Ah yes, that's definitely what the SW United States needs, another city in the desert. It's not like the region is struggling with water scarcity or anything like that.
Depending on how good it's managed. These giant project rise and fall with their management in my opinion. One can also see that not every enormous project was created outside it's original scope.
Nice visual concept, but it's insane. Just like the Line, this staggering amount of money could be used across so many other cities to upgrade districts/boroughs/blocks, public transit, utilities and services. The only benefit of building a brand new city is you don't have existing infrastructure and its problems. It's just silly.
But 'The Line' is obviously going to have infrastructure problems anyway. A walkable city where one end of the city is 170 km away from the other end? Hunderds of thousands of people all have to take the same train line to get anywhere at all? Nah, it will be fine. Edit: I hadn't even gotten that far into the video but obviously Telosa will be a transit mess as well. Imagine a school of 1000 people being dismissed at the same time and all of them have to get on one of the gondolas. You'd have to make a queue system just to make sure people won't kill each other to get on board first. What a joke...
@@mds3697 It screams of a project not properly thought out project. You can in theory build a city from scratch, and make said city work, but in order to do that you need to have considered everything. And by everything I mean every single insane possible outcome. For a project like this to actually work, it'd need loads of scientific research done in preparation, you'd need to include professionals in hundreds of fields as well as ground teams in said fields as well in order to get it to work. This just screams of another person with loads of money thinking: "Well I have the money, how hard can it be?" Also I don't think $400BN dollars is anywhere close to enough for a project of this scale, cities are mind numbingly expensive to properly plan, build and run.
Long ago a Utopian economist Robert Owen tried this. The people robbed him blind! I like the idea, it seems to make sense, but reality won't support it.
Would make more sense to revitalize a city in the more habitable rust belt. .. or revitalize or build a new one somewhere in between Chicago Minneapolis and St Louis.
That was my plan. I already got a blueprint for it from like 15 years ago. The trouble I'm having is getting land. It's not easy especially since I'm no billionaire. At this point I feel like my dreams are being mocked by billionaires running the show with their short sighted vision of what a true sustainable city is. My planed city is far better than Telosa and would some day be a wonder of the world.
For real. It's not like the eastern half of the country doesn't have a lot of dead or dying ghost towns these billionaires can use for their city building experiments. As an added bonus, people actually live in those areas. I'm sure Gary, Indiana or Detroit, Michigan would appreciate the investment.
I live in Phoenix, and I’ll tell you now that this won’t work. They underestimate the monsoon and the lack of water. Dust storms all summer, and little rainfall in the winter will be a death sentence. We need to get rid of all these grass lawns and golf courses first before thinking about another major city in the desert
gross ugly take. "I need to restrict you, to preserve myself" just don't be upset when this mentality gets thrown back at you. Mass deportations are all the more possible with automated technology. but you people still invite millions of illegal aliens to use the same infrastructure than blame your fellow citizen when the system becomes overstressed by illegal weed wells across the cali desert. You same people want wage increases but are willing to massively import work that undercuts the prospect of collective wage increases when you have such a vast labor market willing to undercut and be paid under table. Just another lapse of understanding, you wouldn't believe this billionaire would have more access to info than you or chose to understand more about the intricacies of water rights, or just how much water us Arizona citizens actually use. It's just funny your choice is to restrict others given the option you tyrannical fascist. You have no information on this subject expect "muh climate change" "muh drought" "muh AUTHORITATIVE NEWS SOURCE TOLD ME" and it's telling and riddled by your scarcity mindset.
It makes me upset to see lawns in regions where grass doesn't exist. There are so many excellent gardens that don't use grass because it's not native, but to go against nature to force a particular image is short sighted and costly. I've seen enough landscape design in Australia that only uses native plants to know that grass isn't necessary in the desert.
Lawns and golf courses are easy targets for examples of bad water use, but optimizing agricultural water use would produce far, far greater progress. That aspect is addressed (at a high level) in this video with greenhouses. Something like 90% of available water is used by agriculture. We need that industry to feed ourselves obviously, but more pressure should be applied to ag rather than on individuals xeriscaping their lawn (which people should still do anyways)
@@francoislechanceux5818 Las Vegas is an exception because of the rediculous amounts of money they get from the casinos. Is this supposed to be a second Las Vegas?
@@DarkNexarius Lol. It always seems impossible until it's done. Who said that, please ? Exception, exception...this is an exceptional project. And science has gotten mankind really far.
Cities should be located along major waterways, or at least in strategic locations with good access to natural resources. Instead of building a new gridded city in the desert, why not upzone Chicago or Detroit and revitalize those areas? Would be a lot more practical, and the location is so much better.
Hahaha Brilliant... you think the tards building this project would have at least researched all aspects of the word first. The end seems to be a better word for how this project will end up.
he didnt look in a dictionary. but be sure that some intern told him that telosa means higher purpose and he went with that. all that money but zero intelligence
Another international environmental project is Forest City in Malaysia. But despite it being marketed as an energy efficient green city that incorporates the local environment, it's really far from it. The development has actually led to irreversible environmental damage to the Johor wetlands due to reclamation...reclamation that happened WITHOUT the environmental assessment required. Plus after the reclamation happened, a nearby fishing village said there were reduced catches. The project wasn't targeted towards the local Malaysians but rather middle-class Chinese citizens looking to park their wealth abroad. And if that's not the tip of the iceberg, it is located in an Environmentally Sensitive Area Rank 1 Area (meaning no development should occur unless it's low-impact nature tourism, education, or research)...the irony that just writes itself. The project is now a ghost town.
its like the Mexican proposed forest city. the area is currently intact forest, doesn't matter how many plants there are or how efficient/sustainable the city is. clearing cutting or disturbing the rainforest is plain stupid and defeats the whole idea...
"Despite being marketed as "an energy-efficient, ecologically sensitive, land-conserving, low-polluting offshore city", the development has had significant negative environmental impact, with irreversible damage due to reclamation of ecologically sensitive coastal wetlands." Wiki AKA techno babble
Historically, cities have been established along trade routes and industrial centers, preferably next to a large body of water -- seashore, navigable river, etc. There are very few opportunities left for a large landlocked settlement in the middle of a wasteland to thrive and develop. One is Las Vegas, due to pure legalism, related to gambling, so the only other option is to turn this splashy utopia into yet another open air real-estate vault for billionaires and institutional investors to park/launder their wealth in a secure location. Then the only worry will be where to house the maintenance/service personnel.
The location part is quite accurate. Mobility is another factor that gets supercharged by proximity to waterways whether it be seaports or navigable waterways. Vast majority of global cities are an example.
I love you mentioned the workers. I live in a designed community with lots of gardeners. There would still be those, but they would also be your neighbors. Your kids would play with their kids. Because they could afford or even be given living quarters as a perk of the job. This is the key difference. Your vocation would say much less about the kind of schools you access or housing you find. ;) great question.
@@DrBussanich isn't what you're describing just a healthy middle class that pays service people a living wage? In America we already had that until we gave up Christian nationalism for godless globalism
For a city in the middle of the desert to be WALKABLE they will need to create shaded paths and natural cooling areas. For shaded pathways it might be a good idea to engineer areas with retractable shade so they can be retracted for the fair weather winter months and be be fully out for the summer months. Powerless airconditioners can be built easily, areas that are surrounded in stone and do not see daylight ever and are several feet underground to make use of the cooler temperature below the surface level. These could possibly serve a dual purpose as summer walkways and winter water canals for water collection. Water resevoirs could be built with a greenhouse around them that will collect the cleaner evaporated water leaving behind sediment. It's doable but they don't see to include successful ideas to combat heat and water.
@@callumcurtis15 An average person uses 150 litres of water a day, so for 50,000 people that's 7.5 million litres a day, not counting any industry or business use. That sounds like a lot of energy, plus the storage and disposal of waste.
What's so crazy is they throw around "fossil fuel" all the time but never mention that 99% of all PLASTICS and MEDICATIONS are made with... PETROLEUM! What a crock of hypocrisy.
I live in Utah. We send ass loads of water from the colorado river (Lake Powell) to Nevada and California. We are headed for an extreme water shortage crisis. And they wanna build another city in the middle of a fucking desert? 🤣🤣🤣😂😂
@@bobbyboywonder12 They got so close yet so far. Also why arent we just focusing our billions of dollars on struggling cities that need the funding. Smh
These projects just seem like unbridled megalomania. Imagine the good these billionaires could do if they were to infuse all this capital into existing cities. There's so many communities that could be completely transformed with a tiny fraction of this money.
There’s a reason they go out in the desert to do these projects. Trying to work with entrenched city and state governments is a recipe for wasted time and money.
@@zachmelton1114 There are ways to enrich communities without working directly with the government. And you’re going to have plenty of government headaches trying to build a giant city in the middle of the desert. You don’t think the government is going to have concerns about trusting a project like this with the amount of water it would need to get started in an area where water is already scarce?
"There is no shortage of water in the desert but exactly the right amount, a perfect ratio of water to rock, water to sand, insuring that wide free open, generous spacing among plants and animals, homes and towns and cities, which makes the arid West so different from any other part of the nation. There is no lack of water here unless you try to establish a city where no city should be.” -Edward Abbey
Telosa already exists, it’s called California City. Located northern Antelope Valley in Kern County, California. It is 100 miles (160 km) north of the city of Los Angeles, and the population was 14,973 as of 2020. Covering 203.63 square miles (527.4 km2), California City has the third-largest land area of any city in the state of California. PS - probably easier to reinvent California City rather then take a virgin desert and tear it up
Just looking at in from google maps California City doesn't look like that at all. Its a typical car dependent suburbia infected American city. Theres not even One Non-Single Family Home there.
Developers typically give little or no attention to food and agriculture, and the natural resource they require, such as good soil and water. They say, "Oh, we will be able to import that import that from places that have those resources. Not a problem". It is not a problem until those with more money come in and buy the farms and products. So planning for self-sufficiency is needed on all levels.
I mean the developers literally added in hydroponic farms to their development plans, which would save 90% of the water used in typical irrigation practices. If these replaced current farm land, they would save water. Which is how even unsustainable suburban developments replacing former farm land helped Arizona use less water now than it did when its population was 1/6 the size.
America is a self sufficient nation for its food. And most of its fertilizers, the fertilizer we don't make in house we get from Canada, who has plenty for us as we're always first on the list. Also, the stack farming in urban setting looks somewhat promising. Assuming the foods really are just as nutrient dense as traditionally grown
I was also thinking about the fact that it doesn’t seem like this city would have any industry? Just technology and entertainment sectors? I’m skeptical of that.
Sustainability is super important to us let's build our city in an extremely uninhabitable Landscape where just sustaining the existence of a single human costs massiv amounts of energy and non renewable resources...
With $400B you can build a city in the desert and hope someone moves there or completely pay off the debt of an entire country with 182 options to choose from including Indonesia, Saudia Arabia, Ireland, New Zealand, Egypt, etc.
@@castlesinfo6049 I lived in Arizona for 13 years. Trees and lack of asphalt helps, but when the temperature is 120 degrees in the desert, it's 140+ over asphalt. 120 is plenty hot.
If there is good public transportation. I know. I don't drive n live in LA. One time I was sitting bench waiting for buses in 105 degrees. People passed by worrying about me. I didn't care. I got lost n took me 2+ hours to find this bus stop. I know 105 is cooler than 120. Still. If bus/trains come frequently, this is less issue. To maintain 15 minute walking distance, there will be shades in many places. It's much easier to walk under shades. In many major cities in Asia, many buildings has extra hall way to walk in front of entrance. This utopia concept city has a lot things to consider. Many people have pointed out water is major issue. Oh, 2 or 3 hours later, I arrived home. I drank lots of water. Yes, water is needed more in desert n transit friend city.
I think it would be a lot easier to start small sustainable communities or towns with 1-3,000 person populations. Building these 5 million population cities built on sustainability are unrealistic, but with 400 billion dollars you could easily have 100’s of successful towns built or revamped.
@@ayoutubechannelname not the way he’s saying it. He’s saying “worthless”, as in good for no purpose, not “worth less” as in cheaper. He clearly has no respect for the land he’s wanting to develop, he’s viewing it only as a commodity he can purchase and be monetarily enriched from the improvements he makes. That’s as far from sustainability as you can get.
@@kraphtymac He wants to make the land worth more than “worthless”, wherein the term “worthless” does not connote “worthless” but simply “worth less”. Try to be less hyperbolic.
A follow-up video on one or more failed planned cities would be very interesting. I know there are a couple in California and Colorado, both placed in the middle of the desert.
Yes, California City, Lake Los Angeles and Bombay Beach are all failed "planned communities" in the Mojave Desert in California. This idea is not very well thought out!
I live in Yuma AZ and the soil in the Sonoran Desert is quite good BUT we're using water that comes from far away. A big advantage with desert farming for one is the year-round yields. The other is pest-free soil. That's great but the entire southwest is in an unsustainable situation. There are consequences to building these huge man-made lakes like Mead and Powell. Further development in the lower basin- Arizona, California and Nevada is a pipe dream. Fresh water should never be seen as infinite but the place to build these cities is the rust belt. Not the desert southwest.
I grew up in L.A. and everyone there is ignorant about how far away their water comes from, or what will happen when it runs out. I wonder how long before all the big cities of the American Southwest end up abandoned like Chaco Canyon & other Anasazi sites..
Lack of water is purely a political problem. Desalination plants, while expensive, could provide nearly unlimited fresh water for cali and the southwest and their technology for these is improving all the time. Environmentalists impede their construction though.
Rich people trying to play the SIMS but in real life, while knowing nothing about how to build cities... and when all of this money could be use to make already existing cities a better place to live..
@@isaks7042 what good example? the only good thing I see about this is the zooning (the 15min max walk to your job/grocery store/school) but that can be achived in any city pretty easily (just fix the stupid zoning laws)
@@faustinpippin9208 No that cant be achieved in any city easily... Especially in the US. The suburbs has already grown too big and you cant just remove all suburbs in an instant.
@@isaks7042 no need to remove the entire suburbs.... just place some convenience store,school in the suburb district so you are not forced to ride a 20wide lane higway for 15min just to get bread....same goes for other things, ofc somethig loud and polluting should stay outside
Bearing in mind that coal is the only “Fossil Fuel” and the only vehicles on US streets that are at least partially fossil fuel powered these days are electric vehicles (20% of US electricity is still derived from coal) does that mean that EV’s will be banned in Telosa? Or just electrical power from the grid?
"Billionaire Marc Lore", "Billionaire Marc Lore", "Billionaire Marc Lore". Has that guy officially changed his name to include "Billionaire" or something? We get it. He's rich.
@@heidirabenau511 By the time he builds the city, he'll already be a trillionaire. Because the FED keeps printing more money and making it worthless. We'll all be Zimbabwean trillionaires soon.
When I heard equitism I thought communism Get out of the USA while you still can. Either that or die fighting for your freedom. All he needs is a few more billionaires to help fund this project and don't think they won't agree to it. It's like them keeping the sheep from using all the resources. I've watch another video on this and they plan on giving each person the Same amount of everything. No decision making for yourself Fight for your freedom now or leave this country
0:39 "Your doodie is our duty"...that ad campaign is genius. Well played to them! Another planned Southwest desert city comes to mind when I see this project is Lake Havasu City in Arizona. Developer Robert P. McCulloch started by buying 3.3K acres in 1958 before buying over 13,000 more acres four years later and established Lake Havasu City in 1963 (and incorporated in 1978). The problem was, he couldn't get buyers interested because of its location far from population centers and the fact that it's in an arid climate. Then an idea came to mind...the City of London was putting the 1831 version of London Bridge up for sale. Robert's real estate agent convinced him to make the wild purchase of buying the bridge as a way to attract buyers as the city's main attraction. The bridge was transported through the Panama Canal in pieces, unloaded in Long Beach, and then moved to Lake Havasu City where it was re-assembled in 1967 and completed in 1971. The plan worked, as it's the second-largest tourist attraction in the state after the Grand Canyon, and over 57K people now live there.
In my opinion,you would have to create a magnificent place of tourism 1st to generate cash to fund such a big city. Create some type of monumental building or stadium that will attract people in awe. This place has to have the most beautiful views, or it' just not going to happen.
Historical cities were settled because of benefits of the land. Vienna is along one of the great European rivers. Florence is at the center of one of the best agricultural regions in the world. Singapore is in the middle of every trade route in the Asia Pacific. The cities grew naturally as their value increased over time. You cannot build a city in the desert with no natural resources and no strategic position.
You do realize the deserts of Arizona and California are among the largest agriculture production cores in the entire world? More water is used on Alfalfa in these states than all residential use combined.
@@wickedcabinboy hmm I wonder why? Could it be agriculture using over 70% of the water every year to feed foreign countries during 20 years of drought. Nah, must be the people using less than 20%.
Building a significant new city in the middle of a desert may seem exciting, but it has many dangers. These dangers become even more pronounced when the temperature climbs above summer temperatures. The intense heat radiating off the sand can cause severe sunburns and dehydration in those who venture outdoors without proper protective clothing. The combination of extreme heat and dry air is also known to cause severe respiratory illnesses in vulnerable populations such as seniors and children. What’s more, the extreme temperatures can make living conditions unbearable for many new city residents. It will become nearly impossible to remain cool inside buildings since air conditioning units are often inadequate when faced with such extreme weather conditions. As a result, many people here would likely have to resort to expensive alternatives to survive the summer months.
@@bearcubdaycare All the cities you listed are GROSSLY POLLUTED, especially air pollution! Phoenix daily on the news has warnings on air pollution which at times can be life threatening! When coming over the range to Las Vegas, the air pollution is so THICK one could cut it with a KNIFE! Palm Springs is just about the same air pollution as Las Vegas, though sometimes far worse!
For me the biggest downside is the lack of water, I would have a hard time living in a city without a river or lake being nearby. It also makes me a bit sceptical about all the greenery ambitions but if they manage to sort out the water issue on a sustainable way I really hope something like this will be realised.
How can they manage water when the whole area is drying up on record scale? Lake Mead won't exist soon.. and neither will the Colorado River. It's a doomed project.
If the water problems are mitigated, and who knows? even better, solved to an extent, do you think a smart city with a new kind of economic policy would be beneficial to the common public? What would you do?, would you be interested in buying a plot of land either to move in or as an investment, or do you think, it wouldnt be feasible? I too am interested to buy assets or properties in these kinds of new city projects, but i am lacking in long term knowledge in how feasible that investment for my family's future can be? Any insight from you would be nice to hear..
Well if they truly want a city of the future then i sure hope they work a ton on water recycling so you pretty much only need to get in drinking water since for the rest filtered water should be just fine.
My 5 cents: Marc Lore needs to tap into the wisdom of human experience--why some cities have been more successful and why some others are failures. One way to approach this issue is to have a large (very large) pool of people brainstorming the problem trough a publicly accessible forum. The combined thoughts of thousands of interested people are more valuable than millions of dollars in consulting fees.
Success? Eliminate big-box stores, create multiple forms of transportation, make it walkable - NOT CAR DEPENDENT, and allow for multiple zoning. They can start there. Start with towns that have suffered because jobs were sent overseas. But they want to start with a clean slate having destroyed congress with their monied lobbyists. Well…THEY don’t deserve it!
Republican cities The elected public servants don't think they are leaders to "lead" the people and understand they are meant to *represent* the people and let the people come up with solutions to problems them selves instead of taxing the citizens in to poverty to make.... what are they up to now 4 attempts and $6 billion?...... a train/subway from south califorina to north california.
@@sharongillesp You mean corporate stores (corporate stores can be "small") The problem with travel in the US isn't "car dependents" it is bad design..... driving though Califorina for example is a fking nighmare because politicians in Cali are fking morons - and most of it could be solved in probably less than 6 months. Yep, local goods should have a 0% tax on them, cross state goods should have 5% tax, goods from allies should have a 10% tax and goods from clearly hostile countries like China should have a 20% tax. Local employers 0% tax, employers in multiple states should have an extra 1% tax per state they are in (so if they are in 3 states 3% tax) US citizens should have a 15% income tax (5% local, 5% state, 5% federal - that each person can put in to what ever they want... if they want to "defund" their police let them) Foreign workers working in the US should have a 20% income tax (that goes *directly* to state tax returns and is NOT used by the government in any way) Yes, foreign goods would be expensive.... but there is no reason to have stuff we could do here on a local level shipped over seas to us - killing jobs here, funding child sweat shops and so on..... if it is being shipped over the seas to us, it better be some high quality shit or something we can't do here.
@@oggyreidmore How they approach problems traffic as an easy example: Dems just build more lanes Republicans build new roads one of the cities I lived in before it flipped blue built a road that went strait from the north of the city to the south of the city, no off ramps or anything - and it cut like 2/3 the traffic in the city down. They also made it so when you are in the left turn lane you are looking down the passenger side of the car that is in the turn lane across from you so you can see on coming traffic. All the dem cites I have been in you are looking down the driver side of the car across from you and you can't see on coming traffic with out driving in to the middle of the intersection. more complex issues are "affordable housing" *CAUSING* more homelessness and such.
Neither do people to be honest. The entire state of Arizona and its 7 million people used roughly 420k acre-feet of water for indoor use. Their indoor and outdoor use accounts for roughly 1.4 million acre-feet of water with suburban development standards of the past 50 years. That amount would equal roughly 20% of the water they use in a given year. You could add in all of Nevada;s water use and not reach the amount of water the Colorado River is delivering even after drought. That doesn’t even count the in state rivers in Arizona, or the groundwater reservoirs.
I know these planned cities have to start with imagination and CGI but usually they don't get much beyond that stage. When I see this city actually built, I will believe it.
It's just not people from "The Show me State" that question these grand designs. Usually the only cities of such grand design that ever actually get built are capital cities and even those mega projects are not without their problems. Having said that, I still hope this ultra modern metropolis gets built, it looks pretty cool.
Usually cost is the big issue, and internal politics in the area, the politicians usually want a huge cut of any major projects and usually want kickbacks to their unions and other friends, the simple answer to that is just to build where they aren't at.
@@temper44 Yes, I mean if you build a city with a European population density of 5 million people, then you probably need a railroad. And yes, American cities actually have railroads, like San Francisco, New York or Chicago.
It's an interesting idea. But in Nevada, Utah, and Arizona, water is ALREADY an over allocated resource. The Feds already had to intervene because the states were not able to reach agreement on how to equitably share the diminished amount that can sustainably be extracted. Getting one of more states to set aside a part of their already reduced allocation will be a MAJOR challenge.
Except they only threatened to intervene, and actually didn't, and we're still short that 2 to 4mil acre-feet. NO ONE is getting any additional water, LOL, this is going to remain a cartoon drawing.
This is doomed to fail. Not only because of the track record of projects like this. Because of Marc Lore clueless statement "Worthless Land". Until Marc understands, there is no such thing as "Worthless Land" he will fail! Marc, I urge you to totally rethink what south-west is all about.
your plea will fall on deaf ears, he is enrapt in his own ego, fueled by his echo chamber and surrounded by yes-men. Pipe dreams of a wealthy out of touch man.
I’m sure he only meant it in the sense that he can buy for pennies, generate a whole scamload of hype, and sell for mucho dollars while galloping away with all due haste…
What people need most is affordable housing. Instead of starting from scratch, invest in a place that needs more housing and make it affordable. A city grows and thrives when people aren't spending all their paycheck on rent.
Many cities/governments have proposed cheap affordable housing projects. But those projects get rejected or fail because peoples standard of the "affordable house" is to high. Avg house by square ft in America is 2,174ft (Beaten only by Australia 2,303ft) compared to Hong Kong 484ft, India 503ft & China 648ft. This doesn't even factor in that the avg persons per home in America is (3.3), compared to India at 4.44 topped by Middle East & North African countries with avg of about 6.9. Western people will continue to see a divide in wages and housing
Considering the logistics of it, I think this would do way more harm to the environment than good. The resources are better spent building nuclear reactors and improving public transit.
Why nuclear? Uranium is also not that sustainable and most us uranium comes from russia with just 40 years worth or currently economically available deposits.
Abandoned ghost town / construction site in the making. The region is already suffering from severe water shortage. Putting an entirely new settlement there is a brain fart of Muskian dimensions.
The fight for water rights are ALREADY in full effect in AZ. Currently, Residents in the unincorporated community of Rio Verde Foothills, just outside of Scottsdale, are suing Scottsdale to restore water delivery services, cut off due to extreme drought conditions in the Colorado River. It is well documented that ground water throughout the state is drying up, with towns like Strawberry, an hour north of Phoenix, in the pine forest, already refusing to grant new home hookups to the towns water supply. Here in AZ, water rights to the Colorado river were a central issue in the last election. Cool idea, but the notion that we are at the whims of few random billionaires is insane. We don't need projects based on ego. Imagine that money being pumped into already neglected infrastructure, water technology and education. That money would be transformational to an already existing city.
Cities don't have problems for lack of money, they have problems because of poor priorities. If you give big cities more money, you just get more wasted money
Fresh water is the real innovation that is lacking and will be the deal-breaker. So build it in Florida, design for high winds and to capture rain, both easier to achieve. Even so, Equitism sounds like a community-wide pyramid scheme. The B1M seems to be depending more and more on so-called developers' publicity packages. I subscribe to their channels for information, not PR.
You can't build a city without an industry. Without a way to earn a living, nobody is going to move there. It doesn't matter what types of architectural grand vision the city has. Conversely, if there are ways to making really good livings, it doesn't matter how crappy the city is, people will move there.
Sometimes I think we American's have this problem. We're a culture that is addicted to the idea of 'frontiers'. That there's always someplace else to go if things get bad where we are. And historically we've built this into a myth of rugged self reliance and opportunity that is not at all what the frontier was for a lot of people. For a lot of people it was dirty, difficult, dangerous, and they would not have gone if there was any other option to stay put where they already were. The vast majority of frontiersman were not running towards opportunity they were running FROM poverty, war, tyranny, resource depletion. I don't think we've ever stopped running. And I think weird super projects like this are some kind of manifestation of that. Until we stop running and accept that we have to stand our ground where we are. Fix what we've neglected, I don't see anything getting a whole lot better.
An executive from Walmart, of all places too. They've already shown us by underpaying their employees to the point of encouraging them to get on food assistance. Those cards holding the food stamps are charged a fee each time they're used at Walmart, giving them a little something from jp Morgan on top of not having to pay them. Guess who pays for the food stamps. We all do, including the ones who need them. Not Walmart though. Now an executive with that same mentality is going to help us out with a city? 👌
I like the idea of building an entirely new city that avoids the problems of the past, and experiments with a non-typical ownership structures etc. However it seems like the water problem is a pretty big one for this city, and also the presence of a monorail in the visualisation immediately rings alarm bells lol
The location is suspicious. I always get dystopian creepy vibes and think they're 15 minute cities surrounded by unforgiving landscape to prevent you from escaping.
Man... Not everything is evil masterplan it's simply megalomania of thinking of buying a plot of desert and thinking of building city better than anyone before...
The city will be built by ... who? Where will those people be housed? This either needs to be located next to a city or pay outrageous prices to attract people in the trades who are already in short supply and so able to make solid money elsewhere. The idea is interesting, and I'm curious how they propose making it actually happen. Another aspect I'm curious about is land ownership. Will the land around the immediate city be owned by Marc and his investors so that they can cash in as the city expands? If so, he's banking on people being willing to move to a city where they know that billionaires and banks have a choke collar on them. While I find the city's idea compelling and attractive, I wouldn't go without substantial clarity on the long term plan for ensuring the city isn't constrained by billionaires and banks (in unreasonable ways ... I would expect these folks to make a profit on their investment, but not such a large one that it endangers the sustainability of the city).
its 15 min districts and equity, what do you think the city is for? power hungry elites to control every aspect of people, thats why they have public transportation and a ban of private cars
Building a city in the desert is never a good idea unless they somehow manage to terra form it, transform the land first into a huge forest with artificial lakes or rivers and mountains and the city would either be underground or enclosed in a dome in a deep trench or between cliffs. The city should be based on permaculture or solarpunk theme with a lot of nature integration that will provide shade.
Yes I'm curious if billions were instead used for terraforming, what could be accomplished. Maybe then water could be retained from the monsoon season.
About 40 years ago a confidence trickster sold London Bridge to a visiting American billionaire. At first people thought the workmen were just repairing the bridge, but by the time the city council became aware of what was happening, the bridge had gone and a few months later it was being rebuilt in the Arizona desert! Is it in the same place as this new city? It wouldn't make much sense to have a bridge in the middle of nowhere with no city and roads using it. I think there must be a canal pasing underneath it now instead of the River Thames.
Those pods are all you need to see to know that they designed the city around an architect never talked to an urban planner. American cities already have massive problems with how inefficient cars are. Trying to empty a stadium, skyscraper, university or airport using cars that carry 1-5 people at a time is inefficient, requires a lot of space for parking, requires massive roads and leads to non-stop congestion. That problem doesn't go away just because you're using "pods" that carry 1-6 people at a time. Grade separation and automation don't solve the problem that you're moving a lot of people in tiny packets. In cities of that scale, you need a train. Nothing else moves that many people efficiently. What is it with billionaires and their desire to build the most inefficient transport systems they can possibly think of? Moving 500,000 people around a city 1-6 people at a time is going to be a nightmare, much less a city of 5 million. Just build a damn train.
So you'd basically be applying to move to a community ran by a company or is it a governmental run city built by a company? Important part to know for a potential citizen I'd say.
Labeling these projects as green and sustainable is just a fucking bad joke. Building these from scratch is an environmental catastrophe. Already existing city's and structures need to be reused and made sustainable.
EXACTLY. Sustainability has to start by recycling what we have. It CAN be done, and it can be scalable and economical...but it's just not as sexy to sell.
Obviously water is the major obstacle to building in the southwest. On the other hand, if you want a solar powered city, you pretty much have to build in the southwest. If they considered using nuclear they could remain carbon neutral and put the city somewhere closer to water. There are plenty of locations on the great lakes where you could build a city closer to where people already live with ocean access via the St. Lawrence River. Revitalization of Gary or Detroit makes more sense than a de novo city in northern AZ.
This development would save more water being built on current agriculture land in Arizona than it would being developed in any cold weather state. Especially considering the cold weather states depend on California and Arizona for crops in the winter months. Not to mention the almonds, cattle feed, or cotton. To me the real sustainability problem is that the cold weather states treat the desert as their agriculture hub.
Good policy changes in literally any city or satellite suburban town can achieve many of these goals for far less money. Solid public transport, extra green zones, walkable urban areas, no car zones, water recycling with sustainable farming & renewable energy resources supplying the urban area. You're just missing all futuristic buildings, but you're removing the headache of moving millions of people hundreds of miles away from anywhere to live in a hot desert with no water. Amsterdam, Barcelona, Paris, Athens & many more are in different stages of already implementing this for far less than half a trillion dollars.
Hundreds of millions to be spent on a man's ego, while millions of far cheaper, more sensible projects are thrown to the ground because it doesn't cater to someone's self-image or unwarranted self-importance. Thankfully and hopefully, such projects will never get to see the light of day.
Interesting concept, but it needs to be developed somewhere that gets a lot of rain. There are lots of crazy communities in Florida, perhaps he should consider that region.
imagine all that $400 billion being used to improve public transport and building more homes for the working class, but no, capitalists would rather waste it on nothing
None of these city building billionaires care about actually making the world a better place. They are only chasing the dream of being remembered as "genius visionaries"
"Everyone has a stake in the city they can sell for money!" And what happens when they do that? Unless they're regularly given a new stake, this is temporary state of affairs, not a long term solution.
Equitism seems like a version of Georgism which is slightly modified for the context of new developments. My guess is everyone pays land rent for the property they inhabit. To the extent that you have a share in the city, the land rent is either routed back to you or excused. So, if a person was to sell their stake, they'd have to live in a rented place. Not a big deal, really.
Wtf is that gondola transit system? Such cost effective. Much sustainable. Economy of scale? Yes Fun to see the Uber rich going full mask of with their feudalism
As soon as I heard fossil fuel vehicles are banned, I knew it was going to fail miserably. All that cobalt needed to mine just for it to last only 5-10 years. Amazing.
Beautiful concept! If this does come to fruition, it will be for the wealthy class. The poor will only have access because someone has to run the city infrastructure.
Interesting idea, although i just get angry when all these futuristic projects (specifically the renders) just try to reinvent public transport. Just use trams, busses, etc, these pod designs are inefficient and literally "slow moving" the alternative already shows it works a million times better than anything else. If you want another oppinion watch "Adam Something"s video on excatly this.
Sort of reminds me of Elysium. The super wealthy get to live in on the Halo ring, and everyone else gets to live on the polluted earth that was used to make and support Elysium.
It's like the 12-year-old me suddenly had billions of dollars in Cities: Skylines building the perfect city of my dreams then end up a total disaster lol
So many negative comments…..I think it’s an amazing concept. I’d love to know more and plan to keep up with the progress. As a retired contractor, new building ideas are interesting to me.
If a billionaire is going to throw $400 billion at a "city of the future" project, why not do it in an existing blighted area? Pick a blighted post-industrial area of Detroit, Baltimore, Indianapolis or Los Angeles and invest the money there. Build the dense, affordable, sustainable, and walkable city with effective mass transit and all of the other stuff. Spoiler Alert: they already have water, people, and businesses ready to move in. Why take up more and more land when we have underutilized land in major cities already?
That’s the freaking truth… those old cities are in PRIME locations and $400 billion spent wisely (with minimal govt corruption) would be amazing. So much potential for those old industry cities.
It’s very difficult and expensive to kick out all of the existing businesses and residents to be able to construct the “ideal” neighborhood. You can’t build what these people are really going for without doing this.
@@AlexanderBlack1 True, but you dont need to kick everyone out... though with $400 billion cash you could probably buy some of them out of their homes and get some imminent domain rights to redevelop some of these neighborhoods. In my simple mind, $400 billion would be much better spent revitalizing and reindustrializing the rust belt than for building some pie in the sky utopia for rich people in the middle of a freaking hot desert. Been to Dubai in the summer and it is miserably hot and not fun at all to walk somewhere.
@@Username-hw6ee Well your mind is simply. Incorrect. It's obviously better to build a new city since the biggest challenge for any project is other people. So if you try to take over a city to improve infrastructure you are going to have countless people standing against you which will delay development by decades, make some development unachievable and make it cost far more. While if you build a new city all you have to worry about the development cost... and solutions to future problem. Such as water and energy.
@@MrNote-lz7lh Is this sarcasm? haha. You enjoy your abandoned city in the desert... I'll be rooting for revitalizing existing cities in locations that actually support life. I'll give you a lovely spot called Bir Tawil that is free for the taking if the biggest challenge of a city is all those nasty people...
@A B reliable public transit, lots of green space, 15-minute neighbourhoods, near-absence of cars and no car-dependent sprawl. Lots of really good ideas
@@skurinski No, they're not. They're not just good, they're the _only_ ideas, because all alternatives are no ideas but simply "everything stays the way it is!!!" Only thing one can arguably allege here is that those are not new ideas, but well-known for quite some time now. There's a whole country built upon them and it's one of the most enjoyable to live in in the entire world.
This is really neat! I'd like to help create a video game that allows players make real life plans for sustainable communities utilizing permaculture principles. I love how the plan for this community doesn't involve motor vehicle traffic. If I were to build a community, our aim would be to ensure safe housing, clean water, healthy food, quality education, and full health care for everyone, while planning future development to be in harmony with the Earth and with each other.
@@Jay-ns5ub each player would have their own solutions...i think that if money didn't get in the way of everyone's right to safe housing, clean water, healthy food, quality education, and full health care, we'd see greater leaps in technology.
@@RoySATX I've never played Fallout but it looks interesting. The game I'm envisioning will be connected with apps to ensure safe housing, clean water, healthy food, quality education, and full health care, as well as an educational and empowering online system of government for children and adults.
The impulse to start with a clean sheet is pretty strong. Anyone who thinks about how to build a better machine, or house, or car etc. gets off to this kind of exercise. Currently, the way a city forms is organic and slow and much like an evolving creature, ends up looking a bit strange. Much like the economy, I'm not sure anyone really understands how a city works.
@@francoislechanceux5818 Dubai is hell, it's like all the bad city planning of the US concentrated into one city. Totally wasteful, pure decadence, trying to appear like they've achieved something when all they did was selling oil
@@tomlxyz That's your backward provincial opinion. Dubai exists. Dubai is flamboyant and modern. And millions of people from around the world visit it every year and millions more from around the world too want to live there but are denied, rejected and/or deported.
Man, I'm really starting to think that securing the future of our society as a whole seems like a bit of a pipe dream; when our current ways of life aren't sustainable over the long term, but these sustainable solutions that some people propose are full of serious holes that they conveniently overlook when they're trying to sell their concepts... There is a possibility that we won't be able to spare ourselves from the mass extinction event we're currently going trough.
@@ericpreston8877 so you know any economic model that has proven to be better than capitalism? Not in concept or theory but in reality? Because every time someone "tries" socialism or communism it ends up devolving into a totalitarian dictatorship really quickly.
Instead of building this in the middle of a desert, he should build it in Mississippi or Alabama maybe. Land there is definitely cheap but still very hospitable, and the state could really use it as they are pretty backward states with struggling economies.
I just said basically the same thing! The ideal location would be northwest Mississippi: access to navigable waterways, fertile land, endless water supply. Bingo.
The water level at Lake Mead has dropped but not to worry. Just make water so expensive that people in Phoenix just all move away. Billionaires and their dangerous ideas.
Why the heck aren’t they building these future cities in the Midwest? Water, plenty of impoverished counties that would welcome them with open arms, and closer to major transportation hubs.
Better yet when it gets worse rainfall and hurricanes from the coat comes in, and more record breaking heatwaves people will be moving to the Midwest and/or rust belt areas. Better investment to revitalize those areas
True enough. All the money for these projects is with the coasters who regard 'flyover states' with unconcealed contempt. I suspect the billionaires and crypto-bros would rather parch in the desert than set up in states with strong histories of union activism. :)
LOL. if he really wanted to do this he could work with an existing municipality to carve out some sort of special exemption from all the typical regulations. I suspect no one would just cede control to a billionaire for vague promises.
The main problem nowadays with just about any planned city is that they are ludicrously unaffordable. Construction costs are so high, and investors are so determined to turn a quick profit, that there's no appetite for any semblance of affordability. There aren't 5 million millionaires who are going to flock to this new city to start a new life. This city will have an affordability problem far greater than anything seen in San Francisco or New York.
@@thijmstickman8349 You would be surprised. In most communist countries such as China their are a lot of billionaires funding that because they get special treatment.
@@Bland-79 Communism (from Latin communis, 'common, universal')[1][2] is a far-left[3][4][5] sociopolitical, philosophical, and economic ideology and current within the socialist movement[1] whose goal is the establishment of a communist society, a socioeconomic order centered around common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange which allocates products to everyone in the society.[6][7][8] Communist society also involves the absence of private property,[1] social classes, money,[9] and the state. China isn't a communist society, and hasn't tried to be one for the last 30 years. Communists whole thing is getting rid of capitalism, money and private ownership. A billionaire is someone who owns a lot of private companies...
Citizens of freedom : "meh European 15 minutes city and walkable city is extremely government control and communium and CCP" Also Citizens of freedom : Build from scratch in desert, what can go wrong right
Ah yes, that's definitely what the SW United States needs, another city in the desert. It's not like the region is struggling with water scarcity or anything like that.
Is Elmo Musk involved in this ridiculous project ?
He apparently has another 100 billion burning a hole in his pocket.
WRZ 2023-01-15
The Colorado is and had been drying up....
@@ccdogpark I did see a cyber truck in the video 🙄
😂😂 Correct
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
It’s gonna end up another abandoned project due to unexpected costs and delays
It screams vanity project. I don't think there is any actual intent to put this plan into action. It makes for some good PR for Marc though.
Very "unexpected" 😂
not too mention structural lack of water.
with a huge carbon footprint to go with it. what a freaking circus. again.
Depending on how good it's managed. These giant project rise and fall with their management in my opinion. One can also see that not every enormous project was created outside it's original scope.
Nice visual concept, but it's insane.
Just like the Line, this staggering amount of money could be used across so many other cities to upgrade districts/boroughs/blocks, public transit, utilities and services. The only benefit of building a brand new city is you don't have existing infrastructure and its problems.
It's just silly.
But 'The Line' is obviously going to have infrastructure problems anyway. A walkable city where one end of the city is 170 km away from the other end? Hunderds of thousands of people all have to take the same train line to get anywhere at all? Nah, it will be fine.
Edit: I hadn't even gotten that far into the video but obviously Telosa will be a transit mess as well. Imagine a school of 1000 people being dismissed at the same time and all of them have to get on one of the gondolas. You'd have to make a queue system just to make sure people won't kill each other to get on board first. What a joke...
Great comment.
Or city managers and all the codes, building zones, and angry residents that come with existing cities
@@mds3697 It screams of a project not properly thought out project.
You can in theory build a city from scratch, and make said city work, but in order to do that you need to have considered everything. And by everything I mean every single insane possible outcome.
For a project like this to actually work, it'd need loads of scientific research done in preparation, you'd need to include professionals in hundreds of fields as well as ground teams in said fields as well in order to get it to work. This just screams of another person with loads of money thinking: "Well I have the money, how hard can it be?"
Also I don't think $400BN dollars is anywhere close to enough for a project of this scale, cities are mind numbingly expensive to properly plan, build and run.
Why waste money on a failing infrastructure when you can just make a new sustainable one?
I grew up on a ranch in Arizona and still live here. We had a saying, "The desert is where billionaire’s dreams come to die!"
@@dingbat4892 WHEN is the last time you saw a true philanthropic billionnaire?
@g.s.3450 Saudis taking out water
Long ago a Utopian economist Robert Owen tried this. The people robbed him blind! I like the idea, it seems to make sense, but reality won't support it.
Not true look at Vegas
I think utah would best best for this project. Utah is one of the fastest growing state and most of utah has plenty of water and has lots of land
Would make more sense to revitalize a city in the more habitable rust belt.
.. or revitalize or build a new one somewhere in between Chicago Minneapolis and St Louis.
Brilliant !
Nope. The tyranny of the status quo means that trying to revitalize a city will fail.
That was my plan. I already got a blueprint for it from like 15 years ago. The trouble I'm having is getting land. It's not easy especially since I'm no billionaire. At this point I feel like my dreams are being mocked by billionaires running the show with their short sighted vision of what a true sustainable city is. My planed city is far better than Telosa and would some day be a wonder of the world.
@@kvm1992 could you describe how it would look like and work? I am kinda curious.
For real. It's not like the eastern half of the country doesn't have a lot of dead or dying ghost towns these billionaires can use for their city building experiments. As an added bonus, people actually live in those areas. I'm sure Gary, Indiana or Detroit, Michigan would appreciate the investment.
I live in Phoenix, and I’ll tell you now that this won’t work. They underestimate the monsoon and the lack of water. Dust storms all summer, and little rainfall in the winter will be a death sentence. We need to get rid of all these grass lawns and golf courses first before thinking about another major city in the desert
A cute wee fact: What is the largest agricultural crop grown by man ?
Front lawns. (AKA: Grass)
gross ugly take. "I need to restrict you, to preserve myself" just don't be upset when this mentality gets thrown back at you. Mass deportations are all the more possible with automated technology. but you people still invite millions of illegal aliens to use the same infrastructure than blame your fellow citizen when the system becomes overstressed by illegal weed wells across the cali desert. You same people want wage increases but are willing to massively import work that undercuts the prospect of collective wage increases when you have such a vast labor market willing to undercut and be paid under table. Just another lapse of understanding, you wouldn't believe this billionaire would have more access to info than you or chose to understand more about the intricacies of water rights, or just how much water us Arizona citizens actually use. It's just funny your choice is to restrict others given the option you tyrannical fascist. You have no information on this subject expect "muh climate change" "muh drought" "muh AUTHORITATIVE NEWS SOURCE TOLD ME" and it's telling and riddled by your scarcity mindset.
It makes me upset to see lawns in regions where grass doesn't exist. There are so many excellent gardens that don't use grass because it's not native, but to go against nature to force a particular image is short sighted and costly. I've seen enough landscape design in Australia that only uses native plants to know that grass isn't necessary in the desert.
Golf courses are beautiful to look at but are ultimately useless. Vast tracts of land for a single game. Just No. It doesn't serve a purpose.
Lawns and golf courses are easy targets for examples of bad water use, but optimizing agricultural water use would produce far, far greater progress. That aspect is addressed (at a high level) in this video with greenhouses. Something like 90% of available water is used by agriculture. We need that industry to feed ourselves obviously, but more pressure should be applied to ag rather than on individuals xeriscaping their lawn (which people should still do anyways)
One of the worst places in the US for drought, how are they going to supply millions with enough water?
drain more water from the already depleting colorado river
@@bigboyman5743 hahah very true... there's hardly any water left in the Colorado too... these guys have no idea what they're doing
People live in Las Vegas, right ?
@@francoislechanceux5818 Las Vegas is an exception because of the rediculous amounts of money they get from the casinos. Is this supposed to be a second Las Vegas?
@@DarkNexarius Lol. It always seems impossible until it's done. Who said that, please ?
Exception, exception...this is an exceptional project. And science has gotten mankind really far.
Cities should be located along major waterways, or at least in strategic locations with good access to natural resources. Instead of building a new gridded city in the desert, why not upzone Chicago or Detroit and revitalize those areas? Would be a lot more practical, and the location is so much better.
People would rather live in the middle of the desert then in Detroit
Fun fact telos (τέλος) in Greek means the end. Maybe in ancient Greek means higher purpose as you said but in modern Greek language is just the end.
Quite funny if you ask me
Hahaha Brilliant... you think the tards building this project would have at least researched all aspects of the word first. The end seems to be a better word for how this project will end up.
its WEF dystopia city, so "the end" name is very fitting
he didnt look in a dictionary. but be sure that some intern told him that telosa means higher purpose and he went with that. all that money but zero intelligence
Thank you very much for providing your "fun fact", what is serious language sharing for me.
Bay-an-uck-let, blessings on you in Gaelic.
Another international environmental project is Forest City in Malaysia. But despite it being marketed as an energy efficient green city that incorporates the local environment, it's really far from it. The development has actually led to irreversible environmental damage to the Johor wetlands due to reclamation...reclamation that happened WITHOUT the environmental assessment required. Plus after the reclamation happened, a nearby fishing village said there were reduced catches. The project wasn't targeted towards the local Malaysians but rather middle-class Chinese citizens looking to park their wealth abroad.
And if that's not the tip of the iceberg, it is located in an Environmentally Sensitive Area Rank 1 Area (meaning no development should occur unless it's low-impact nature tourism, education, or research)...the irony that just writes itself. The project is now a ghost town.
its like the Mexican proposed forest city. the area is currently intact forest, doesn't matter how many plants there are or how efficient/sustainable the city is. clearing cutting or disturbing the rainforest is plain stupid and defeats the whole idea...
I'll bet this dude is looking for investors. I doubt he will use his own money. Search for 'Ghost Cities' in TH-cam to learn more.
"Despite being marketed as "an energy-efficient, ecologically sensitive, land-conserving, low-polluting offshore city", the development has had significant negative environmental impact, with irreversible damage due to reclamation of ecologically sensitive coastal wetlands." Wiki
AKA techno babble
Historically, cities have been established along trade routes and industrial centers, preferably next to a large body of water -- seashore, navigable river, etc. There are very few opportunities left for a large landlocked settlement in the middle of a wasteland to thrive and develop. One is Las Vegas, due to pure legalism, related to gambling, so the only other option is to turn this splashy utopia into yet another open air real-estate vault for billionaires and institutional investors to park/launder their wealth in a secure location. Then the only worry will be where to house the maintenance/service personnel.
The location part is quite accurate. Mobility is another factor that gets supercharged by proximity to waterways whether it be seaports or navigable waterways. Vast majority of global cities are an example.
I think you nailed it
Haha. Good comment but I think the autocorrect got you. A city dedicated to glamping! Sounds alright.
I love you mentioned the workers. I live in a designed community with lots of gardeners. There would still be those, but they would also be your neighbors. Your kids would play with their kids. Because they could afford or even be given living quarters as a perk of the job. This is the key difference. Your vocation would say much less about the kind of schools you access or housing you find. ;) great question.
@@DrBussanich isn't what you're describing just a healthy middle class that pays service people a living wage? In America we already had that until we gave up Christian nationalism for godless globalism
For a city in the middle of the desert to be WALKABLE they will need to create shaded paths and natural cooling areas.
For shaded pathways it might be a good idea to engineer areas with retractable shade so they can be retracted for the fair weather winter months and be be fully out for the summer months.
Powerless airconditioners can be built easily, areas that are surrounded in stone and do not see daylight ever and are several feet underground to make use of the cooler temperature below the surface level. These could possibly serve a dual purpose as summer walkways and winter water canals for water collection.
Water resevoirs could be built with a greenhouse around them that will collect the cleaner evaporated water leaving behind sediment.
It's doable but they don't see to include successful ideas to combat heat and water.
What a nightmare, a city with no water in the middle of a desert.
Water can be taken out of the air using solar power, not ideal but can be done .
"But muh ego!"
@@callumcurtis15 works terrible in the desert with low air humidity, and imagine what happens when everyone start doing it in a 100k+ city...
@@callumcurtis15 An average person uses 150 litres of water a day, so for 50,000 people that's 7.5 million litres a day, not counting any industry or business use. That sounds like a lot of energy, plus the storage and disposal of waste.
yes
I laughed so hard when he said a city of sustainability… in one of the most arid and water depleted environments in the world. 😂
What's so crazy is they throw around "fossil fuel" all the time but never mention that 99% of all PLASTICS and MEDICATIONS are made with... PETROLEUM! What a crock of hypocrisy.
Maybe they can find the spice from Dune there
I would not laugh. Why you may ask? Do you remember the movie Chinatowne? If you don't have it...Steele it!
I live in Utah. We send ass loads of water from the colorado river (Lake Powell) to Nevada and California. We are headed for an extreme water shortage crisis. And they wanna build another city in the middle of a fucking desert? 🤣🤣🤣😂😂
@@bobbyboywonder12 They got so close yet so far. Also why arent we just focusing our billions of dollars on struggling cities that need the funding. Smh
These projects just seem like unbridled megalomania. Imagine the good these billionaires could do if they were to infuse all this capital into existing cities. There's so many communities that could be completely transformed with a tiny fraction of this money.
and not fuck up my"worthless" desert........we can hope he loses his money soon , before hiring the bulldaozers
There’s a reason they go out in the desert to do these projects. Trying to work with entrenched city and state governments is a recipe for wasted time and money.
@@zachmelton1114 There are ways to enrich communities without working directly with the government. And you’re going to have plenty of government headaches trying to build a giant city in the middle of the desert. You don’t think the government is going to have concerns about trusting a project like this with the amount of water it would need to get started in an area where water is already scarce?
The project would have way too many hands in it stealing if it went in an existing city.
Exactly 💯
"There is no shortage of water in the desert but exactly the right amount, a perfect ratio of water to rock, water to sand, insuring that wide free open, generous spacing among plants and animals, homes and towns and cities, which makes the arid West so different from any other part of the nation. There is no lack of water here unless you try to establish a city where no city should be.” -Edward Abbey
Telosa already exists, it’s called California City. Located northern Antelope Valley in Kern County, California. It is 100 miles (160 km) north of the city of Los Angeles, and the population was 14,973 as of 2020. Covering 203.63 square miles (527.4 km2), California City has the third-largest land area of any city in the state of California.
PS - probably easier to reinvent California City rather then take a virgin desert and tear it up
Just looking at in from google maps California City doesn't look like that at all. Its a typical car dependent suburbia infected American city. Theres not even One Non-Single Family Home there.
Since California City is almost textbook suburban spawl in concept, even more so in execution, so not really in almost any way.
I've been there. It's an example of a good idea that came too soon. L.A. did expand northward, but way south of California City.
Thank you for sharing these stats
So long as we stop suburban sprawl, I’m ok with that
Developers typically give little or no attention to food and agriculture, and the natural resource they require, such as good soil and water. They say, "Oh, we will be able to import that import that from places that have those resources. Not a problem". It is not a problem until those with more money come in and buy the farms and products. So planning for self-sufficiency is needed on all levels.
I mean the developers literally added in hydroponic farms to their development plans, which would save 90% of the water used in typical irrigation practices. If these replaced current farm land, they would save water. Which is how even unsustainable suburban developments replacing former farm land helped Arizona use less water now than it did when its population was 1/6 the size.
So an arcology.
America is a self sufficient nation for its food. And most of its fertilizers, the fertilizer we don't make in house we get from Canada, who has plenty for us as we're always first on the list. Also, the stack farming in urban setting looks somewhat promising. Assuming the foods really are just as nutrient dense as traditionally grown
I was also thinking about the fact that it doesn’t seem like this city would have any industry? Just technology and entertainment sectors? I’m skeptical of that.
Sustainability is super important to us let's build our city in an extremely uninhabitable Landscape where just sustaining the existence of a single human costs massiv amounts of energy and non renewable resources...
With $400B you can build a city in the desert and hope someone moves there or completely pay off the debt of an entire country with 182 options to choose from including Indonesia, Saudia Arabia, Ireland, New Zealand, Egypt, etc.
Nothing like a 15 minute walk to the store in 120 degree heat.
Over cooking temperature even!
the trees and the lack of asphault make it much better to walk
@@castlesinfo6049 I lived in Arizona for 13 years. Trees and lack of asphalt helps, but when the temperature is 120 degrees in the desert, it's 140+ over asphalt. 120 is plenty hot.
If there is good public transportation. I know. I don't drive n live in LA. One time I was sitting bench waiting for buses in 105 degrees. People passed by worrying about me. I didn't care. I got lost n took me 2+ hours to find this bus stop. I know 105 is cooler than 120. Still. If bus/trains come frequently, this is less issue. To maintain 15 minute walking distance, there will be shades in many places. It's much easier to walk under shades. In many major cities in Asia, many buildings has extra hall way to walk in front of entrance.
This utopia concept city has a lot things to consider. Many people have pointed out water is major issue. Oh, 2 or 3 hours later, I arrived home. I drank lots of water. Yes, water is needed more in desert n transit friend city.
That's like 43c For the rest of the world 😂
I think it would be a lot easier to start small sustainable communities or towns with 1-3,000 person populations. Building these 5 million population cities built on sustainability are unrealistic, but with 400 billion dollars you could easily have 100’s of successful towns built or revamped.
Referring to any land as “worthless land” tells me exactly what I need to know about just how much they care about sustainability.
That’s referring to land prices being cheap.
@@ayoutubechannelname you here to simp for billionaires, bud?
@@thegirlwiththemouseyhair6486 Anybody can say “worthless land”, not just billionaires.
@@ayoutubechannelname not the way he’s saying it. He’s saying “worthless”, as in good for no purpose, not “worth less” as in cheaper. He clearly has no respect for the land he’s wanting to develop, he’s viewing it only as a commodity he can purchase and be monetarily enriched from the improvements he makes. That’s as far from sustainability as you can get.
@@kraphtymac He wants to make the land worth more than “worthless”, wherein the term “worthless” does not connote “worthless” but simply “worth less”. Try to be less hyperbolic.
I am almost ashamed that I even watched this. But everyone’s comments are refreshing! Good luck I really hope all the rich crazy people move there.
Me too & watched the whole thing 🫢
A follow-up video on one or more failed planned cities would be very interesting. I know there are a couple in California and Colorado, both placed in the middle of the desert.
We have deserts in Colorado?
@@jackgardner8225 Yes, in the high desert!
Yes, California City, Lake Los Angeles and Bombay Beach are all failed "planned communities" in the Mojave Desert in California. This idea is not very well thought out!
And even more outside the US - there's a very creepy one on the edge of Bangkok, Thailand. All steel and rust and weird noises on windy days.
@paul sroczynski not a desert tho....
I live in Yuma AZ and the soil in the Sonoran Desert is quite good BUT we're using water that comes from far away. A big advantage with desert farming for one is the year-round yields. The other is pest-free soil. That's great but the entire southwest is in an unsustainable situation. There are consequences to building these huge man-made lakes like Mead and Powell. Further development in the lower basin- Arizona, California and Nevada is a pipe dream.
Fresh water should never be seen as infinite but the place to build these cities is the rust belt. Not the desert southwest.
I grew up in L.A. and everyone there is ignorant about how far away their water comes from, or what will happen when it runs out. I wonder how long before all the big cities of the American Southwest end up abandoned like Chaco Canyon & other Anasazi sites..
Do you know where The Lighthouse is? 🤗🍦
Lack of water is purely a political problem. Desalination plants, while expensive, could provide nearly unlimited fresh water for cali and the southwest and their technology for these is improving all the time. Environmentalists impede their construction though.
@@elcarajo66I live in Bakersfield and our cities sells LA water lol
Run a pipe from the great lakes
Rich people trying to play the SIMS but in real life, while knowing nothing about how to build cities... and when all of this money could be use to make already existing cities a better place to live..
You dont know that he knows nothing. Also, this city can set a good example for other cities.
@@isaks7042 what good example? the only good thing I see about this is the zooning (the 15min max walk to your job/grocery store/school) but that can be achived in any city pretty easily (just fix the stupid zoning laws)
@@faustinpippin9208 No that cant be achieved in any city easily... Especially in the US. The suburbs has already grown too big and you cant just remove all suburbs in an instant.
@@isaks7042 no need to remove the entire suburbs.... just place some convenience store,school in the suburb district so you are not forced to ride a 20wide lane higway for 15min just to get bread....same goes for other things, ofc somethig loud and polluting should stay outside
Let's see how it turns out, how they really execute and design it.
Bearing in mind that coal is the only “Fossil Fuel” and the only vehicles on US streets that are at least partially fossil fuel powered these days are electric vehicles (20% of US electricity is still derived from coal) does that mean that EV’s will be banned in Telosa? Or just electrical power from the grid?
"Billionaire Marc Lore", "Billionaire Marc Lore", "Billionaire Marc Lore". Has that guy officially changed his name to include "Billionaire" or something? We get it. He's rich.
He won't be a billionaire if he builds this city!
@@heidirabenau511sadly he will still be
When you become a billionaire, they let you drop your gender prefix. It says Billionaire Marc Lore in his passport! lol
Part of the sponsorship arrangement?
@@heidirabenau511 By the time he builds the city, he'll already be a trillionaire. Because the FED keeps printing more money and making it worthless. We'll all be Zimbabwean trillionaires soon.
As soon as I heard "equitism" my spider-sense blared.
yup. More WEF and UN nonsense
When I heard equitism I thought communism
Get out of the USA while you still can. Either that or die fighting for your freedom. All he needs is a few more billionaires to help fund this project and don't think they won't agree to it. It's like them keeping the sheep from using all the resources. I've watch another video on this and they plan on giving each person the Same amount of everything. No decision making for yourself
Fight for your freedom now or leave this country
@@ria0991 if not the U.S.A., where would you propose going?
0:39 "Your doodie is our duty"...that ad campaign is genius. Well played to them! Another planned Southwest desert city comes to mind when I see this project is Lake Havasu City in Arizona. Developer Robert P. McCulloch started by buying 3.3K acres in 1958 before buying over 13,000 more acres four years later and established Lake Havasu City in 1963 (and incorporated in 1978). The problem was, he couldn't get buyers interested because of its location far from population centers and the fact that it's in an arid climate.
Then an idea came to mind...the City of London was putting the 1831 version of London Bridge up for sale. Robert's real estate agent convinced him to make the wild purchase of buying the bridge as a way to attract buyers as the city's main attraction. The bridge was transported through the Panama Canal in pieces, unloaded in Long Beach, and then moved to Lake Havasu City where it was re-assembled in 1967 and completed in 1971. The plan worked, as it's the second-largest tourist attraction in the state after the Grand Canyon, and over 57K people now live there.
Lake Havasu has the lake and a river in their front and back yards. No water, no Havasu.
I've been seeing you for years.
He actually wanted people to have vacation homes here being so close to CA. He already had his workers moved out here.
In my opinion,you would have to create a magnificent place of tourism 1st to generate cash to fund such a big city. Create some type of monumental building or stadium that will attract people in awe. This place has to have the most beautiful views, or it' just not going to happen.
Like dubai
Historical cities were settled because of benefits of the land. Vienna is along one of the great European rivers. Florence is at the center of one of the best agricultural regions in the world. Singapore is in the middle of every trade route in the Asia Pacific. The cities grew naturally as their value increased over time. You cannot build a city in the desert with no natural resources and no strategic position.
You do realize the deserts of Arizona and California are among the largest agriculture production cores in the entire world? More water is used on Alfalfa in these states than all residential use combined.
@@basedoz5745 - Haven't been following the news, have you? The aquifer is drying up, there's a record drought, lakes and rivers are drying out.
@@wickedcabinboy hmm I wonder why? Could it be agriculture using over 70% of the water every year to feed foreign countries during 20 years of drought. Nah, must be the people using less than 20%.
@@basedoz5745 Check latest usage, not so much as you suggest.
@@wickedcabinboy But there is always hope, we had a temporary respite.
Building a significant new city in the middle of a desert may seem exciting, but it has many dangers. These dangers become even more pronounced when the temperature climbs above summer temperatures. The intense heat radiating off the sand can cause severe sunburns and dehydration in those who venture outdoors without proper protective clothing. The combination of extreme heat and dry air is also known to cause severe respiratory illnesses in vulnerable populations such as seniors and children.
What’s more, the extreme temperatures can make living conditions unbearable for many new city residents. It will become nearly impossible to remain cool inside buildings since air conditioning units are often inadequate when faced with such extreme weather conditions. As a result, many people here would likely have to resort to expensive alternatives to survive the summer months.
this isnt a problem with thermal heating.
And yet, people live in Phoenix, Palm Springs, Las Vegas.
@@bearcubdaycare All the cities you listed are GROSSLY POLLUTED, especially air pollution! Phoenix daily on the news has warnings on air pollution which at times can be life threatening! When coming over the range to Las Vegas, the air pollution is so THICK one could cut it with a KNIFE! Palm Springs is just about the same air pollution as Las Vegas, though sometimes far worse!
They should build a 'prototype' in the exact center of the Sahara desert first... to see if it can work.
@@terrytaylor2825 A Terraforming particulate generator in the Sahara Desert,
Global Cooling
Shoveling snow in Phoenix.
For me the biggest downside is the lack of water, I would have a hard time living in a city without a river or lake being nearby. It also makes me a bit sceptical about all the greenery ambitions but if they manage to sort out the water issue on a sustainable way I really hope something like this will be realised.
How can they manage water when the whole area is drying up on record scale? Lake Mead won't exist soon.. and neither will the Colorado River. It's a doomed project.
Here comes Gates to save the day with his machines that turn crap into water. I'll pass, thanks.
If the water problems are mitigated, and who knows? even better, solved to an extent, do you think a smart city with a new kind of economic policy would be beneficial to the common public? What would you do?, would you be interested in buying a plot of land either to move in or as an investment, or do you think, it wouldnt be feasible? I too am interested to buy assets or properties in these kinds of new city projects, but i am lacking in long term knowledge in how feasible that investment for my family's future can be? Any insight from you would be nice to hear..
Well if they truly want a city of the future then i sure hope they work a ton on water recycling so you pretty much only need to get in drinking water since for the rest filtered water should be just fine.
Lack of industry...JOBS!
District 10, hunger games 😂
This would be like living in a theme park without being able to step outdoors, most of the year, due to the 125 degree heat.
Sounds like Phoenix, Arizona.
Well if it were NOT a National Park he could built it in Death Valley, PLENTY of WATER below the sand, but it's all salt water!
My 5 cents: Marc Lore needs to tap into the wisdom of human experience--why some cities have been more successful and why some others are failures. One way to approach this issue is to have a large (very large) pool of people brainstorming the problem trough a publicly accessible forum. The combined thoughts of thousands of interested people are more valuable than millions of dollars in consulting fees.
Success? Eliminate big-box stores, create multiple forms of transportation, make it walkable - NOT CAR DEPENDENT, and allow for multiple zoning. They can start there.
Start with towns that have suffered because jobs were sent overseas.
But they want to start with a clean slate having destroyed congress with their monied lobbyists. Well…THEY don’t deserve it!
Republican cities
The elected public servants don't think they are leaders to "lead" the people and understand they are meant to *represent* the people and let the people come up with solutions to problems them selves instead of taxing the citizens in to poverty to make.... what are they up to now 4 attempts and $6 billion?...... a train/subway from south califorina to north california.
@@sharongillesp
You mean corporate stores (corporate stores can be "small")
The problem with travel in the US isn't "car dependents" it is bad design..... driving though Califorina for example is a fking nighmare because politicians in Cali are fking morons - and most of it could be solved in probably less than 6 months.
Yep, local goods should have a 0% tax on them, cross state goods should have 5% tax, goods from allies should have a 10% tax and goods from clearly hostile countries like China should have a 20% tax.
Local employers 0% tax, employers in multiple states should have an extra 1% tax per state they are in (so if they are in 3 states 3% tax)
US citizens should have a 15% income tax (5% local, 5% state, 5% federal - that each person can put in to what ever they want... if they want to "defund" their police let them)
Foreign workers working in the US should have a 20% income tax (that goes *directly* to state tax returns and is NOT used by the government in any way)
Yes, foreign goods would be expensive.... but there is no reason to have stuff we could do here on a local level shipped over seas to us - killing jobs here, funding child sweat shops and so on..... if it is being shipped over the seas to us, it better be some high quality shit or something we can't do here.
@@toorimakun What do you mean "republican cities"? What do political parties have to do with city planning?
@@oggyreidmore
How they approach problems
traffic as an easy example:
Dems just build more lanes
Republicans build new roads
one of the cities I lived in before it flipped blue built a road that went strait from the north of the city to the south of the city, no off ramps or anything - and it cut like 2/3 the traffic in the city down.
They also made it so when you are in the left turn lane you are looking down the passenger side of the car that is in the turn lane across from you so you can see on coming traffic.
All the dem cites I have been in you are looking down the driver side of the car across from you and you can't see on coming traffic with out driving in to the middle of the intersection.
more complex issues are "affordable housing" *CAUSING* more homelessness and such.
Are there going to be real live unicorns in the city?! At least they don’t drink much water 😂
😂😂😂😂
Neither do people to be honest. The entire state of Arizona and its 7 million people used roughly 420k acre-feet of water for indoor use. Their indoor and outdoor use accounts for roughly 1.4 million acre-feet of water with suburban development standards of the past 50 years. That amount would equal roughly 20% of the water they use in a given year. You could add in all of Nevada;s water use and not reach the amount of water the Colorado River is delivering even after drought. That doesn’t even count the in state rivers in Arizona, or the groundwater reservoirs.
Why not use the $400B to develop sea water filtration & delivery systems for current drought areas?
I know these planned cities have to start with imagination and CGI but usually they don't get much beyond that stage. When I see this city actually built, I will believe it.
So you are from Missouri too?
It's just not people from "The Show me State" that question these grand designs. Usually the only cities of such grand design that ever actually get built are capital cities and even those mega projects are not without their problems. Having said that, I still hope this ultra modern metropolis gets built, it looks pretty cool.
Building it is easy. It's the economic viability of its continued existence that troubles me.
CGI does not figure in need for water
if it's built- someday- all by robot labor?
Why not build this in a state that actually needs a big city like this? One that's also easier to build a big city in.
Many opportunities to invest in Kansas and give hope to the people there. But they'd rather throw it all away on a vanity project.
So in a developing country, right?
@@JohnFromAccounting Still issues with water, either way.
Somewhere in the great lakes area makes a ton of more sense.
Usually cost is the big issue, and internal politics in the area, the politicians usually want a huge cut of any major projects and usually want kickbacks to their unions and other friends, the simple answer to that is just to build where they aren't at.
I am worried about the lack of a railway, especially if there will be 5 million people in the future
You're worried about the lack of railways, in an American city?
@@temper44 Yes, I mean if you build a city with a European population density of 5 million people, then you probably need a railroad.
And yes, American cities actually have railroads, like San Francisco, New York or Chicago.
I am more worried about lack of public transportation, this conceptual city does address it
Good thing this city will never exist.
If there was a railway the citizens would use it to flee from the city.
Let the water wars begin
It's an interesting idea. But in Nevada, Utah, and Arizona, water is ALREADY an over allocated resource. The Feds already had to intervene because the states were not able to reach agreement on how to equitably share the diminished amount that can sustainably be extracted. Getting one of more states to set aside a part of their already reduced allocation will be a MAJOR challenge.
Except they only threatened to intervene, and actually didn't, and we're still short that 2 to 4mil acre-feet. NO ONE is getting any additional water, LOL, this is going to remain a cartoon drawing.
This is doomed to fail. Not only because of the track record of projects like this. Because of Marc Lore clueless statement "Worthless Land". Until Marc understands, there is no such thing as "Worthless Land" he will fail! Marc, I urge you to totally rethink what south-west is all about.
your plea will fall on deaf ears, he is enrapt in his own ego, fueled by his echo chamber and surrounded by yes-men.
Pipe dreams of a wealthy out of touch man.
I’m sure he only meant it in the sense that he can buy for pennies, generate a whole scamload of hype, and sell for mucho dollars while galloping away with all due haste…
A brilliant Adam Sonething video in the making
What people need most is affordable housing. Instead of starting from scratch, invest in a place that needs more housing and make it affordable. A city grows and thrives when people aren't spending all their paycheck on rent.
Many cities/governments have proposed cheap affordable housing projects. But those projects get rejected or fail because peoples standard of the "affordable house" is to high.
Avg house by square ft in America is 2,174ft (Beaten only by Australia 2,303ft) compared to Hong Kong 484ft, India 503ft & China 648ft. This doesn't even factor in that the avg persons per home in America is (3.3), compared to India at 4.44 topped by Middle East & North African countries with avg of about 6.9.
Western people will continue to see a divide in wages and housing
Considering the logistics of it, I think this would do way more harm to the environment than good. The resources are better spent building nuclear reactors and improving public transit.
Why nuclear? Uranium is also not that sustainable and most us uranium comes from russia with just 40 years worth or currently economically available deposits.
@@leonfa259 There's tons of Uranium in other countries. It's really the only viable energy option we have.
@@leonfa259 Australia has plenty and we don't use it.
humans are not responsible enough for gun powder....let alone nuclear power.
PUBLIC TRANSIT DOESNT WORK
Abandoned ghost town / construction site in the making.
The region is already suffering from severe water shortage. Putting an entirely new settlement there is a brain fart of Muskian dimensions.
Well written ...
I believe Caligula would make more sane decisions.
Well at least it'll be a cool place to explore.
The fight for water rights are ALREADY in full effect in AZ. Currently, Residents in the unincorporated community of Rio Verde Foothills, just outside of Scottsdale, are suing Scottsdale to restore water delivery services, cut off due to extreme drought conditions in the Colorado River. It is well documented that ground water throughout the state is drying up, with towns like Strawberry, an hour north of Phoenix, in the pine forest, already refusing to grant new home hookups to the towns water supply. Here in AZ, water rights to the Colorado river were a central issue in the last election. Cool idea, but the notion that we are at the whims of few random billionaires is insane. We don't need projects based on ego. Imagine that money being pumped into already neglected infrastructure, water technology and education. That money would be transformational to an already existing city.
Cities don't have problems for lack of money, they have problems because of poor priorities. If you give big cities more money, you just get more wasted money
Read about this a bit before, but will definitely look far more into this town.
Fresh water is the real innovation that is lacking and will be the deal-breaker. So build it in Florida, design for high winds and to capture rain, both easier to achieve. Even so, Equitism sounds like a community-wide pyramid scheme. The B1M seems to be depending more and more on so-called developers' publicity packages. I subscribe to their channels for information, not PR.
You can't build a city without an industry. Without a way to earn a living, nobody is going to move there. It doesn't matter what types of architectural grand vision the city has. Conversely, if there are ways to making really good livings, it doesn't matter how crappy the city is, people will move there.
Sometimes I think we American's have this problem. We're a culture that is addicted to the idea of 'frontiers'. That there's always someplace else to go if things get bad where we are. And historically we've built this into a myth of rugged self reliance and opportunity that is not at all what the frontier was for a lot of people. For a lot of people it was dirty, difficult, dangerous, and they would not have gone if there was any other option to stay put where they already were. The vast majority of frontiersman were not running towards opportunity they were running FROM poverty, war, tyranny, resource depletion.
I don't think we've ever stopped running. And I think weird super projects like this are some kind of manifestation of that. Until we stop running and accept that we have to stand our ground where we are. Fix what we've neglected, I don't see anything getting a whole lot better.
A Walmart executive talking about "putting people in the center" yeah...sure buddy
That was the first red flag
Let's just call it Wal-City.
This is giving me “Demolition Man” vibes 😂
5:36 nice they added a cyber truck, these people are legends
Ah yes a billionaire educating us about equitism
The irony
Irony yes but it could still be genuine right? Let's stay optimistic.
Tbh what does equitism sound like in practice? Well, it sounds like taxes, and what do rich billionaires pretty much never like? Taxes.
An executive from Walmart, of all places too. They've already shown us by underpaying their employees to the point of encouraging them to get on food assistance. Those cards holding the food stamps are charged a fee each time they're used at Walmart, giving them a little something from jp Morgan on top of not having to pay them. Guess who pays for the food stamps. We all do, including the ones who need them. Not Walmart though. Now an executive with that same mentality is going to help us out with a city? 👌
100000% this
its woke communism
I like the idea of building an entirely new city that avoids the problems of the past, and experiments with a non-typical ownership structures etc. However it seems like the water problem is a pretty big one for this city, and also the presence of a monorail in the visualisation immediately rings alarm bells lol
What really rings alarm bells is the total lack of understanding of what the purpose of a city really is.
If it helps in greenification , reducing the carbon footprint, maybe reduce the rental crisis , and maybe even improve air quality. Go for it.
The location is suspicious. I always get dystopian creepy vibes and think they're 15 minute cities surrounded by unforgiving landscape to prevent you from escaping.
The IRS can already cancel your passport on a whim, so...
Man... Not everything is evil masterplan it's simply megalomania of thinking of buying a plot of desert and thinking of building city better than anyone before...
You have paranoia
@@MuzzaHukka right. But without a passport I can go anywhere I want in my country. Whereas this is a city in the middle of a desert sooo...
The city will be built by ... who? Where will those people be housed? This either needs to be located next to a city or pay outrageous prices to attract people in the trades who are already in short supply and so able to make solid money elsewhere. The idea is interesting, and I'm curious how they propose making it actually happen.
Another aspect I'm curious about is land ownership. Will the land around the immediate city be owned by Marc and his investors so that they can cash in as the city expands? If so, he's banking on people being willing to move to a city where they know that billionaires and banks have a choke collar on them. While I find the city's idea compelling and attractive, I wouldn't go without substantial clarity on the long term plan for ensuring the city isn't constrained by billionaires and banks (in unreasonable ways ... I would expect these folks to make a profit on their investment, but not such a large one that it endangers the sustainability of the city).
its 15 min districts and equity, what do you think the city is for? power hungry elites to control every aspect of people, thats why they have public transportation and a ban of private cars
Building a city in the desert is never a good idea unless they somehow manage to terra form it, transform the land first into a huge forest with artificial lakes or rivers and mountains and the city would either be underground or enclosed in a dome in a deep trench or between cliffs.
The city should be based on permaculture or solarpunk theme with a lot of nature integration that will provide shade.
Get with this idiot right away, he needs your ideas.
Yes I'm curious if billions were instead used for terraforming, what could be accomplished. Maybe then water could be retained from the monsoon season.
About 40 years ago a confidence trickster sold London Bridge to a visiting American billionaire. At first people thought the workmen were just repairing the bridge, but by the time the city council became aware of what was happening, the bridge had gone and a few months later it was being rebuilt in the Arizona desert! Is it in the same place as this new city? It wouldn't make much sense to have a bridge in the middle of nowhere with no city and roads using it. I think there must be a canal pasing underneath it now instead of the River Thames.
When you go to Burning Man every year and you are a billionaire. Let´s build a city in the desert. I like the renders and some of the ideas though.
Those pods are all you need to see to know that they designed the city around an architect never talked to an urban planner.
American cities already have massive problems with how inefficient cars are. Trying to empty a stadium, skyscraper, university or airport using cars that carry 1-5 people at a time is inefficient, requires a lot of space for parking, requires massive roads and leads to non-stop congestion. That problem doesn't go away just because you're using "pods" that carry 1-6 people at a time. Grade separation and automation don't solve the problem that you're moving a lot of people in tiny packets. In cities of that scale, you need a train. Nothing else moves that many people efficiently. What is it with billionaires and their desire to build the most inefficient transport systems they can possibly think of?
Moving 500,000 people around a city 1-6 people at a time is going to be a nightmare, much less a city of 5 million. Just build a damn train.
As soon as you see futuristic "pods" as public transit you know the project is likely to be abandoned ;)
So you'd basically be applying to move to a community ran by a company or is it a governmental run city built by a company? Important part to know for a potential citizen I'd say.
I guess you'd be exiled in the desert if you fail to pay your annual subscription fee😂
@@X_mano the way, City is sounding. I wouldn’t call it an exile.
Labeling these projects as green and sustainable is just a fucking bad joke.
Building these from scratch is an environmental catastrophe.
Already existing city's and structures need to be reused and made sustainable.
EXACTLY. Sustainability has to start by recycling what we have. It CAN be done, and it can be scalable and economical...but it's just not as sexy to sell.
Obviously water is the major obstacle to building in the southwest. On the other hand, if you want a solar powered city, you pretty much have to build in the southwest. If they considered using nuclear they could remain carbon neutral and put the city somewhere closer to water. There are plenty of locations on the great lakes where you could build a city closer to where people already live with ocean access via the St. Lawrence River. Revitalization of Gary or Detroit makes more sense than a de novo city in northern AZ.
This development would save more water being built on current agriculture land in Arizona than it would being developed in any cold weather state. Especially considering the cold weather states depend on California and Arizona for crops in the winter months. Not to mention the almonds, cattle feed, or cotton. To me the real sustainability problem is that the cold weather states treat the desert as their agriculture hub.
Good policy changes in literally any city or satellite suburban town can achieve many of these goals for far less money. Solid public transport, extra green zones, walkable urban areas, no car zones, water recycling with sustainable farming & renewable energy resources supplying the urban area. You're just missing all futuristic buildings, but you're removing the headache of moving millions of people hundreds of miles away from anywhere to live in a hot desert with no water. Amsterdam, Barcelona, Paris, Athens & many more are in different stages of already implementing this for far less than half a trillion dollars.
Hundreds of millions to be spent on a man's ego, while millions of far cheaper, more sensible projects are thrown to the ground because it doesn't cater to someone's self-image or unwarranted self-importance. Thankfully and hopefully, such projects will never get to see the light of day.
Interesting concept, but it needs to be developed somewhere that gets a lot of rain. There are lots of crazy communities in Florida, perhaps he should consider that region.
imagine all that $400 billion being used to improve public transport and building more homes for the working class, but no, capitalists would rather waste it on nothing
None of these city building billionaires care about actually making the world a better place. They are only chasing the dream of being remembered as "genius visionaries"
Brilliant comment
Exactly. Instead of paying us fair wages and taxes, this is where it goes to?
"Everyone has a stake in the city they can sell for money!"
And what happens when they do that?
Unless they're regularly given a new stake, this is temporary state of affairs, not a long term solution.
You will own nothing and be happy.
Equitism seems like a version of Georgism which is slightly modified for the context of new developments. My guess is everyone pays land rent for the property they inhabit. To the extent that you have a share in the city, the land rent is either routed back to you or excused. So, if a person was to sell their stake, they'd have to live in a rented place. Not a big deal, really.
A city that will never get finished or abandon
Jail for experimentation...
Wtf is that gondola transit system? Such cost effective. Much sustainable. Economy of scale? Yes
Fun to see the Uber rich going full mask of with their feudalism
As soon as I heard fossil fuel vehicles are banned, I knew it was going to fail miserably.
All that cobalt needed to mine just for it to last only 5-10 years. Amazing.
oh let me guess... Trump voter. 😆😆
@@morganangel340 NPC confirmed
@@NightKnight347 TRIGGERED much ?
@@morganangel340 lol
Beautiful concept! If this does come to fruition, it will be for the wealthy class. The poor will only have access because someone has to run the city infrastructure.
The floating city sounds awesome & terrifying, at the same time.
Interesting idea, although i just get angry when all these futuristic projects (specifically the renders) just try to reinvent public transport. Just use trams, busses, etc, these pod designs are inefficient and literally "slow moving" the alternative already shows it works a million times better than anything else. If you want another oppinion watch "Adam Something"s video on excatly this.
I wanted to write, I smell an Adam Something viewer, then i saw you already mentioned the channel yourself 😂
Sort of reminds me of Elysium. The super wealthy get to live in on the Halo ring, and everyone else gets to live on the polluted earth that was used to make and support Elysium.
It's like the 12-year-old me suddenly had billions of dollars in Cities: Skylines building the perfect city of my dreams then end up a total disaster lol
So many negative comments…..I think it’s an amazing concept. I’d love to know more and plan to keep up with the progress. As a retired contractor, new building ideas are interesting to me.
this is a dystopian idea forcing public transit and 15 min districts, controlling every flow of information and controlled farming, oh its hell
Because we don't need this shit. That money should go into existing places in need. This is just greed and waste. It's disgusting
Control the population
If a billionaire is going to throw $400 billion at a "city of the future" project, why not do it in an existing blighted area? Pick a blighted post-industrial area of Detroit, Baltimore, Indianapolis or Los Angeles and invest the money there. Build the dense, affordable, sustainable, and walkable city with effective mass transit and all of the other stuff. Spoiler Alert: they already have water, people, and businesses ready to move in. Why take up more and more land when we have underutilized land in major cities already?
That’s the freaking truth… those old cities are in PRIME locations and $400 billion spent wisely (with minimal govt corruption) would be amazing. So much potential for those old industry cities.
It’s very difficult and expensive to kick out all of the existing businesses and residents to be able to construct the “ideal” neighborhood. You can’t build what these people are really going for without doing this.
@@AlexanderBlack1 True, but you dont need to kick everyone out... though with $400 billion cash you could probably buy some of them out of their homes and get some imminent domain rights to redevelop some of these neighborhoods.
In my simple mind, $400 billion would be much better spent revitalizing and reindustrializing the rust belt than for building some pie in the sky utopia for rich people in the middle of a freaking hot desert. Been to Dubai in the summer and it is miserably hot and not fun at all to walk somewhere.
@@Username-hw6ee
Well your mind is simply. Incorrect. It's obviously better to build a new city since the biggest challenge for any project is other people. So if you try to take over a city to improve infrastructure you are going to have countless people standing against you which will delay development by decades, make some development unachievable and make it cost far more. While if you build a new city all you have to worry about the development cost... and solutions to future problem. Such as water and energy.
@@MrNote-lz7lh Is this sarcasm? haha. You enjoy your abandoned city in the desert... I'll be rooting for revitalizing existing cities in locations that actually support life.
I'll give you a lovely spot called Bir Tawil that is free for the taking if the biggest challenge of a city is all those nasty people...
Don't think it will happen but at least there's some cool concepts other cities could apply.
@A B Getting a billionaire to pay for your shit.
@A B walkability
@A B reliable public transit, lots of green space, 15-minute neighbourhoods, near-absence of cars and no car-dependent sprawl. Lots of really good ideas
@@Knedlajz2 those are bad ideas
@@skurinski No, they're not. They're not just good, they're the _only_ ideas, because all alternatives are no ideas but simply "everything stays the way it is!!!"
Only thing one can arguably allege here is that those are not new ideas, but well-known for quite some time now. There's a whole country built upon them and it's one of the most enjoyable to live in in the entire world.
This is really neat! I'd like to help create a video game that allows players make real life plans for sustainable communities utilizing permaculture principles. I love how the plan for this community doesn't involve motor vehicle traffic. If I were to build a community, our aim would be to ensure safe housing, clean water, healthy food, quality education, and full health care for everyone, while planning future development to be in harmony with the Earth and with each other.
Sounds like a socialist nightmare.
That game already exists, it's called Fallout.
@@Jay-ns5ub each player would have their own solutions...i think that if money didn't get in the way of everyone's right to safe housing, clean water, healthy food, quality education, and full health care, we'd see greater leaps in technology.
@@RoySATX I've never played Fallout but it looks interesting. The game I'm envisioning will be connected with apps to ensure safe housing, clean water, healthy food, quality education, and full health care, as well as an educational and empowering online system of government for children and adults.
So...how many times can you clean recycled water? It does have a shelf life as everyone is finding out. ;)
125 F outside, another perfect summer day in Telosa!
The impulse to start with a clean sheet is pretty strong. Anyone who thinks about how to build a better machine, or house, or car etc. gets off to this kind of exercise. Currently, the way a city forms is organic and slow and much like an evolving creature, ends up looking a bit strange. Much like the economy, I'm not sure anyone really understands how a city works.
Dubai says something to you ?
@@francoislechanceux5818 Dubai is hell, it's like all the bad city planning of the US concentrated into one city. Totally wasteful, pure decadence, trying to appear like they've achieved something when all they did was selling oil
@@tomlxyz That's your backward provincial opinion. Dubai exists. Dubai is flamboyant and modern. And millions of people from around the world visit it every year and millions more from around the world too want to live there but are denied, rejected and/or deported.
Man, I'm really starting to think that securing the future of our society as a whole seems like a bit of a pipe dream; when our current ways of life aren't sustainable over the long term, but these sustainable solutions that some people propose are full of serious holes that they conveniently overlook when they're trying to sell their concepts...
There is a possibility that we won't be able to spare ourselves from the mass extinction event we're currently going trough.
Say it with me
Capitalism
Capitalism
Capitalism
Capitalism
Capitalism
Sucks
@@ericpreston8877 so you know any economic model that has proven to be better than capitalism? Not in concept or theory but in reality? Because every time someone "tries" socialism or communism it ends up devolving into a totalitarian dictatorship really quickly.
@@manoloorz Socialism isn't a thing to be tried. It will come much further down the line from the conditions now emerging.
@@ericpreston8877
Well. It is a billion times better than socialism and communism at least.
@@MrNote-lz7lh A house nigga. Massa sed he'd let me sit at his table and give me scraps if I wuz kind!
Instead of building this in the middle of a desert, he should build it in Mississippi or Alabama maybe. Land there is definitely cheap but still very hospitable, and the state could really use it as they are pretty backward states with struggling economies.
I just said basically the same thing! The ideal location would be northwest Mississippi: access to navigable waterways, fertile land, endless water supply. Bingo.
The water level at Lake Mead has dropped but not to worry. Just make water so expensive that people in Phoenix just all move away. Billionaires and their dangerous ideas.
It's viability will pivot on sustainable, long-term access to good water
which is why it will fail.
Why the heck aren’t they building these future cities in the Midwest? Water, plenty of impoverished counties that would welcome them with open arms, and closer to major transportation hubs.
Better yet when it gets worse rainfall and hurricanes from the coat comes in, and more record breaking heatwaves people will be moving to the Midwest and/or rust belt areas. Better investment to revitalize those areas
True enough. All the money for these projects is with the coasters who regard 'flyover states' with unconcealed contempt. I suspect the billionaires and crypto-bros would rather parch in the desert than set up in states with strong histories of union activism. :)
LOL. if he really wanted to do this he could work with an existing municipality to carve out some sort of special exemption from all the typical regulations. I suspect no one would just cede control to a billionaire for vague promises.
That ad sponsorship was perfect 😂
The main problem nowadays with just about any planned city is that they are ludicrously unaffordable. Construction costs are so high, and investors are so determined to turn a quick profit, that there's no appetite for any semblance of affordability. There aren't 5 million millionaires who are going to flock to this new city to start a new life. This city will have an affordability problem far greater than anything seen in San Francisco or New York.
It's a trap and you won't be able to leave your 15 min city to another unless you get permission, WEF
This 'Equitism' idea reeks of WEF "stakeholder capitalism".
yup. Its the UN's Agenda 2030 and its "Sustainable Development Goals" which includes so called "Smart Cities" which are a dystopian nightmare
Just another word for Communism.
@@Bland-79 Lmao what, I dont think billionaires are gonna fund communism
@@thijmstickman8349 You would be surprised. In most communist countries such as China their are a lot of billionaires funding that because they get special treatment.
@@Bland-79 Communism (from Latin communis, 'common, universal')[1][2] is a far-left[3][4][5] sociopolitical, philosophical, and economic ideology and current within the socialist movement[1] whose goal is the establishment of a communist society, a socioeconomic order centered around common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange which allocates products to everyone in the society.[6][7][8] Communist society also involves the absence of private property,[1] social classes, money,[9] and the state.
China isn't a communist society, and hasn't tried to be one for the last 30 years. Communists whole thing is getting rid of capitalism, money and private ownership. A billionaire is someone who owns a lot of private companies...
Yeah this is never gonna actually happen lmao
Citizens of freedom : "meh European 15 minutes city and walkable city is extremely government control and communium and CCP"
Also Citizens of freedom :
Build from scratch in desert, what can go wrong right