DID YOU KNOW?....vehicle laws in China

[Roland_Deschain]

Regulated Vehicle Laws, GOOD or BAD

So I thought maybe some other people may find this topic intresting as I found it a bit intresting. So right now I live and work in Beijing China. After being here a while I discovered some very intresting laws about owning and operating a vehicle in the in the big popululated city.

Every day they have a number 1-9. If your license plate ends in this number than you can not use your car at all that day. The only other place that has this similar law is in Mexico City.

Also now...and this is a more recent law that I am still not 100 percent sure about the details because I cant read chinese..but my girlfriend told me the gist of it. If you want to own a car you have to suscribe in a lottery type thing to have a right to own one. And this lottery is more based specifically towards people who really do not need one. And if you fail the lottery than you can reapply after 6 months.

What is your opinion on this people? I know in a city like Beijing they have more people than in New York and that their public transportation is better.....but do you think its fair? unfair? smart? logical? Honestly I think its a needed thing definately for beijing because so many people have just become wealthy in this generation and they think that they need all these things that they dont have, and are still discovering what makes them truely happy.

I was thinking though. Are places like San Franscisco or New York really that far from needing such laws? I mean Im sure we dont "need" them persay, we could sit all day in traffic jams, but is it not a good idea? I mean the country really is so dependent on cars and an improvement to the public transportation would be a nice touch and perhaps the requirment of its use might stimulate the government to improve it a little bit, also its more enviormentally friendly as well wastes less petrol.

Anyway I think it wouldnt be a bad idea. I know it sounds unfair not driving on days you really want or not being able to have a car because you dont "need" one. Is this a sacrifice worth the dispossition it puts yourself in though?

let hear your thoughts people, I thought it was an intresting topic, and you can talk about this for any city you may know of that may also fall into the same guidlines of population.

 

[asm]

The problem with most "regressive" laws is, the ones that are better off will always find ways to circumvent it. On a lottery day with an odd number being the losing ticket, the rich guy will drive the other car he has.

The problem, if you ask me, is that people think it's fundamentally really really cool to own a car and drive it around. It's a status.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

The problem with most "regressive" laws is, the ones that are better off will always find ways to circumvent it. On a lottery day with an odd number being the losing ticket, the rich guy will drive the other car he has.

The problem, if you ask me, is that people think it's fundamentally really really cool to own a car and drive it around. It's a status.

You are right that is seems to be a status, but in a larger point of veiw its also a necissity in a place like America except for a few cities, I mean most of our public transportation is pretty shitty compared to the rest of the world, because we run on the wheel. Our populations will continue to grow and we will continue to consume more oil unless we find alternate fuel source, or take action to slowly dimenish what material we have left.

Obviously the rich will abuse it using loopholes, but in the long sight of things with petrol running out and populations growth, are such problems still not worth the effort to control such a lifestyle of casual waste thats not really necissary?

 

[asm]

You are right that is seems to be a status, but in a larger point of veiw its also a necissity in a place like America except for a few cities, I mean most of our public transportation is pretty shitty compared to the rest of the world, because we run on the wheel. Our populations will continue to grow and we will continue to consume more oil unless we find alternate fuel source, or take action to slowly dimenish what material we have left.

That's true. What's funny though (and this is a very liberal use of the word funny), is that governments could easily provide better public transportation for less money. There's a lot of money made by selling cars and pumping out oil, the government guy might talk smoothly about alternative energy sources and reducing emissions, but he really REALLY doesn't want you to stop.

Obviously the rich will abuse it using loopholes, but in the long sight of things with petrol running out and populations growth, are such problems still not worth the effort to control such a lifestyle of casual waste thats not really necissary?

Yes, but I think the problem would be better solved through offering feasible alternatives and better yet, changing the mindset of people, as opposed to restraining this-and-that.

 

[Donald Trump]

The Chinese government subsidises oil/petrol so that the Chinese people pay less for their petrol or diesel than other countries. Not being able to use a car on a certain day according to license plate number has been used in the West before, normally when there is a shortage of oil, so probably in the 70s. But I would suspect that it has been done more recently, though probably not on such a large scale.
The car lottery thing is one of the drawbacks, or benefits if you're inclined to see it that way, of living in a country with a communist government. It makes a certain amount of sense, but it also restricts your freedom.
I'm not a big fan of public transport, but I do live in a country where public transport is non-existent/shit.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

That's true. What's funny though (and this is a very liberal use of the word funny), is that governments could easily provide better public transportation for less money. There's a lot of money made by selling cars and pumping out oil, the government guy might talk smoothly about alternative energy sources and reducing emissions, but he really REALLY doesn't want you to stop.

Yes, but I think the problem would be better solved through offering feasible alternatives and better yet, changing the mindset of people, as opposed to restraining this-and-that.

Honestly I know Mr government guy is just pulling us along as they all are, but I think it would be wise to take note of public transportation improvement while it is still an option.

I do not really look at it as restraint, if we improved public transportation and somewhat had a guidelines for trivial vehicle use, would that not be changing the mindset so to speak? Revolutions don't come with voluntary change most of the time, they come with reggression and coping, and become a habit or lifestyle.

I mean in our childrens era think of how many cars there will be everywhere, think of the fuel costs, think of the fact that your going to need to buy them these vehicles, think of the traffic =O. I would love it if the future generations were not useless without a car.