A city build by trains

A city built by trains.

No, rather, with trains in mind.

A thought of retrospect, but not to its own independent experience, but to others that did it first.

As I rode the MTR from Po Lam to Tsing Yi this morning, I ponder this reality. How the city of Hong Kong had the delayed development that allowed for an infrastructure to be planned and built with efficiency in mind.

Certainly, any infrastructure was build with efficiency in mind, yet, what the secondary layer of efficiency, one that considers "what if this system was build with the larger scope of the city in mind?" simply because Hong Kong had a general developed city in existence prior to the development of the train system.

Take CTA for example, the train system in Chicago. It was named "The Loop" for it was only designed with the small framework of looping within the small-scope of downtown back in the early 20th century. Large parts of what we now consider part of the city, where retail and commercial may thrive where events may be, did not exist at the time when The Loop was established. The later transit system was build concurrently to the expansion of the city system throughout the 20th century. And arguably, the efficiency of the CTA compared to the MTR is simply lacking.

Beyond the geographic and physical design of the transit system, Hong Kong also made operating changes as well, making the transit system a huge commercial opportunity, but arguably to a fault.

Where I am fond of the CTA is that it is a public commute which is supposed to allow for Chicagoans the opportunity to get home. The blue and red line runs 24 hours. The cost is relatively affordable, nor does it fluctuate by distance, where as the MTR is a commerical system beast. The MTR company serves as the public transit for the masses, yet, it benefits hugely by having developed many entertainment, residential complexes, conveniently at their stations. This making it a highly insulated operation. You take their trains to their malls to spend at their stores. It is quite remarkable from a business standpoint. But it certainly begs the question of monopoly.

This has been the great question I've been dancing with since my return home. This observation of seeing my family accepting their simple role of being a cog in the machine, asking me to do the same. Appreciating the benefits of simply allowing a small few conglomerates to take all our earnings, but receiving their prizes of efficiency and ease. Thoughtless, but comfortable. Versus the fighting hands of the American landscape, one that demands for me to fight for what's mind, yet, when I do, it truly is, sincerely and genuinely mine. I still battle in my soul which idea befits me, befits this world, befits all of us?

Even more importantly is which do I trust more? The one that promises it'll take care of me, or one that blatantly says I'm on my own?