tropicana.
On the east side one has Paradise, Maryland Pkwy, and Eastern. Boulder Highway is the main thoroughfare east of that.
The Strip is great for walking at any time of the day or night. There is a monorail on the east side of the Strip. I’ve never ridden it – doesn’t seem to be very convenient unless you’re starting at the Convention Center (Paradise & Sahara).
China Town Plaza is on Spring Mountain, just west of Valley View. We especially enjoyed Sam Woo’s Barbeque – cash only. There is a good Filipino restaurant, Pinoy Pinay, on the NE corner of Sahara and Maryland Pkwy. For my money (I’m cheap) the best all-you-can-eat buffet is at Sam’s Town, on Boulder Hwy near Tropicana. There are good Japanese restaurants everywhere, but we ate at one on Maryland Parkway – at Flamingo if memory serves. Bottom line: once you know your way around, there’s no reason to stay on the Strip for food.
I hear that some casinos loosen their slots to attract and retain customers on certain days of the week. It is probably possible to find out which casino has the loosest slots on any given day. For this, I have a hot tip that will save you a lot of money:
Stay home.
-
Alaska To Stimulus Funds: Yup, We’ll Take ‘Em
Earlier this month the Alaska state legislature, in a special session, voted 44-14 to accept $28.6 million in stimulus funds that Sarah Palin had rejected in May. Sean Parnell, Alaska’s governor since Palin’s resignation, says the money will be used primarily for energy efficiency improvements in public buildings.
The tale of the showdown between Palin, the state legislature, and the federal Department of Energy may ultimately reveal as much about state sovereignty under the current administration in Washington as it does about Alaska’s internal politics.
Palin has more than once made her case for rejecting the stimulus money — or at least a portion of it — clear: her objection is that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act calls for the adoption of the International Energy Conservation Code in exchange for the funds, which would set new standards for things like window fenestration and lighting equipment in new and remodeled commercial and residential buildings. Such codes, however, could be a logistical nightmare for some communities to adopt and for the state to enforce.
Alaskan buildings are architecturally diverse, each constructed for a particular climate and geography. Homeowners in Ketchikan, for example, where it rains nearly every day of the year, have different concerns than those in Valdez, where the average yearly snowfall is 325 inches. Many communities in the state are only accessible by boat or plane, so the shipping of supplies is costly and inefficient. Economic hardship and subsistence are also the normal standard of living in many of the remote, rugged Alaskan towns and villages.
Because of these circumstances, the state has always permitted local governments to set their own building codes. Most of the villages choose not to have building codes at all. All things considered, monitoring energy code compliance in perpetuity would easily cost the state more than $28.6 million. Palin also has noted that the state has hundreds of millions of dollars already budgeted for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects, so the less than $30 million in stimulus funds really aren’t a substantial addition to the state’s effort.
Her rejection of the funds sparked a debate that was carried out in press releases, official letters, and Anchorage Daily News editorials. A legislator from Anchorage claimed in an op-ed piece that Palin was “denying” Alaskans much needed funds, and that rejecting money from the stimulus package brings to mind the old saying, “two wrongs don’t make a right.” The co-chairs of the state senate resources committee wrote a letter urging Palin to consider Missouri’s proposal (accepted by the Department of Energy) which would fulfill the mandate with a 90% compliance rate on the local level, exempting communities with populations under 2,500 and structures without plumbing and electricity. There are enough major Alaska communities that have already adopted energy codes, they said, that the state either already meets or could easily meet the federal requirements in the necessary time frame.
Palin responded to these opponents with her own editorial and press releases, and an Anchorage architect agreed with her in another op-ed, suggesting that while Alaska has long built energy efficient buildings out of cold weather necessity, the two senators’ numbers for 90 percent compliance didn’t add up. The primary result of taking the money, he claimed, would be “a new regulatory requirement to verify compliance.”
The disagreement hinged on everyone’s interpretation of the DOE’s language. The initial mandate required “assurances” from the governor that local communities with the authority to do so “will implement” the codes. Because there is no statewide energy code in Alaska and the state constitution supports local self-government, Palin took the stance that this requirement would put her outside of her jurisdiction as governor. She and her staff exchanged letters with the DOE in attempt to clarify the possibility of the Missouri option, and the degree to which the state would be required to oversee code implementation and compliance.
The DOE admitted that the code mandate wasn’t appropriate for all states, but said the Missouri option was part of the Missouri governor’s “broader commitment” to “work proactively” with communities and the legislature to improve energy efficiency, implying, perhaps, that despite Alaska’s success in these areas, the governor’s personal involvement was non-negotiable. Revisions were offered, but Palin was still dissatisfied with the DOE’s language. Proponents of taking the money suggested that the DOE’s revisions required the governor to work “within the extent of her authority” to promote the building codes, not to actively enforce them. Palin didn’t agree with this interpretation, saying she didn’t want the role of dictating or influencing local policies.
As a state with a cold climate and an economy vulnerable to volatile fuel prices, Alaska has indeed taken its own steps to improve energy efficiency in recent years. In addition to independently adopted energy codes in most of the major cities and hundreds of millions budgeted for state energy projects, there has been an admirable home energy rebate program in place for several years; homeowners can have their houses audited for energy efficiency and be reimbursed up to $10,000 for making recommended improvements.
It’s hard to imagine, though, that the legislature’s motives in opposing Palin’s decision were entirely pure. Palin and the legislature had a combative relationship over budget issues for most of her tenure as governor, and this was an opportunity for them to demonstrate their clout. It’s telling, too, that the legislature rejected Parnell’s proposal to extend their special session (which was held primarily to overturn Palin’s veto) by one day in order to extend a year-long suspension of the state’s 8-cent gas tax, which will now be reinstated September 1. The legislature may choose to suspend the gas tax again when the regular session begins in January, but their lack of urgency to act on the issue undermines their claim that the stimulus funds are urgently necessary to help keep Alaskans’ energy costs down.
Of course, Palin’s own stance has been calculated as well. She initially wanted to decline roughly half of Alaska’s $930 million allotment, and her vocal anti-stimulus statements garnered national attention, which helped establish her as a critic of the Obama administration in her own right, independent of her role in McCain’s presidential campaign. By the time the smoke cleared, however, she was rejecting only this $28.6 million. Critics have said that it looks like a token amount, chosen to make a strategic political statement.
In her op-ed piece, she noted that during her time as a Wasilla city council member and then mayor, the city experienced a boom in growth that made building codes an issue of great contention. Wasilla is notably missing on the list of major communities that have independently adopted energy codes, which would suggest that it would be one of the key cities that would have problems with a statewide energy code.
After the legislature’s vote, Sean Parnell wrote to the DOE accepting the funds, noting his own disapproval of the mandates. He quoted an August DOE statement that the state legislature “does not need to adopt, impose and enforce a statewide building code in order to qualify,” making clear that he was accepting the funds on the basis of that statement. He also provided the DOE with “assurances”, not that state or local codes would be adopted, but that the Regulatory Commission of Alaska “will seek to implement general policies to promote energy efficiency and maintain just and reasonable rates while protecting the public.”
Ultimately, if Alaska holds its ground and does not adopt the IECC, Palin and the legislature may have unwittingly conspired to successfully challenge the federal government’s encroaching influence on the state’s affairs. Perhaps not coincidentally, the legislature unanimously passed a 10th amendment state sovereignty resolution while they were hashing out the stimulus funds controversy, and Palin signed it weeks before resigning as governor. It will be interesting to see how the DOE handles Alaska’s obstinance…and how the Alaska legislature responds if the DOE calls their bluff down the road and asks how the codes are coming along.
Andrea Gregovich is a writer and translator living in Anchorage.
-
Executive Editor JOEL KOTKIN on My View for the World… regarding Mumbai
“While the gulf between the extremely wealthy and destitute remains deep in Mumbai, a burgeoning middle class is helping reshape the economy, Kotkin said, adding that ‘Small vehicle, motorcycle and modest-apartment sales are all on the rise.’ In less than a lifetime, we have seen the rapid rise of a host of dynamic new global cities — and the relative decline of many others. The world capitals of tomorrow may largely be not in the Western world, but in countries such as China, Russia and Australia,” the report said.”
-
Contributing Editor Richard Reep on Orlando Weekly
“A trio of classes based upon the study of architecture – an almost invisible art in this city –begin the week of Sept.14 at Maitland Art Center for an eight-week program. There’s only room for 15 students in each of the educational outreaches taught by Richard Reep, a local artist in the RS 21 collective as well as a career architect with LEED certification (which means he’s an expert on efficient construction and concerns regarding energy and environmental design). ”
-
Executive Editor JOEL KOTKIN on Business Standard regarding Mumbai
“‘Mumbai’s prominence rests not just on an expanding industrial base, but also on the illustrious Bollywood, the world’s largest movie industry. The bust of Mumbai’s ridiculous housing-price boom has actually seemed to help the economy,’” the report by Forbes columnist and presidential fellow at Chapman University, Joel Kotkin said.”
-
Contributing Editor MICHAEL LIND quoted on The Nation regarding Obama
“Over at Salon, Michael Lind offers a different view, pointing to some other animating issues, like resentment at the “Wall Street elites who wrecked the economy” while working-class people lost their jobs and houses.”
-
Contributing Editor MICHAEL LIND quoted on Grant Lawrence regarding Obama
” The most dangerous deficit that the United States faces is not the budget deficit or the trade deficit. It is the Democrats’ demagogy deficit. Franklin Roosevelt, looking down from that Hyde Park in the sky, would not be surprised that conservatives are seeking to channel populist anger and anxiety, not against the Wall Street elites who wrecked the economy, but against reformers promoting healthcare reform and economic security for ordinary people. As he told his audience in 1936, “It is an old strategy of tyrants to delude their victims into fighting their battles for them.” But FDR would be shocked by the inability of his party to mobilize the public on behalf of reform.”
-
China’s Metropolitan Regions: Moving Toward High Income Status
Changsha, Hunan (China): Over the past 30 years, China has eradicated more poverty than any nation in the world’s history. The reforms instituted by Deng Xiaopeng have not only created a large, new middle class in China, but have also produced some of the largest and architecturally most impressive urban areas in the world. There is still poverty in China, but the most extreme poverty is in the rural areas. The expansive shanty-town poverty found in Manila, Jakarta, Mexico City, Sao Paulo or Mumbai is absent in the large Chinese urban areas.
While China as a nation is growing slowly, the same cannot be said of its urban areas. Perhaps the greatest migration in human history is underway, as rural residents move to the urban areas. United Nations population projections indicate that China will add 310 million people to its urban areas over the next 25 years, a figure equal to the population of the United States.
Gross Domestic Product in Chinese Cities: China has seen its incomes and gross domestic product increase markedly. Urban economic growth has been even greater than that of the country as a whole. This article contains the latest available information on gross domestic product for the largest prefectural and provincial level cities in China, derived from annual yearbooks (see Table). It needs to be understood that “cities” are much different in China than anywhere else.
The Differing Definitions of “City”: The most commonly used definition of a city in China is more akin to a large metropolitan region in the United States or Europe. Some cities, like Shanghai, Beijing, Tianjin and Chongqing are the equivalent of provinces, while other cities are “prefectural level,” administering large areas within provinces (Note 1). Each of these “cities” is comprised by smaller jurisdictions that go by at least 8 names, including city districts and “county level cities,” which are cities within the city, but not the main urban areas. Much of the land area in county level cities and even inside some city districts is rural rather than urban. As a result, analysts who should know better often make downright silly comparisons between Chinese cities and other cities in the world, simply because they do not understand the differing meaning of the term. Nearly all of China, urban and rural is broken into prefectural or provincial cities, just as nearly all of the United States is divided into counties.
The large rural areas within the cities reduce the overall GDP per capita because incomes are generally so much lower outside the urban areas.
Geographical Distribution of Wealth: China purposefully began its most significant reforms on the east coast, which is where much of the wealth of the nation is concentrated. All 25 of the most affluent metropolitan regions are on the east coast and 14 of the richest 20 metropolitan regions in China (measured by GDP per capita) are in the two river delta mega-regions, the Pearl and the Yangtze.
The Pearl River Delta: China’s richest area is the Pearl River Delta, home of formerly British administered Hong Kong, Deng Xiaopeng’s megacity Shenzhen and historic Guangzhou (Canton). The area is one of the world’s great mega-regions, with a population of more than 50 million, in 8 virtually adjacent urban areas, tied together by a modern freeway system. Altogether the Pearl River Delta urban areas have more people than the world’s largest single urban area, Tokyo, and an overall higher density.
Hong Kong, which remains outside the normal provincial governance structure, had the highest GDP per capita in the nation at $42,200 (purchasing power parity) in 2007, slightly more than 90 percent of the United States. Hong Kong and formerly Portuguese Macau have both achieved first world economic status, though Macau does not make the 1,000,000 urban area population threshold for inclusion on the present list.
Shenzhen, on Hong Kong’s northern border ranks 4th in the nation at $22,100 and Guangzhou 5th, at $19,900. Two other Pearl River Delta metropolitan regions, Foshan, Zhuhai, have GDPs per capita greater than $15,000, which by some accounts qualifies them for entry into the high income world. The remaining large Pearl River Delta metropolitan regions, Dongguan, Zhongshan and Jiangmin each have GDPs per capita exceeding $10,000.
The Yangtze River Delta: The Yangtze River Delta is another great mega-region, with more than 30 million people. It, however, covers much more land area than the Pearl River Delta and has much greater expanses of rural territory. The Yangtze River Delta metropolitan region of Suzhou, the city of canals, and neighbor of Shanghai, has the highest GDP per capita outside Hong Kong, at $25,500. One county level city within Suzhou, Kunshan has a GDP per capita of more than $28,000 (Note 2). Suzhou’s neighbor on the way to Nanjing, Wuxi, is next at $23,300. Shanghai, China’s largest metropolis, ranks 6th in GDP per capita at $18,400. Other Yangtze Delta metropolitan regions have GDPs per capita between $10,000 and $15,000, including Nanjing, Hangzhou, Changzhou and Ningbo.
The Beijing Metropolitan Region: China’s third mega-region is around Beijing, the national capital. Altogether, this region has nearly 25 million people, but like the Yangtze River Delta, the Beijing megaregion has large swaths of rural territory. Beijing itself has a GDP per capita of $16,200, while Tianjin and Tangshan (site of the 1976 earthquake, one of history’s worst, which killed at least 250,000 people) have GDPs per capita of between $10,000 and $15,000.
Outside the Megaregions: While the wealth is concentrated in the three large megaregions, prosperity has come to other metropolitan regions as well. One of Deng Xiaopeng’s original special economic zones, along with Shenzhen, was Xiamen, which is the richest metropolitan region outside the three large megaregions.
Prosperity Comes to the West: The interior metropolitan regions are now well on their way to sharing the prosperity of the east. Changsha, from where I write, is now served by the nation’s “interstate” highway system in all directions. At the end of 2008, this system had expanded to 37,000 miles. Eventually, 53,000 miles are planned, which would make it longer than the present 46,000 mile US interstate system. This national expressway system is a pivotal factor in bringing prosperity to the interior. Now, trucks can reach Pacific Coast ports such as Guangzhou, Fuzhou or Hangzhou in six to nine hours of driving. This makes it possible for manufacturing businesses to locate in Changsha, Xi’an or Wuhan and a number of other metropolitan regions that are well inland.
This should be of inestimable help as the nation seeks to decentralize its urban growth to the interior urban areas. Changsha, itself, has moved strongly into middle income status, with a GDP per capita closing in on $10,000. Moreover, local officials are planning for a near doubling of the current 2.5 million population in the next two decades. At least three major new towns under construction on the urban periphery and another will be built where the borders of three prefectural cities meet: Changsha, Zhuzhou and Xiangtan which is the birthplace of Chairman Mao Zedong (about 50 miles from Changsha, just off the Shangrui Expressway).
Chongqing (formerly known in the west as Chungking), one of the four provincial level municipalities, has low GDP per capita of less than $5,000. However, this figure is skewed low by the fact that the urban area itself accounts for approximately one-sixth of the provincial city’s population, with the bulk of the population in the far lower income rural areas. Chongqing provides the ultimate evidence that cities in China are like nowhere else in the world. The “city” of Chongqing has a population of more than 30 million, in a land area the size of Austria or Indiana. The actual urban area, however, covers less area than the Indianapolis urban area and only 1.5 times the area of the Vienna urban area.
Toward a High Income Nation: The urban areas of China still have poverty, but the commercial and residential development (both high rise and detached “villas”) make it clear that a great many people are doing “very well.”
China is moving hard toward high-income world status. I specifically avoid the term “first world,” because metropolitan China already feels first world, regardless of its income status. However, should current growth rates continue relative to the high income world, metropolitan regions such as Suzhou and others could move into the list of the world’s 100 most affluent metropolitan areas within a decade. It cannot happen too soon.
Note 1 : This includes sub-provincial level cities, which have jurisdiction over virtual prefectures within provinces, however have more administrative independence than prefectural level cities.
Note 2: GDP per capita data is not widely available for divisions within prefecture and provincial level cities
China Metropolitan (City) Regions Gross Domestic Product: 2007 Provincial, Sub-Provincial & Prefectural Level Cities Purchasing Power Parity (US$) RANKED BY GDP/CAPITA GDP/Capita Rank Metropolitan (City) Regions ¥ (RMB) US$ PPP 1 Hong Kong $42,200 2 Suzhou, JS ¥91,900 $25,500 3 Wuxi, JS ¥83,900 $23,300 4 Shenzhen, GD ¥79,600 $22,100 5 Guangzhou, GD ¥71,800 $19,900 6 Shanghai, SHG ¥66,400 $18,400 7 Zhuhai, GD ¥61,700 $17,100 8 Foshan, GD ¥61,200 $17,000 9 Beijing. BJ ¥58,200 $16,200 10 Xiamen, FJ ¥56,200 $15,600 11 Nanjing, JX ¥53,600 $14,900 12 Changzhou, JS ¥52,800 $14,700 13 Hangzhou, ZJ ¥52,600 $14,600 14 Handan. HEB ¥51,900 $14,400 15 Dalian, LN ¥51,600 $14,300 16 Ningbo, ZJ ¥50,500 $14,000 17 Zhongshan. GD ¥49,500 $13,700 18 Tianjin. TJ ¥46,100 $12,800 18 Dongguan. GD ¥46,000 $12,800 20 Shenyang, LN ¥45,600 $12,600 20 Qingdao. SD ¥45,400 $12,600 22 Tangshan. HEB ¥44,700 $12,400 23 Zibo, SD ¥43,500 $12,100 24 Yantai, SD ¥41,300 $11,500 25 Huizhou, GD ¥41,000 $11,400 26 Baotau, NM ¥40,400 $11,200 26 Shijiazhuang. HEB ¥40,300 $11,200 28 Jinan, SD ¥39,300 $10,900 29 Anshan, LN ¥38,400 $10,700 30 Jiangmen, GD ¥37,800 $10,500 31 Taiyuan. SAX ¥36,400 $10,100 32 Wuhan. HUB ¥35,600 $9,900 33 Hohhot, NM ¥34,900 $9,700 34 Zhengzhou, HEN ¥34,100 $9,500 35 Changsha. HUN ¥33,700 $9,400 36 Urumqi, XJ ¥31,100 $8,600 37 Nanchang, JX ¥30,500 $8,500 38 Fuzhou, FJ ¥29,500 $8,200 39 Changchun, JL ¥28,100 $7,800 40 Hefei. AH ¥27,600 $7,700 41 Wenzhou. ZJ ¥27,500 $7,600 42 Baoding, HEB ¥27,100 $7,500 43 Haikou, HA ¥26,700 $7,400 43 Chengdu, SC ¥26,500 $7,400 45 Lanzhou, GS ¥25,600 $7,100 46 Luoyang. Hen ¥25,100 $7,000 47 Harbin, HL ¥24,700 $6,800 47 Fushun, LN ¥24,500 $6,800 49 Jilin, JL ¥23,300 $6,500 50 Xiangfan, HUB ¥22,500 $6,200 51 Xi’an, SAA ¥21,300 $5,900 52 Liuzhou, GX ¥20,700 $5,800 53 Guiyang, GZ ¥19,500 $5,400 54 Xuzhou, JS ¥19,200 $5,300 55 Kunming, YN ¥18,800 $5,200 56 Shantou, GD ¥17,000 $4,700 57 Linyi, SD ¥16,300 $4,500 58 Nanning, GX ¥15,800 $4,400 59 Datong, SAX ¥15,600 $4,300 59 Huiayn, JS ¥15,500 $4,300 61 Chongqing, CQ ¥14,700 $4,100 62 Qiqihar, HL ¥10,000 $2,800 Sources: Annual statistical reports, generally from http://www.chinaknowledge.com GDP PPP calculated from 2007 International Monetary Fund data Caution: In some cases, GDP per capita may exclude temporary residents Includes all provincial, prefectural level and sub-provincial level cities and special economic regions on the mainland with a core urban area of more than 1,000,000 population (see http://www.demographia.com/db-worldua.pdf). Note: Cities in China are substantially different in definition than in other nations. See: http://www.demographia.com/db-define.pdf. Provincial abbreviations at db-china-abbr.pdf
Wendell Cox is a Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris. He was born in Los Angeles and was appointed to three terms on the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission by Mayor Tom Bradley. He is the author of “War on the Dream: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life.
”