Why India Doesn’t Build Skyscrapers 

@@Sathish_12 he is talking about Indian workers and engineers.

That's funny

sheesh 💀💀

Bangladesh as well

Lol...all the labours ran away from India ...but still they manage to build small huts by low skilled personz

Yes, they're the biggest enemies of skyscraper

that's good for hyderabad but why does this city has no fsi why the exception ?

Correct

Exactly world towers 442m , threesixty west 360 360m, india tower 700m, All below 280m or end up like india tower canceled

@@saitushar6508 airport is far from the main city

You forgot Noida and gurgao

​@@Shrekkkk72 I think they can be built in South Bangalore away from HAL.

@@advocatevinaypandey1922 that's just delhi, noida and gurgaon is just delhi

@@XenithForPm are you illiterate, i mean a kid also know that it is NCR (National capital region) they(gov) made it to remove the crowd not to acquire land Noida belongs to up all it's tax collection is send to Lucknow to distribute in proper schemes and work and same with gurgaon too which is the part of haryana

Noida does have India's second tallest building though (Supernova Spira). It stands at a whopping 300 meters! @@XenithForPm

This is not a problem. Not building skyscrapers is not a problem holy shit.

skycrapers doesn't reflect development, indians shouldn't fall for these traps

@@reubennelson4086 B1M loves skycrapers but they should also tell about the bad side of it

@@reubennelson4086 in 2100 india will lose their jugle because your country always built horizontal

@@reubennelson4086 It is a problem, horizontal development has been devastating for the environment.

FSIs are the biggest reason. Indian cities have the worst FSI - floor space index regulations in the world

FSI is a universal issue. Like a city without an airport would still have no skyscrapers with this FSI

No, it has very little to do with it. Almost all major cities have airports, and these restrict the height of towers. But India is unique.

With how hot it gets in India, it's probably a good thing they don't have a lot of skyscrapers because they would take a ton of energy to cool when certain cities in India getting over 100° F (37° C). On top of that the power outages would be a nightmare.

@@carstarsarstenstesenn The amount you pay for higher rents due to low FSIs can easily be used to pay for air conditioning. See Dubai.

Your space program is amazing though - so don't think India is without world prestige :D

@@JohnnyWednesday thanks man. Soon India's private rocket is going to launch by Skyroot Aerospace 🤗

Because India is a dirty poor country. Look at your gdp per capita

@@JohnnyWednesday Didn't knew it was known outside India.

@@Sarah-lk8ye Are you from India too?

An update here by an Indian, even though we don't have a lot of skyscrapers, it is starting to rise now people are starting to live in apartments owning a flat ik it's very sad we don't have a lot of them 😞😢

It has more space not like Indonesia

Skyscrapers are not good for high population

@@goncalodias6402 Then do you have any better alternative to it?

@@aiswaryabersan7983 Indonesia land area is about 2/3 of India while the population is about 1/5. And also similar economy level, so....

How much fine?

@@itsmanasK sorry for late reply, i don't remember exactly because it was back in 2014

Is your residential house a skyscraper?

@@thefreemonk6938 even residential houses have guidelines

Which city or town my dear ?

Obviously you're not gonna build next to the airport. NYC has 3 airports and very tall buildings

You don't have other places to build...Why only near Airport..?

@@Ok....- Its because the land space far from the airport is already crowded.....also the new part of the city is closer to the airport because again land space was available........

​@@Ok....- because that's the only place where some worthwhile economic activity occurs in Kolkata aka the Detroit of India

Indian cities have the worst FSI - floor space index regulations in the world

Japan has skyscrapers. Its possible to build earthquake proof skyscrapers

@@prabuddhaghosh7022 Fun fact Mumbai has more skyscrappers than Tokyo by a large margin.

@@prabuddhaghosh7022 shillong and Japan are considerably different on the basis of terrain.

@@death_parade it a hill station it's not like Japan it's mostly plains

@@daff...odils29 I was comparing Mumbai and Tokyo, not Shillong and Japan.

That's going to destroy their environment.

@@AndrewManook it is not because the environment is already destroyed over there.

@@AndrewManook You think urban sprawl is good for the environment?

@@sohankopparapu5206 That's literally what I'm saying, horizontal expansion is the worth form of urban sprawl.

@@AndrewManook OK , mike tython. You don't like skyscrapers neither regular homes. What's the plan then?

Japan: left the continent

i think he meant by ppp

Gdp per Capita India still in poverty

With 1.5 billion people even flexing the 2nd spot is cringe worthy 🤣🖕🤡

I was expecting totally different ending to "something for them in return".

@@prathneo 😭

True

@@ineed2ventnow then u have to compare size of othe cities with mumbai... Mumbai is smaller than any city with similar population.

@@nikhilreddypaladugu621 why does navi mumbai not have skyscrapers then ? their upcoming airport is a few km's south the city and nowhere close to the main city center

Sky is literally free real estate

@@TheRishijoesanu the cost is the safely build them

@@TheAmericanCatholic The cost of not having skyscrapers is high rents

She misses out one part. The state of Maharashtra actually does not want growth in Mumbai. Reason being the higher you earn, you find Mumbai too shitty and just take your wealth and leave. This results in potential businesses moving to other states, especially neighboring Gujarat. In fact, there have been several methods to deindustrialize Mumbai. One has been to penalize industries which try to setup offices inside Mumbai. This has sort of led offices to move to Navi/New Mumbai. However, this has not been enough and Maharashtra has been promoting industries in Pune etc to decouple the dependency on Mumbai.

Fun fact a top hat was also called a skyscraper. Skyscraper is just ment to say anything thin and tall so it can be a hat a house or a horse yes I said it a horse.

Even in rural areas of bihar that is considered to be the backward state in india, we get around 20 and more hours of electricity

@@hke.4475 You are from Pakistan, abdul.

@@hke.4475 Which district of Bihar? Can you tell us?

@@hke.4475 lol wahi rehna , dusri states mai aaker gandagi mat failana ..!

​@@manik6621 The guy is a por-kistani

obsession with "skylines"

For India it is totally strange for not having skyscrapers. I live here and I can tell you cities keep expanding outwards and that has a terrible impact on pollution, more fuel usage, worse work life balance, income inequality, etc. Never underestimate how a tiny forced restriction can have much more adverse ripple effects in people's lives.

@@ItsMeChillTyme those problems can be fixed without skyscrapers. A bunch of 5 story apartments would be better and more affordable than any rich high rise condo. They dont do shit for new york for example.

That's because it is. Skyscrapers allow people to concentrate in an area, so that businesses get a great range of potential workers. They are a driver of growth.

@@Chasipants You are so ignorant of the scale of population here, it is unbelieveable. Load up New Delhi on street view (not old delhi which is just Delhi) and all you see it 5+ storied apartments stacked up and the population is still dense. The rich just move into larger and more luxurious apartments with more services. Now this sprawl has gobbled up 3 cities with it. I'm all with the whole skycrappers sentiment but this isn't some hyper developed scandinavian nation we're talking about.

Wish some of that would spread south to Surat as well...

yup PRIME MINISTER OF GUJARAT has done a lot...for GUJARAT

@@sid2372 choke on burnol monke

Ahmedabad has skyscrapers m

@@sid2372 ya he gives free money to everyone in gujarat. Come to gujarat you can also get 500 700 crores free😜

exactly i don't think indians will follow the east asian style of growth people here don't like living in buildings unless they have no other option

@@shukracharya_ What do they live in if not buildings? Caves?

@@LutraLovegood lol india hae one of tye highest land ownership rates in the world higher percentage of indians have their own houses then even American or brits

@@shukracharya_ Exactly.. indians deserve clay houses.. and tuktuks and low income..

@@LutraLovegood you ever heard of a house?

If the green space is off limits to the public though, than i'd prefer it just stay as housing

no people will not swich to building people here have preference to buy a plot and build houses then live in tall buildings

@@shukracharya_ in foreign countries poor people live in apartments. In india rich people live in apartments

@@M3ganwillslay only upper middle class but everyone has preference for a house instead of apartments the ones living in tall buildings have no other choice and mostly importantly we have so much flad lands at cheaper rates why would i live in an in a building when i can live in a comfortable single story house?

@@M3ganwillslay and don't forget india have one of the highest house and land ownership rates in the world literally everyone has land

Then why can Hong Kong or Singapore manage high density? Also, it’s about units per floor. A skyscraper with just 4 flats per floor will have a much lower density than a Soviet block. The congestion from skyscrapers can be mitigated by building more public transit and restricting cars from road’s around.

@@dex6316 That's just reconfirming how useless it is to pump heaps of money into tall slender skyscrapers. They barely increase density unless built very close to each other à la Hong Kong compared to bigger blockier mid-rises. Just a decadent dick-measuring contest. Paris has an extremely dense center which is liveable and allows functions to mix on the ground. Vertically functions will never mix to the same degree despite some recent efforts. This isolates people high into the air and in their cars, removing all the random encounters that make a community. We're still repeating often disproven modernist dogma, just with a slightly more capitalist touch.

Yup, and tackling a 1.5 billion population with skyscrapers (that require steel), they would need 1000x the skyscrapers of China. This channel got it backwards, other countries are in desperate need of medium density.

I do not believe in the concept of skyscrapers. Cities which have no skycrapers are more prettier, more managed and more livelier.

@@badmintonscroll Maybe this is true in Europe, but in India most cities are dirty and overcrowded. A skyscraper would let you breathe uncontaminated air, at least

Sir India doesn't have problem of infra as it built more highways than even china and US in last 5 yrs under PM Modi and even more than expressways built in last 75 yrs but westerners don't come to India and show that

Brazil was rich back in days and reached its peak and could build the infrastructure it enjoys now, not on the level of countries such as USA, Canada or EU but good in certain ways but india has a long way to go and just recently it has begun its infrastructure boom

@@melroyreus3417 yes I do agree with you that India's infrastructure boom just began from 2016....but the speed is mind blowing.... In terms of highway... Railway... India is growing... So does it's gdp.... I bet in 2030 India's gdp would be around 8 to 9 trillion dollars and it has to do nothing with skyscrapers

@@lovemsoni1844 US and other developed countries tend to have less infras proj such as those you have mentioned bec they tend to focus on renovations and upgrades rather than building new ones. Some of their highways are in-fact being decommissioned to make way for more parks and spaces. China has even implemented new policy on building skycrappers to limit it. India right now is doing what it should have been done long time ago. Infras proj for the people since it is heavily populated and poised to become the most populated country in the world. Indians should have been demanding better public service and infras projects to their govt instead of waiting for them to act. And glad to see that their govt is finally doing something. And it is better than doing nothing at all when it comes to infras projects.

Brazil have oil so they can build whatever they want

What accurate facts? Entire video is full of lies. Tell this m0r0n to open the wiki for tallest buildings in Mumbai.

We are still lower income country.

Probably painted when new but just never maintained

I don't think you know the memes, they use every square inch of space possible, the traffic is crazy. Only on some roads they actually follow the painted lanes. To this point I still can't understand why India's infactracture can't look normal. Why the roads are always so dirty and break easily, the highways have people walking everywhere.

Because it is not of most importance.

Average income is $2 a day...

Not more than Japan

@@kor2597 i know but that's how indian government take precautions and i don't support it. Accommodating this huge population we need the concrete jungle

Nah not the right reason

The real reason is Indian govt and it’s citizens don’t have a vision to show their country as a superpower economy.. that’s why they are still $2500 per capita..

Skyscraper are economic disaster

Bro LA is leagues ahead any Indian city, We have many problems here

No the biggest reason is FSI. Indian cities have the worst FSI - floor space index regulations in the world

@@TheRishijoesanu hmm vo bi ha

@@TheRishijoesanu main reason is godrej and other charitable trust and there is no tax on them that's why there is high price in indian cities of land we need wealth tax on them. Watch videos of Right to recall group on wealth tax and godrej.

@@sharadjain2463 How is Godrej raising the rents. The reason for high rents in Mumbai is well established in urban economics literature, it's high FSI/FAR regulations as the video says. India has a lot of people but with limited purchasing power. Sky is literally free real estate

@@namankulshrestha5373 Not vo bhi hain. That's the primary and the biggest reason.

You mean Very racist

Even I'm from Nashik, but saying you haven't witnessed ANY power cut is completely false. I live on Gangapur Road, one of the posh localities of Nashik, but the power goes off at least twice in a week. Yes it's for 2-3 minutes only, but the thing is it does. It also goes off in the summer on several Saturdays when they have scheduled maintenance of wires. It also goes off in the monsoon when there are heavy rains, and sometimes it takes 8-10 hrs for them to fix it when there are heavy thunderstorms. The biggest problem in India is that we don't have underground cables, so any fluctuation in the weather causes power shut down!!

May be because that's a big city and it happens with poor people who lives in villages coz I face power cut every day during summer that too sometimes for 2-4 hours and also everytime it rains sone time for whole night the electricity is gone and guess what my own state produce electricity

Singapore is one city that is doing mixed cities the right way.. you should check out their master plan

Exactly!

@@roryp7730 still its a car centric city and plus many corporate goes there Imo i think islamic and European town gets the town or city design right, they do have modern city but those failed to beat the traditional beauty at tourism

@@fbyi2940 how is singapore a car centric city? btw eastern asia has the best urban design, much better than europe

I like the landscape cities

@Zaydan Naufal tapi nyatanya emang gitu kkop itu bisa di atasi dengan bayar pake uang 💰

@Zaydan Naufal All great points, especially about the archaic land law and public housing. Honestly major land law reform should have been done years ago lol. Now that I think about it, Yogyakarta is similar to Bali in that the heights of urban buildings there are roughly the same throughout the metro area but it's mostly low density. IMO Sumatran cities are the closest you could have to Europan cities in terms of building forms (not necessarily the function tho). I feel like Medan with its shophouses-lined downtown and grid street pattern has the potential to be more walkable than say, Surabaya where the skyscrapers are clustered in random areas and are built next to low density landed houses. Even smaller cities like Selatpanjang has a pretty dense downtown lined with shophouses. Definitely more walkable than a suburb development with the same population in Jabodetabek. Re: parking lots, it's definitely not in the level of North America but Jakarta CBD still has more than I'd expected for a downtown tbh (even when compared to more walkable American downtowns). I lived in Portland, OR and Boston, MA for several years and there are essentially no surface parking in their downtowns except curb parking along narrow streets. It's definitely not the case in Jakarta CBD, where surface parking lot (illegal or not) still exist. Parking scarcity is a good thing, because it will deter people from actually driving into the downtown and causing traffic jam. Of course, this will only work if there are viable alternatives to driving or more affordable housing in or near the downtown.

makanya ibu kota di pindah, karna Jakarta dari awal konsepnya ngawur bahkan dari era Soekarno mau di pindah tapi keburu lengser sampe akhirnya cuma Jokowi yg berani pindahin ibu kota. gw cuma berharap di Nusantara penataannya lebih tertata rapi, dan harus di bangun banyak gedung apartemen tinggi biar orang2 tinggal di situ, biar gak ada tempat yg ada padat penduduk.

@Zaydan Naufal iya gw tau tapi dengan banyaknya gedung apartemen tinggi bisa menampung banyak orang tinggal di sana dari pada gak ada tempat terus orang2 bangun pemukiman sembarangan malah jadi tempat padat penduduk lagi gak beda jauh sama Jakarta. kalo untuk perumahan mending dikit aja meminimalisir penggunaan lahan yg berlebihan biar lebih banyak lahan terbuka buat resapan air. Istana Presiden aneh dari mana ? gw malah suka desainnya, justru kalo Istananya udah jadi sesuai desainnya itu bakal jadi bangunan ikonik, toh filososinya desainnya bagus dari bentuk Garuda terus di samping ada 3 pilar keatas mirip rumah adat padang, desain ini belum pernah di pake di seluruh dunia ini bisa ini jadi gebrakan dan jadi simbol bangunan ikonik.

@Zaydan Naufal di mana2 yg namanya bangunan gak ada yg ramah lingkungan, lu bangun rumah itu aja udah rusak lingkungan karna rumah lu tutupin tanah buat resap air. apapun selama ini gw selalu dukung rencana Nusantara ini, semuanya pasti udah di pikirin dulu dari segi aspek dan penataannya. justru ngapain bangun gedung sedang kalo bisa sekalian gedung tinggi ? toh gedung tinggi bisa memaksimalkan lahan. yakin Nusantara gak bakal sepadat Jakarta ? ini baru awal kita harus antisipasi jangan sampe mengulangi kesalahan kayak di Jakarta. Nusantara ini untuk permanen jangka panjang karna Kalimantan ini tempat yg strategis tepat di tengah2 Indonesia, kalo mau pindah ibu kota lagi kedepannya minimal harus 100 tahun lagi gak bisa asal2an.

Europe and Japan enjoy their extreme density without going ridiculously high.

@@cheshirster They don't have big populations, especially europe, also Japan is pretty high and they would have gone higher if not for earthquakes.

​@@cheshirsterEurope's population density only exists because how of how old their cities are. When people designed Paris, it wasn't with two lane roads for cars in mind. So the city is chock full of narrow one ways, hence the ratio of built up area to road area is very high. But when people do urban planning now, nobody's gonna create a city made purely of narrow one ways. And if you take the Paris model and lay it over a city with post-car road design, the density will decrease substantially.

so true...

That's an important point, hardly anyone says it.

Mumbai is full of different cultures and political background people, so complexities.. As studied says more than half of towers are vacant, therefore, it's better make office spaces residential tower are just investments and no affordable housing possible as of high rise- land prices are skyrocketing and slums or people living there couldnt afford to shift in it.

It’s hard to control how many people get to live in a place!

India needs a Hukou system

Really the population density issue is less due to tall buildings and more due to slums built in encroached land which the government doesn't have control over.

Patna has higher FSI?

@@samindr5703 yes patna ka FSI 3.5 hai

Correction, those cities do not really have that many skyscrapers. Europe generally builds very less skyscrapers, might look like a lot coz they are 20-30 concentrated in just one location. This channel has a video on it i think.

@@kracks9852 uh , european cities have it means they have it .

The difference is that in Brazil the actual demand for housing and office space is relatively low

@@FOLIPE well, the demand for anything anywhere will be "relatively low" compared to India. Even when it's a giant country with a giant economy, like Brazil

Yeah, I would rather get a large plot than living so close to other people. It’s better for privacy.

nah

@@VMRDY yeah but people like me have other reasons like fear of heights and fear of buliding collapsing 😹😹

@@hiiiiir what if earthquake of big magnitude shake the building all? 🙄 privacy is also a main issue for me especially in nights. 😋 neighbors will stare at you if you bring any girl and bingo, you'll be boycott from that society.

@@rohitsharma66 Ask Japan, their skyscrapers are doing fine despite very regular earthquakes.

It's India, we have many pagodas here

Prices are high for skyscrapers in our country precisely because there aren’t enough of them. The ones that do get built therefore are built to cater to the rich otherwise the builder’s ROI would be low.

So how did chinaa become capable of doing it?? Ans : hard work and hard work

@@-bigChungusVerified And a real estate bubble in which 60% of their economy is tied to the housing market.

@@mvalthegamer2450 Even America faces crisis every now and then and India faces a lot of economic crises more often than America 🇺🇸 or cheen 🇨🇳..

heard of south bombay, connaught place in delhi and MG road in bangalore? yep those are skyscraper-filled downtowns in india

That is true. But I still don't see why you would want to limit hight. It forces up the prices, limits progress and encourages sprawl. Unless you wana go the communist way of building alot of cheap identical buildings where demand are low and hope it will fix future needs less restrictions are the way to go in a capitalist society.

Well not like poor people can afford big lands

@@P4hko For India even that's a good Idea, Atleast we can get rid of our conjusted and unplanned cities.

Well thats typically true in most places, its totally possible to build affordable housing in sky scrapers as well, see many cities in China.

@@nickskier1 China is an infrastructure FRAUD.

Lodha The Park?

@@Xrginld17X All I see is the racecourse, ocean and the world most expensive residential tower of a billionaire. But can’t expect much from a Chinese shill, still eating bats?

@@Xrginld17X World's largest slum is In Africa. Also Dharavi is an Area which is both Industrial as well as Residential. Dharavi Produces an output of 1 Billion USD yet it's called a Slum.

@@Xrginld17X guess ur still lurking in the dark ages!🙄

@@maisakurajima9194 1 billion for that much people is less output.

Manhattan has some incredibly narrow streets and incredibly tall buildings...

@@prasad530 Manhattan also smells worse than Calcutta.

What's the point of getting ownership of a piece of land 50 km away from the main city? After you moved to the city from a smaller town 700 km away just because you wanted to be close to the economic opportunities? You squander away your life commuting.

I live in Mexico City, and I have never seen a plot of land lose value over time. You better own your space.

It is a paramount. They are smart.

Yeah but india isn’t developed

If you build more residential space the housing becomes cheaper.

Dude just speaking, Averagely the skyline of a city talks a lot about the economy of a certain region, Many European cities have dedicated regions only where you can build sky scrapers, Canary lane of UK, La Defans of France to name a few

@@joydeepsarkar3033 yes

Bullsh1t ,do you assume the skyscrapers only for residential,the place where I live 80% of them are Hotel and Officce. Just few of them are residential I.e Flat/condo. Skyscrapers nowadays are symbolic as a rich, if you go to Singapore and see all the modern skyscrapers you know the place are super rich but they are,go to Kuala Lumpur and Jakarta still has the same impression,but when you go to Mumbai the vibe about super rich place aren’t appears,why? The place aren’t like new ,just few of the skyscrapers are brand new . Frankly speaking Mumbai aren’t first class city.. Mumbai is a capital financial of India ,India is fast growing economy,but the present doesn’t seem so. There are something off.

Even without all that Mumbai already has the 5th largest number of skyscrapers in the world. It will overtake Dubai and New York to become 3rd largest in world within few years given the number of skyscrapers now under construction in all three cities.

You find glass towers appealing?

@@Game_Hero they are much better to look at than some simple ugly residential concrete tower

@@bush.nawaz.t8385 They are also more energy-intensive to heat/cool and maintain. You can definitely have well-designed concrete skyscrapers - see the Empire State Building.

Not really true? Where are the commercial skyscrapers in Bangalore apart from the handful in and around UB city? It's mostly just residential tall buildings and offices are tech parks with 10 storey buildings in most of the city.

I think you confused Gachibowli in Hyderabad with Bangalore. Except UB city bengaluru got none like you've mentioned

are you trying to suggest that India has better metro system than China? 🥴

You know monorail is a failure ryt?

@@LaowaiDaveJCP no. But definitely bigger than most Asian countries. Except maybe china, Japan ,SK

@@infinix2003 monorail is failure not metro rail

@@indicraft1775yeah that's what i said.

Actually sprawling roads made for cars increase traffic problem even more.

Paris and London both allow high-rise buildings in certain areas - but away from their historic centres.

i lived in frankfurt, germany for some years. it is very upsetting that only the super rich elite can lend or buy some apartments in the high rise buildings, there is class segregation. the high rise places are owned by banks or investment companies and super rich. the once wonderful city areas which were full of lively neighbourhoods and historical buildings were destructed to build high rise apartments and they became ghost towns when they build the high rises there and the central station is not far away, which means street criminals have taken over power and sex industry grew fast, just like the drug industry there. you can not walk there safely even in daylight. the high rise is coslty to maintain, it is bad for children who have no ability to go out and play, mothers can not look out for their kids from windows, the anonymous neighbours do not help, there is no community sense, crimes will not be reported, not even a police will be called etc. european cities have learned from the negativ sides of high rise skyscrapers build in other countries and limit to build those in europe. even china banned building high rise because they had to make their own experience how costly and uneffective they are.

This is true.

The govt can’t afford to build high rise showpiece buildings bcz the money is distributed for freebies in india but for development in cheen..

@@-bigChungusVerified building are never built by government like china. Everything here is private .

@@santhoshv3028 Everything in cheen is owned by the communist party.. so they can decide where to build and they don’t need to appease the mass by freebie policies.. india 🇮🇳 is land of politics.. where will development come from?!

@@-bigChungusVerified that's what I said. Government can't build anything here easily like china.

@@santhoshv3028 If Indian leaders had the whillpowrt they could have been better than America..

This video is nonsense. Mumbai is the city with the 5th highest number of skyscrapers in the world. And at current pace, it will dethrone Dubai and New York to get the third highest number of skyscrapers in the world within next 5-6 years. Open the fcuking Wikipedia instead of watching these nonsense videos from liars.

Fully agree. These high rise buildings look so depressing. Can't even imagine living in one of these.

It's the LIC Building in Chennai which was India's first Skyscrapper at 15 floors and was the tallest building in India till 1961 when Mumbai's First skyscrapper, Usha Kiran Building was completed

Skyscrapers only start above 150m

The govt can’t afford to build high rise showpiece buildings bcz the money is distributed for freebies in india but for development in cheen..

@@-bigChungusVerified so nowadays skycrapers=development, wow urban planning of 2022 in a nutshell😂 trust me you can't afford anything in those skycrapers

I think the idea is to reduce the housing costs, which doesn't necessarily mean that a majority of people will be able to afford it but it still would impact the overall affordability. Also in case of New York, imagine the extent of the housing crisis if there were less overall floor space or if the number of skycrapers were in double digits. My point is building higher would not necessarily "solve" the housing crisis but it would definitely make a positive impact. However I do agree with your other points related to overall congestion in the city.

2.4 billion? There are only 1.5 billion people in India. A billion equals to 100 crores!!!

@@llawliet8969 8 million people use it everyday. 8 million × 300 working days = 2.4 billion passengers in a year.

Banglore can't even imagine

But it creates lots of traffic and pollution.

That clearly doesn't happen. Mumbai is a case in point. Economic activity is concentrated in a few places and people have to commute for hours back and forth to access these places. A very small percentage of Mumbaikars live where they work.

Yeah I have the same opinion . I'm glad somebody else also thinks like me . I was like i'm the only one

@@KindellArmstrong manageable

@@hiiiiir Greenpeace South Asia's Analysis from 2021 ranks Mumbai as the fifth most polluted in the world - with the highest fatalities (25,000) attributable to air pollution - and Delhi as the most contaminated megacity in India.Oct 23, 2022

Indeed

I admire Chicago's skyline much more than Manhattan or even Dubai. It's just so iconic.

Lol...

isn't Chicago the crime capital of the US, of course it has much competition

Where

In India...its a fked up system, our cities just grow outwards not vertically...leading to need to build more roads, no uniform coverage of public transportation and more vehicles on the roads...

Those cities have very high FSIs. Mumbai doesn't

Sky is literally free real estate

India 🇮🇳 doesn’t want to become developed.. that’s why india is still living in clay houses and running tuktuks

Sky is free real estate and India is a poor country. India needs skyscrapers

This video is nonsense. Mumbai is the city with the 5th highest number of skyscrapers in the world. And at current pace, it will dethrone Dubai and New York to get the third highest number of skyscrapers in the world within next 5-6 years. Open the fcuking Wikipedia instead of watching these nonsense videos from liars.

how?

Completely different, especially after 2040 ❤️🌃

I think best buildings will come in the business district of Mumbai's Eastern Waterfront.

@@SinghSabha22 2040? LOL. Mumbai is already ranked 5th in the world in terms of number of skyscrapers. In just next few years it will reach 3rd rank ahead of Dubai and New York. Mumbai won't have Hypertalls like Burj Khalifa, but will have enough supertalls and skyscrapers. That too before 2030.

@@death_parade yes i agreed

@@death_parade The cities with the most skyscrapers in 2023 1-Hongkong 2- Shenzhen 3- New York 4- Dubai 5- Guangzhou 6- Shanghai 7- Kuala Lumpur 8- Chongqing 9- Tokyo 10- Wuhan Mumbai's place at 18th with 114 total skyscrapers..

Thought the same thing

Japan's economy was larger in 1995 than it is today. India is the 2nd largest economy in Asia by GDP (PPP).

@@AnonymousReader-er4eg Japan still has a higher gdp

They are overleveraged by trillions of USD in the derivatives market.

@@hydras4949 India's closing in on it. I think 3-4 more years.