Ho Chi Minh City's Metro System Map Options

[SoCal]

[etalkishere]

SoCal, this is much bigger project than the Hanoi metro project.

I've been following as much as possible any development on subway metro projects, particularly the one you posted here. It seems not much news released, at best very sporadic. Every few months, something was publicly announced, then nothing. I can't wait for Vietnam to have its first subway metro system. Certainly, it will help elevate Vietnam image to a different level, and will help reduce continuing, severe traffic congestion problems. I really hope, and pray, Vietnam will have its first subway system completed within the next 7-10 years.

If someone in this forum has more information about these subway metro projects, please share. I am looking for a similar simulation video clip like the one for Hanoi metro project. If someone has it, please share as well.

[landsknechts]

Guys, we don't have $750 millions for the subway. We only have that kind of money for the shipbuilding industry.

[Confucianaire]

Guys, we don't have $750 millions for the subway. We only have that kind of money for the shipbuilding industry.

So what its just gonna be half way done?

[SoCal]

Vietnam needs to focus and finish the HCMC Metro System and Hanoi Metro System as quickly as possible.

In addition, Vietnam needs to finish the four railways, (Hanoi to Hai Phong, Hanoi to Vinh, Saigon to Vung Tau, Saigon to Nha Trang).

SoCal, this is much bigger project than the Hanoi metro project.

I've been following as much as possible any development on subway metro projects, particularly the one you posted here. It seems not much news released, at best very sporadic. Every few months, something was publicly announced, then nothing. I can't wait for Vietnam to have its first subway metro system. Certainly, it will help elevate Vietnam image to a different level, and will help reduce continuing, severe traffic congestion problems. I really hope, and pray, Vietnam will have its first subway system completed within the next 7-10 years.

If someone in this forum has more information about these subway metro projects, please share. I am looking for a similar simulation video clip like the one for Hanoi metro project. If someone has it, please share as well.

This post has been edited by SoCal: Aug 18 2006, 01:20 PM

[landsknechts]

So what its just gonna be half way done?

The project is still on paper, nothing has started yet.

[etalkishere]

Vietnam needs to focus and finish the HCMC Metro System and Hanoi Metro System as quickly as possible.

In addition, Vietnam needs to finish the four railways, (Hanoi to Hai Phong, Hanoi to Vinh, Saigon to Vung Tau, Saigon to Nha Trang).

I 100% agree with you. If I could make decisions, I would make building these subway systems top of all priorities, even higher than building power infrastructures. They will help traffic congestions, and deadly traffic accidents, greatly in busy cities like Hanoi and Saigon. Not to mention that, Vietnam will very likely see sharp increase in foreign visitors, once the systems are in place.

Guys, we don't have $750 millions for the subway. We only have that kind of money for the shipbuilding industry.

Yes, it is expensive. But if you look at the benefits it would bring (significantly reducing traffic congestions, deadly traffic accidents, greater foreigner visitors, VN could host more regional/international sports events, etc), I feel it is highly worthy. We will recoup the cost in few years, I would think. For me, we need to make it a top priority and get it implemented. We have been planning, talking too long already (7+ years?). Let's just get it approved and implement it.

[daidai]

Saigon needs a clean up because it's dirty.

[supernovasp]

I 100% agree with you. If I could make decisions, I would make building these subway systems top of all priorities, even higher than building power infrastructures. They will help traffic congestions, and deadly traffic accidents, greatly in busy cities like Hanoi and Saigon. Not to mention that, Vietnam will very likely see sharp increase in foreign visitors, once the systems are in place.
Yes, it is expensive. But if you look at the benefits it would bring (significantly reducing traffic congestions, deadly traffic accidents, greater foreigner visitors, VN could host more regional/international sports events, etc), I feel it is highly worthy. We will recoup the cost in few years, I would think. For me, we need to make it a top priority and get it implemented. We have been planning, talking too long already (7+ years?). Let's just get it approved and implement it.

We're looking for investment into it. The amount of money for people's relocation are ridiculous high. You can't do anything without money. Saigon's highways and roads itself still need a lot of investment and not up to date yet.

BTW it will probably take double the time if Vietnam's turning into a "democratic" government.

[etalkishere]

We're looking for investment into it. The amount of money for people's relocation are ridiculous high. You can't do anything without money. Saigon's highways and roads itself still need a lot of investment and not up to date yet.

BTW it will probably take double the time if Vietnam's turning into a "democratic" government.

Haha, you probably underestimate the power of democracy You never know, it could go the other way too Given the length of time and the history behind this proposal, I am so concerned that if it will ever get implemented in the next 10 years.

[supernovasp]

Haha, you probably underestimate the power of democracy You never know, it could go the other way too Given the length of time and the history behind this proposal, I am so concerned that if it will ever get implemented in the next 10 years.

Look at India and China's infrastructures, also Korea's massive infrastructure renewal during Park Chung Hee, and Singapore's infrastructures.

[etalkishere]

Look at India and China's infrastructures, also Korea's massive infrastructure renewal during Park Chung Hee, and Singapore's infrastructures.

I just read more about Park Chung Hee in wikipedia, and his time.

"Following pressure from the Kennedy administration in the United States, a civilian government was restored, with Park winning the 1963 election as the candidate of the Democratic Republican Party over Yun, candidate of the Civil Rule Party."

So, what's your point by bringing Park Chung Hee up? SK during his time wasn't a communist country like VN today. In fact, per wikipedia, SK was a multi-party (Democratic Republican Party and Civil Rule Party) country, at that point in time.

This post has been edited by etalkishere: Aug 19 2006, 09:30 AM

[supernovasp]

I just read more about Park Chung Hee in wikipedia, and his time.

"Following pressure from the Kennedy administration in the United States, a civilian government was restored, with Park winning the 1963 election as the candidate of the Democratic Republican Party over Yun, candidate of the Civil Rule Party."

So, what's your point by bringing Park Chung Hee up? SK during his time wasn't a communist country like VN today. In fact, per wikipedia, SK was a multi-party (Democratic Republican Party and Civil Rule Party) country, at that point in time.

Uhhh, right Park Chung Hee was considered a dictator-like president in South Korea. He's the president in South Korean history that received heavy criticism for human rights' violation. Again names mean nothing.

If you actually FULLY read the article in wikipedia:

Originally, presidents were restricted to two consecutive terms. However, with the assistance of the KCIA, Park succeeded in amending the Constitution to allow the current president--himself--to run for three consecutive terms. The Yusin constitution was voted in by a national vote with 91.5% agreeing. In 1971, Park squeaked to victory again, this time over Kim Dae-jung.

Just after being sworn in for his third term, Park declared a state of emergency "based on the dangerous realities of the international situation." He then dissolved Parliament and suspended the Constitution. In 1972, he introduced the Yusin Constitution, which dramatically increased his power. Following the Constitution's passage, Park's regime grew markedly more repressive, with the KCIA becoming well-known for detaining and torturing opposition leaders. However, his leadership was justified by his contributions to economic development and defense from communism and North Korea. Park was reelected to six-year terms in 1972 and 1978, but voting was done by elected representatives and not by the people themselves. The Yusin Constitution effectively made him president for life.

This post has been edited by supernovasp: Aug 19 2006, 12:21 PM

[etalkishere]

Uhhh, right Park Chung Hee was considered a dictator-like president in South Korea. He's the president in South Korean history that received heavy criticism for human rights' violation. Again names mean nothing.

If you actually FULLY read the article in wikipedia:

Originally, presidents were restricted to two consecutive terms. However, with the assistance of the KCIA, Park succeeded in amending the Constitution to allow the current president--himself--to run for three consecutive terms. The Yusin constitution was voted in by a national vote with 91.5% agreeing. In 1971, Park squeaked to victory again, this time over Kim Dae-jung.

Just after being sworn in for his third term, Park declared a state of emergency "based on the dangerous realities of the international situation." He then dissolved Parliament and suspended the Constitution. In 1972, he introduced the Yusin Constitution, which dramatically increased his power. Following the Constitution's passage, Park's regime grew markedly more repressive, with the KCIA becoming well-known for detaining and torturing opposition leaders. However, his leadership was justified by his contributions to economic development and defense from communism and North Korea. Park was reelected to six-year terms in 1972 and 1978, but voting was done by elected representatives and not by the people themselves. The Yusin Constitution effectively made him president for life.

I actually read the whole thing. Yes, his government a repressive one. Yet, SK did have multiple parties, at that time, didn't they?

Also, because of his repressive governement, it only lasted until 1979 (from 1972) when he was gunned down.

This post has been edited by etalkishere: Aug 19 2006, 12:40 PM

[supernovasp]

I actually read the whole thing. Yes, his government a repressive one. Yet, SK did have multiple parties, at that time, didn't they?

which was mostly dominated by one party just as Taiwan and Japan. Most of democratic governments in Asia before they became economically powerful exist only in name as democracy

You might as well read about Lee Kuan Yew http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Kuan_Yew

Also, because of his repressive governement, it only lasted until 1979 (from 1972) when he was gunned down.

Followed by the same kind of leaders untill South Korea was quite developed and THEN the government became democratic in Western sense.

[CJK]

Korea may not have been communist back then, but it was surely a lot more backward and hopeless than today's Vietnam.

Park was a hyper anti-communist dictator; he killed anyone that was communist, im sure many of them were innocent too. He was a general and overthrew the government in 1961 and took over. Fortunately, he did bring a lot of change and jump started the economy into what would become the korean economic miracle.

Anyways, good to see an ambitious Vietnam.
Hope the construction of the metro begins soon.
Gotta love the Seoul and Tokyo subway systems.

[etalkishere]

which was mostly dominated by one party just as Taiwan and Japan. Most of democratic governments in Asia before they became economically powerful exist only in name as democracy

I don't expect much democracy like what America has today, since I know this is a long, progressive process. It surely needs to be worked at. However, I expect Vietnam should start to have at least 2 parties so they can watch out for each other. I don't care if one is more dominant than the other. Personally, I don't see how CSVN government can effectively control corruption without having at least 2 parties checking on each other. Let's look at the facts, corruption has been a problem for so long now, 15-20 years?, and it only gets more rampantly. Despite many initiatives, after initiatives, one special force after another is formed to tackle corruption, nothing much progress is seen. It only gets worse, and even is seen by CSVN leaders a real threat to its leadership.

To be honest with you, as long as CSVN vietnam can effectively control corruption to the minimum, I don't care much if we have democracy. Corruption really hinders our true growth potentials in competing with other regional countries. The problem is that I don't see how corruption is effectively controlled in Vietnam without having 2 parties. I, and many domestic citizens, simply just are running out of patience, given the snail-pace progress the government is making. On top of that, criticizing the government wrongdoings is strictly prohibited. How does that help fight corruption?

This post has been edited by etalkishere: Aug 19 2006, 01:14 PM

[supernovasp]

I don't expect much democracy like what America has today, since I know this is a long, progressive process. It surely needs to be worked at. However, I expect Vietnam should start to have at least 2 parties so they can watch out for each other. I don't care if one is more dominant than the other. Personally, I don't see how CSVN government can effectively control corruption without having at least 2 parties checking on each other. Let's look at the facts, corruption has been a problem for so long now, 15-20 years?, and it only gets more rampantly. Despite many initiatives, after initiatives, one special force after another is formed to tackle corruption, nothing much progress is seen. It only gets worse, and even is seen by CSVN leaders a real threat to its leadership.

To be honest with you, as long as CSVN vietnam can effectively control corruption to the minimum, I don't care much if we have democracy. Corruption really hinders our true growth potentials in competing with other regional countries. The problem is that I don't see how corruption is effectively controlled in Vietnam without having 2 parties. I, and many domestic citizens, simply just are running out of patience, given the snail-pace progress the government is making. On top of that, criticizing the government wrongdoings is strictly prohibited. How does that help fight corruption?

Corruption can be eliminated with transparancy and effective government reform in case of Singapore. Even 2 or 3 parties like Phillippine could NOT end its rampant red-tape, so I wouldn't expect two or three parties could majorly impact the corruption of Vietnam.

[CJK]

Major development happens quickly when a country is dominated by a single party/dictatorship that knows what theyre doing. It cuts down on a lot of time by avoiding disagreements and bureaucracies, like how it is in developed nations today. Democracy, human rights, and transparency start to grow in importance as the economy grows as citizens start to want different things.

[etalkishere]

Korea may not have been communist back then, but it was surely a lot more backward and hopeless than today's Vietnam.

Park was a hyper anti-communist dictator; he killed anyone that was communist, im sure many of them were innocent too. He was a general and overthrew the government in 1961 and took over. Fortunately, he did bring a lot of change and jump started the economy into what would become the korean economic miracle.

Anyways, good to see an ambitious Vietnam.
Hope the construction of the metro begins soon.
Gotta love the Seoul and Tokyo subway systems.

SK is so fortunate to have such a great leader. I didn't know he was a hyper anti-communist, I thought he was just a dictator.

What an amazing economic success story SK has, indeed. My hats off, and congratulations to SK people. I truely hope Vietnam will also have a similiar economic miracle. You're right, being an ambitious is a very good sign. Vietnamese people are very hungry to suceed nowadays, after years of isolation and fighting. Just wish us lots of luck, especially the fight against corruption It is really slowing our development progress.