You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

CellBioGuy comments on Open thread, Jan. 25 - Jan. 31, 2016 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: username2 25 January 2016 09:07PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (169)

Comments (169)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ChristianKl 26 January 2016 06:34:16PM *  0 points [-]

If I look in Google Maps at California there seem to be huge open spaces. What's stopping new cities in California to be build on land that's outside of the existing cities?

Comment author: CellBioGuy 27 January 2016 07:34:30AM 5 points [-]

Cities are where they are because of actual reasons of geography, not just people plopping things down randomly on a map. You need to get stuff into them, stuff out of them, have the requisite power and water infrastructure to get to them (ESPECIALLY in California)... they aren't something you plop down randomly on a whim.

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 27 January 2016 11:24:35AM 3 points [-]

Also, previous attempts at doing exactly this have only had modest success:

California City had its origins in 1958 when real estate developer and sociology professor Nat Mendelsohn purchased 80,000 acres (320 km2) of Mojave Desert land with the aim of master-planning California's next great city. He designed his model city, which he hoped would one day rival Los Angeles in size, around a Central Park with a 26-acre (11 ha) artificial lake. Growth did not happen anywhere close to what he expected. To this day a vast grid of crumbling paved roads, intended to lay out residential blocks, extends well beyond the developed area of the city.

Comment author: username2 28 January 2016 11:15:12AM 0 points [-]

There are planned desert cities in Arabian peninsula. If land value in California grows because people value geographical proximity to San Francisco that much at some point it will outweigh costs of having to build infrastructure in the middle of the desert.

Comment author: Viliam 29 January 2016 09:21:19AM 0 points [-]

There are multiple problems that need to be solved here. Buying land is one of them, and yes, it seems like a reasonable investment for someone who has tons of money. The other problem is water.

Yet another problem could be the transit from the new city to SF. Geographical proximity may be useless if the traffic jams make commuting impossible.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit