Unlike any city in India, Shanghai seems to be livable for the average citizen; you can actually walk the streets, which you cannot in any Indian city; its riches seem to have been shared with the people. Roads, sidewalks, gardens, public art and mass transport; they have it all in spades; they also have preserved and enhanced their colonial heritage. “Inclusive growth” is not a slogan here; it’s real.
不像印度的任何一个城市，上海对普通市民来说是宜居的，你确确实实可以走在那些路上，在印度的任何城市都不可想象。这里的富人似乎在与普通人分享，道路，人行道，公园，公共艺术，交通。上海也保留了殖民时期的遗迹，“包容发展”在这里不仅仅是口号，它是实实在在的。In the most superficial assessment, if one is to compare to Shanghai to Bombay (and frankly, there’s no comparison), it is clear that Shanghai is in a totally different league, comparable to Paris. Duh! It is called Paris of the East.
中国的“山寨”手机大量出口印度
如果一个人比较上海和孟买(坦率的讲，根本没可比性)，显而易见的，上海在完全不同的集团，它跟巴黎在一个档次，它被称为东方的巴黎。(巴黎变成西方的上海，我们就牛了)
Shanghai has almost 24 million people compared to Bombay’s 21 million. There can be no question that life seems to be hugely better in the Chinese city. These comparisons are impressionist, I grant you. There’s no mistaking, however, the dignity of common people and the preponderance of public goods. If Bombay is part of a democracy (and this is dubious, given the thugs of the Shiv Sena) and Shanghai of an authoritarian system, then without any survey or anything, just looking at the ground reality, I’d rather as an ordinary citizen be living in Shanghai.
开挂的印度人
上海2千4百万人口，孟买2千1百万 .毫无疑问，上海的生活优质的多，我承认这个比较完全基于直观印象。然而不会错的，普通人的尊严和公共设施的数量说明一切。就算孟买是皿煮的一部分(鉴于有像Shiv Sena 这样的暴徒，这点也是勉勉强强)，而上海是集权体制，不需调查，只看看基本现实，我愿作为普通人生活在上海。
In the end, two things stood out. One, the Chinese political system, opaque though it is, seems to throw up decisive leaders, committed to enhancing the public interest. Two, the life of citizens seems to be light years ahead of the daily hassles, slum culture and criminal violence in Indian cities.最后想说2点：1 中国政体虽然不透明，但貌似提供了强有力的领导人，为提供公共利益而努力; 2. 市民的生活比吵吵闹闹，充斥着贫民窟和暴力犯罪的印度城市好上几万倍。
