🚀 go-pugleaf

I haven't didn't see the "Thirty-Seven Percent Rule" posting.  I'd like
the opportunity to criticize it.

I don't look beyond a century, because I think the people a century
from now will be so much more capable than we are that they will
regard our opinions of their day as mere historical curiosities.

I don't know whether the "we" who cannot afford to build more than one
million inhabitant compact city a year is California, the U.S. or the
world.  If it is California, what you say may be reasonable, but if it
is the U.S. or the world you have in mind, you must have dreamed up
something atrociously expensive.  For example, current U.S. housing
construction is about 1.5 million units a year, which corresponds to
about 4 million persons.  It has been higher in the past.  I assume
that other facilities for a city are constructed at about the
corresponding rate, except for commercial real estate, which was
recently constructed at a rate far higher than any plausible demand.

I infer from your remarks about supporting 100 million persons that
you are a doomsayer with regard to our and other people's present
ways of life.

--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.