NewGeography.com blogs
by Anonymous 03/18/2011
Chandra Bhan Prasad, a political activist from Northern part of India, has recently constructed a temple enshrining “Goddess English” in Bankagaon, near Lakhimpur in Utter Pradesh, India. The statue resembles the Statue of Liberty (but no crown; just a hat), carries a copy of the Indian constitution, and holds a fountain pen. Representing the unshaken belief by many Indians that English is a passport for good education, well respected and good paying jobs, and a modern outlook, no wonder the Goddess English stands on a personal computer. The temple will have symbols and formulae of chemistry, mathematics and physics engraved on the walls, and current plans are to build the staircase in the form of a computer keyboard replica.
India is a country with over 1,652 languages spoken by its 1.2 billion residents. Hindi is one of its two official languages, spoken by about 350 million people, and the primary language of North India. But about 300 to 350 million Indians speak English. Most linguists rank India as the largest English language user in the world.
Knowledge of English is one of the key factors in India’s new prosperity. You can feel the correlation between English language acceptance and personal income. India’s haves and have-nots are basically divided by their knowledge of the English language.
Do we see similar pattern in the border states of the United States? The USA, as a single language country, has been engulfed in multi-language education controversies, especially in California, Arizona and Texas. A very unacceptable high school dropout rate can be observed in school districts where English is not spoken well, and the per capita income of the non-English speaking Latino population is substantially lower than US median household income.
Is there a lesson to be learned?
Census results released today show again show losses, though small, in historical core municipalities. The city of Minneapolis lost 40 people, between 2000 and 2010, falling from 382,618 to 382,578. The city of St. Paul, also a historical core city of the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area fell from 287,000 to 285,000.
The historical core municipality of Memphis dropped from 650,000 to 647,000, despite the fact that much of the city is of a post-World War II suburban form.
The US Department of Transportation has announced a competitive grant program to reallocate funding that was refused by Florida for a proposed high speed rail line from Tampa to Orlando. The line was cancelled by Governor Rick Scott because of the prospect for billions of dollars of unplanned obligations that could have become the responsibility of the state's taxpayers.
Eligibility: Eligible applicants are states, groups of states, Amtrak or other government agencies that authorized to "provide intercity or high-speed rail service on behalf of states or a group of states. The grant program requires recipients of grants (read "taxpayers") to provide financial support to intercity and high speed rail passenger rail programs in the event that cost and ridership projections are optimistic (a routine occurrence).
Obligation to Pay for Cost Overruns: As in the program announced in 2009. the state, group of states, government agency will be required to demonstrate its financial capacity (that is, the capacity of their taxpayers) to pay for cost overruns (page 9). This open-ended liability led Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey to cancel a new transit-Hudson River rail tunnel, which had costs that were escalating out of control that would be the obligation of the state's taxpayers. Governor Christie and Governor Scott were both aware of the disastrous record of major infrastructure cost overruns, such as in the Boston Big Dig project, the Korean high-speed rail program and the overwhelming majority of passenger rail projects in North America and Europe, according to a team led by Oxford University Professor Bent Flyvbjerg.
Obligation to Pay Operating Costs: Moreover, inaccurate passenger and revenue forecasts have been pervasive in high-speed rail systems, as has been documented by Flybjerg, who found that cost overruns occurred in nine out of ten projects:
... we conclude that the traffic estimates used in decision making for rail infrastructure development are highly, systematically and significantly misleading.
This is illustrated by the fact that even a decade and one-half after the Eurostar London to Paris and London service was opened, ridership remains 60 percent below projection. Ridership on the Taiwan and Korea high speed rail systems has been one-half or more below projections. Our analysis of the Tampa to Orlando line revealed exceedingly high ridership projections, which were inexplicably raised even higher in a new report just released. Failure to achieve ridership projections increases the likelihood that a line will need operating subsidies, which would be the ultimate responsibility of taxpayers under the USDOT program.
Federal Grant Repayment Obligation: Moreover, taxpayers of any grant recipient would be required to repay part or all of the federal grant if a sufficient level of service is not maintained for a period of 20 years (page 41). The operation of this provision is illustrated by recent Florida experience. Tri-Rail, the Miami area's commuter rail service only narrowly escaped having to repay $250 million when its service level was deemed to not meet requirements of a federal grant by early in the Obama presidency. Tri-Rail was rescued by a state subsidy of nearly $15 million annually, which restored an artificially high level of service.
Intercity and High Speed Rail Program: The federal intercity and high-speed rail program is largely limited to upgrades of Amtrak-type service. Before Governor Scott's decision, only two of the programs (Florida and California) would have achieved international standard high speed rail speeds.
Census Bureau estimates in 2008 indicated that the Tucson metropolitan area had become the nation's 52nd with more than 1,000,000 population. A Bureau of the Census estimate released earlier this week placed the population in 2010 at 1,027,000.
However, the 2010 census count showed the Tucson metropolitan area to have only 980,000 residents, a 16.1 percent increase from the 844,000 population in 2010. The historical core municipality of Tucson gained 6.9 percent from 487,000 to 520,000. This is the slowest growth rate since the 1850-1860 census period. The city accounted for 24 percent of the metropolitan area growth.
The suburbs grew at a rate of 29.1 percent and accounted for 76 percent of the population growth over the period.
This is the second time in history and the second time in five years that the nation has "lost" a metropolitan area with more than 1,000,000 population. The first instance was New Orleans, which was ravaged by Hurricane Katrina and dropped below 1,000,000 in 2006 and then recovered to above that figure in 2007. At the current growth rate, it appears likely that Tucson will be restored to major metropolitan area status by 2012.
The new 2010 census figures for Milwaukee reveal one of the nation's slowest growing metropolitan areas. From 2000 to 2010, Milwaukee grew 3.7 percent, from 1,501,000 to 1,556,000. Milwaukee's growth rate places it in a third place tie with Los Angeles (Cleveland and Pittsburgh lost population).
The historical core municipality of Milwaukee fell 0.4 percent, from 597,000 to 595,000. This is the lowest population count since the 1940 census and it is possible that the population living in the 1940 boundaries could be substantially lower. Since that time the land area of the city has more than doubled (from 43 square miles to 97 square miles), which is likely to have masked severe losses in the older urban core of the city (such losses have occurred in nearly all historical core municipalities in the nation). The city reached its population peak in 1960, with 741,000 residents in the expanded boundaries.
The suburbs gained 6.4 percent and attracted more than 100 percent of the population growth in the 2000s. The largest growth, at 12.1 percent, was in Washington County, which is further from the urban core than the other two suburban counties. Waukesha added 29,000 residents, growing 8.1 percent, from 361,000 to 390,000, while Ozuakee County grew from 82,000 to 87,000, for a growth rate of 5.6 percent. The core county of Milwaukee, which includes the city of Milwaukee, grew 0.8 percent, from 940,000 to 948,000.
|