Which city will best embody wealth and capitalism in the 21st Century?

Which city will best embody wealth and capitalism in the 21st Century?

  • Dubai, United Arab Emirates

    Votes: 27 25.0%
  • New York City, United States of America

    Votes: 34 31.5%
  • Hong Kong, People's Republic of China

    Votes: 7 6.5%
  • Shanghai, People's Republic of China

    Votes: 13 12.0%
  • Moscow, Russian Federation

    Votes: 2 1.9%
  • Tokyo, Japan

    Votes: 9 8.3%
  • Singapore

    Votes: 3 2.8%
  • Other (List it in post)

    Votes: 13 12.0%

  • Total voters
    108
Anyway I vote for Minneapolis.:D It is like a bigger, richer Calgary except that it's boom isn't based on raw materials.

Any place can ultimately specialize in software, manufacturing, or financing. Not everyone can be at the centre of the raw materials that everyone else needs to make all of their cool gadgets and gizmos.:cool:

(Though, I do hear the Twin Cities are pretty cool)
 
New York, London, and Shanghai depending on which way the wind blows. Dubai might have a chance, but their a bit behind.
 
London's skyline doesn't have enough ungodly tall buildings yet

Maybe not, but they get top marks for best phallic symbol, which is what capitalism is really all about. ;)

79.jpg
 
Not NYC. It has a good deal of anti-business laws and a police state beginning to emerge.
 
Dubai is developing fast. Too fast. In a way that's a good thing because oil is running out very fast too and the Gulf States needs to develop their economies into other sectors as quickly as possible. And while Dubai is losing its Arab identity it's a great example of the increasing globalisation and multiculturalism. It's also a great example of the benefits and draw back of capitalism which seems to the way of the 21st century. Living standards and income have rose but there's a large gap between the prosperous businessmen in their towers and the indentured migrant labourers living in the slums. And in true 21st century spirit problems that came with unregulated growth are readily ignored. Yep, Dubai is a true 21st century city.
 
I think Singapore. While they're under some risk, because the ruling class will have to be replaced (likely by more corrupt people), their game plan so far is really, really solid.

They've become a hub of so many things that they're going to be stable as an economic centre.
 
I say none of the options.
My vote for the best representative of capitalist politics and its struggle for wealth at all costs is best exemplified by New Orleans. While its destruction may or may not be caused by humans, it is irrelevant.
 
Singapore is the ultimate capitalist country, its run as a corporation and we propably the only government that is running a profit, a huge profit i might add. Most of Dubai is built with oil money, they are not business people. Big building and mega projects do not a profitable make, it is a state of mind and being.
 
Singapore is the ultimate capitalist country, its run as a corporation and we propably the only government that is running a profit, a huge profit i might add. Most of Dubai is built with oil money, they are not business people. Big building and mega projects do not a profitable make, it is a state of mind and being.

Again, so many people assume that Dubai's "oil riches" are the source of all of those beautiful and shiny buildings coming up. That's not at all the whole story, take a look at this map and how much of the UAE Dubai actually controls (territory-wise).

UAE_en-map.png


Abu Dhabi has much, much more in terms of oil wealth. It's the fact that Dubai has made a conscious effort to diversify its economy, attract investment (and the rich) that has made it the Arabian Gem that it's becoming.
 
London, New York or Dubai I reckon. Probably London.
 
Oil money is oil money, smallness is no indication of mineral oil wealth. Dubaians have the mentality of rich Arabs, they think they can but their security when they run out of oil. They spend inflated amount of money on poor investments, alot of their transaction is through Singaporean investment companies.
 
Oil money is oil money, smallness is no indication of mineral oil wealth. Dubaians have the mentality of rich Arabs, they think they can but their security when they run out of oil. They spend inflated amount of money on poor investments, alot of their transaction is through Singaporean investment companies.

Smallness does serve as an indication of mineral oil wealth if this "smallness" means that significant oil deposits are not in your territory. Consider the following two maps.

oilfieldsinmiddleeast.gif


gold7.gif


Both show that the largest oil deposits in the United Arab Emirates are in the territory of Abu Dhabi.

My point and the argument advanced by many other posters here, has been that Dubai's wealth does not come predominantly from oil. No one denies that they do have some oil, but it pales greatly in comparison to what Abu Dhabi has. Nevertheless, Abu Dhabi does not have the towering sky scrapers and other "wonders" that are going up in Dubai. The local government's policy towards pursuing a diversified economy have been a main reason why so many companies are relocating or opening offices there, and why so many people are going there to live a luxurious lifestyle. Consider Haliburton, which most recently decided to move it's World Headquarters to Dubai.
 
Yeah, I can see a Calgary/Fort MacMurray parallel to what you're saying Stacmon. They're doing their best to be a filter for the oil money, and diversifying around that.
 
It's the fact that Dubai has made a conscious effort to diversify its economy, attract investment (and the rich) that has made it the Arabian Gem that it's becoming.
Not to mention that they don't seem to have any quarrels with slave labor.
 
Not to mention that they don't seem to have any quarrels with slave labor.

I've heard some pretty scathing criticism about the low-skilled worker visas handed out by the US to migrant workers (many of whom are Mexican). These visas are tied to specific employers, meaning they're quite ripe for abuse. I've even heard of employers confiscating documents and lowering agreed upon wages (ie: offering $10 an hour initially, and paying $5, telling workers "if you don't like it, go home").

However, it should definitely be noted that the population of the UAE is skewed largely in favour of foreign workers, versus the native Arab population. Consider the following from Wikipedia.

UAE has one of the most diverse populations in the Middle East.[6] Since the mid-1980s, people from all across South Asia have settled in the UAE. In fact, an estimated 85 percent of the population is comprised of non-citizens, one of the world's highest percentages of foreign-born in any nation.[citation needed] The UAE's better living standards and economic opportunities than anywhere else in the Middle East and South Asia have made it an attractive destination for Indians and Pakistanis, along with tens of thousands from Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. In 2006, there were approximately 1.2 million Indian nationals and 700,000 Pakistani nationals in the UAE, making them the largest expatriate community in the oil-rich nation.[7] Persons from over twenty Arab nationalities, including thousands of Palestinians who came as either political refugees or migrant workers, live in the UAE.[citation needed]

* Emiratis (local Arabs) 11%
* Other Arabs 21%
* South Asians 57%
* Western and East Asian 11%


There is a big reason why naturalization of foreigners (ie: giving them citizenship), including to other Arabs, is rare in Gulf Arab countries. Oil wealth is typically shared among the populace, and every citizen of the country is eligible to receive this money. Furthermore, there is universal health care in these countries (ie: Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, etc.).

If you extend citizenship to too many people, you have to give smaller slices of that oil drenched pie to each person, which is obviously not popular among current citizens!

This is why you see so many legal residents in these countries, and so few foreign born citizens. I'm not even sure if spouses can get citizenship, though they can certainly get residence visas.

When it comes to children born to Arab parents, the traditional policy (as far as I know, from my experience with Lebanon and Arab culture in general) is that only the children of fathers are eligible for citizenship. This is because Arab culture traces lineage through the father. It is possible that individual countries may have recently adopted different policies, but one of the most progressive is Lebanon, and I believe that they have as of now, not changed this (my father is Lebanese).
 
Back
Top Bottom