--- author: TVO Today date: '2026-03-24' guest: '' layout: post.njk source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSFph4AgyVo speaker: TVO Today tags: - urban-planning - city-governance - infrastructure-deficit - economic-policy - political-interference title: 多伦多困境与复兴之路：《拯救多伦多》专家访谈 summary: 本期访谈聚焦多伦多当前面临的严峻挑战，包括基础设施赤字、生活成本高昂及治理失灵等问题。专家安妮·戈尔登和肯·格林伯格在《拯救多伦多》一书中，呼吁城市进行深刻变革。访谈深入探讨了城市规划、政府干预以及外部政治经济环境（如美国政策）对多伦多的影响。尽管挑战重重，专家们仍强调多伦多拥有解决问题的潜力和成功案例，并呼吁加强城市自治和跨部门合作，以实现城市的可持续发展与复兴。 insight: '' draft: true series: '' category: politics-society area: society-thinking project: [] people: [] companies_orgs: [] products_models: [] media_books: - Saving Toronto status: evergreen --- ### 多伦多困境初探 **Host**: 多伦多正面临一系列严峻的挑战，这些挑战由来已久。但专家表示，现在改变航向、重振这座城市仍为时不晚。安妮·戈尔登是一位公共政策分析师，也是即将出版的《拯救多伦多：十位城市建设者讲述如何去做》一书的联合编辑。联合编辑肯·格林伯格是一位城市设计师，也是格林伯格咨询公司的负责人。非常高兴能请到你们二位，肯，很高兴你来到演播室，也欢迎你在线参与。我将从你开始，肯。你们的书以“多伦多陷入困境”这句话开篇。多伦多是否已不再是一个正常运转的城市？
Original English **Host**: Toronto is facing a long list of challenges and those challenges go back way back. But experts say it's not too late to change course and revitalize the city. And Golden is a public policy analyst and co-editor of the upcoming book Saving Toronto ten City Builders Tell Us How. And co-editor Ken Greenberg is an urban designer and principal at Greenberg Consultants. Great to have you both, Ken. Great to have you here in studio, and great to have you on the line. And I'm going to start with you. Your book opens with the line Toronto is in trouble. Is Toronto no longer a city that works?
**Ken Greenberg**: 它确实陷入了困境。你知道，我们曾经被视为“由瑞士人经营的纽约”，而现在，人们认为我们是这样一个城市：你哪里也去不了，在这里无法负担生活，一切似乎都在崩溃。当然，这是一种过度概括，但这座城市确实面临着巨大的问题——**基础设施**，基础设施赤字。当我们写这本书时，估计的赤字约为 440 亿至 450 亿美元。我注意到 FCM 现在将其列为超过 600 亿美元。所以，你看到的是对生产力的影响，对社会成本的影响。多伦多面临着许多挑战。我们写这本书是作为一个“警钟”，因为我们知道我们可以做得更好。我们认为我们有答案，这本书旨在让人们意识到我们需要改变方向。
Original English >> It is in trouble. It's you know, we used to be seen as a kind of New York run by the Swiss, and now we're seen as a city that. You can't get anywhere that you want to get to. You can't afford to live here. And everything seems to be breaking down. Now, of course, that's an overgeneralisation, but it is a city that's got huge problems infrastructure, the infrastructure deficit. When we wrote the book, it was around 44 to $45 billion estimated. I noticed that FCM now puts it over 60 billion. So you're looking at impact on productivity. You're looking at social costs. So there are a lot of challenges in Toronto. We wrote the book as a wake up call because we know that we can do better. We have the answers, we think, and this book is intended to get people to realize we need to change our direction.
### 城市作为文化堡垒与外部挑战 **Host**: 好的。那么，我想读一段书中引言的宣传语。你们二位写道：“在充满巨大不确定性的时代，当事物偏离轨道时，城市是文化、身份和创新的基本载体。是信念得以维系、精神得以点燃、我们珍视的价值观得以保存的地方。我们相信，在当前这个特殊的艰难时期发生的某些事件，只会加剧我们正在识别的挑战，并迫切需要解决方案。多伦多作为一个城市和城市区域的成功变得更加重要。它作为加拿大独特性的堡垒。我们的城市如何发展，国家就如何发展。” 肯，你具体指的是哪些挑战？
Original English >> All right. With that, I want to read a blurb from the book's introduction. You both write in times of great uncertainty when things go awry. Cities are the fundamental repositories of culture, identity and innovation. Places where faith is kept, where spirit is kindled, and where values that we cherished are preserved. It is our belief that certain events in this particular troubled time have only upped the ante around the challenges we are identifying, and the urgent need for solutions. The success of Toronto as a city and city region becomes even more important. As a bulwark of Canadian distinctiveness. As our cities go, so goes the nation. Ken, what specific challenges are you talking about here?
**Ken Greenberg**: 确实，我们与美国的状况显著加剧了挑战。我们的生活方式，以及多伦多所代表的一切，都面临着挑战。就拿我们的基本口号“**多元化是我们的力量**”来说。我们可能面临着所有我们经历的困难，而且这些困难是真实的。我们生活在一个没有反移民政党的国家，而每个欧洲国家都有。而美国无疑正在被一个反移民政党治理。我们生活在一个拥有**全民医保**的体系中，我们正努力为全体人民提供公共教育。我们以惊人的速度接纳移民，甚至可能过多。现在我们正试图稍微放缓这一进程。但我们面临着挑战。在某种意义上，我们是对世界其他许多地方，尤其是边境以南地区正在发生的事情的“抵抗”。鉴于安妮提到的那些问题，而且我们都相信，经过十年的努力，我们最初十年前就已完成了相关工作，我们认为现在是进行基本检查的好时机，看看我们身在何处，能做什么，如何应对挑战，以及如何利用我们的人力资本、资源、才华和创造力。所以，这本书描绘了一幅我们现状的严峻图景，但同时它也旨在激励人心。
Original English >> Well, the ante has been upped by the situation we find ourselves in with the US, for sure. And there is a challenge to our way of life, to everything that Toronto represents. So just take our basic slogan, diversity is our strength. We are probably with all of the difficulties that we experience and they're real. We're living in a country that doesn't have an anti-immigrant party, which every European country does. And certainly the US is being governed by an anti-immigrant party. We are living in a system where we have universal health care, where we are trying to provide education, public education for the whole population. We're absorbing people at an astonishing rate, perhaps even too much. And now we're trying to pull back on that a little bit. But we have a challenge. We are the resistance, in a sense, to what's happening in many other parts of the world, particularly south of the border. And given the problems that Anne has cited, and we both believe that we came to after ten years. We had done the course originally ten years ago, we thought this would really be an opportune time to do a basic check to see where we are and what we can do, and how we respond to the challenge, and how can we draw on our human capital, on the resources that we have, on our talent, on our ingenuity. So the book paints a dire picture of where we are, and at the same time is meant to inspire.
### 城市发展困境的根源与省府干预 **Host**: 好的。您谈到了人力资本。所以我必须问这个问题，因为我们的观众不仅在多伦多市，在我们省的每个角落都有观众。所以，我必须问，为什么**多伦多以外**的人们应该关心这座城市的困境？
Original English >> Okay. You talk about human capital. So I have to I have to ask this because our viewers are not just here in the city of Toronto. We have viewers in every corner of this province. So and I have to ask, why should people outside of Toronto be concerned about the city's struggles?
**Ken Greenberg**: 对此我将给出两点回答。首先，从经济上讲，多伦多对本省至关重要。我们贡献了安大略省近一半的 GDP，占全国 GDP 的 20%。所以，多伦多的繁荣对这个国家很重要。但同时，我们描述的这些问题，如依赖**城市扩张**来管理增长，忽视基础设施建设，导致我们目前在财政和治理方面都无力弥补这个（赤字）缺口。在所有服务方面面临的挑战，我们无法提供服务，部分原因在于我们的组织结构、部分原因在于我们的治理方式，部分原因在于财政架构。这适用于加拿大所有城市，在某些方面对大城市更为突出，但你知道，我在巴里（Barrie）度过了很多时光，也曾在那里发表演讲。他们面临着同样的挑战，这些挑战与治理、财政有关，在我看来，最重要的是**土地使用和交通规划**，以及未能将两者结合起来。
Original English >> With a two fold answer to that? Jeyan first, Toronto is very important to the province economically. We're close to half of our GDP in Ontario, and we're 20% of the country's gross domestic product. So it matters to this country, the Toronto Thrive, but also the issues that we're describing, reliance on urban sprawl as a way to manage growth, neglecting our infrastructure to the point that we're we actually right now, the way we're financed and the way we're governed have no capacity to actually close that gap. The challenges in all of the services, we can't provide the services because partly how we're structured, partly how we're governed, partly because of the fiscal architecture. It applies to all cities in Canada, more so to the larger cities in some ways, but not you know, I spent a lot of my time up in Barrie and I've spoken there too. They have the same challenges and the related to governance, finance, and above all, in my view, land use and transportation planning and the failure to integrate the two.
**Host**: 我想继续问你。我想更清楚地了解我们是如何走到这一步的。正如你提到的，你和所有贡献者都描绘了一幅严峻的图景。这一切是从**“巨型城市”（megacity）**开始的吗？我们需要追溯多久才能找到这些“痛点”？
Original English >> And I want to stick with you. I want to get a better sense of how we got here. As you mentioned, you paint a sort of a dire picture here with the rest of the contributors. Did it start with the megacity? How far do we need to go back before we start kind of finding the kind of, you know, points of pain?
**Ken Greenberg**: 这是一个好问题。**巨型城市**（megacity）肯定是一个主要问题，这发生在我有机会完成关于多伦多未来治理的报告之后不久，而且它朝着完全相反的方向发展。所以，这并非唯一原因。当然。我先说一点：多伦多是北美增长最快的城市，这已经持续了好几年，尤其是近两年，不包括……是的，确实是北美增长最快的城市。我们如何管理增长？我们通过**城市扩张**来管理增长，而不是在现有的城市边界内建设，尽管既有就业增长的空间，也有人们居住的空间。所以，通过这样做，我们正在创造一个城市无法支撑的系统。巨型城市的问题在于，它既太大又太小。它太大，以至于人们难以对其负责。同时，它又太小，无法进行环境、土地使用和交通规划的区域性规划，以及我认为的，特别是像警务这样的服务。所以，它的规模不对。因此，你看到的是一个省现在介入并进行**微观管理**。而这正是目前的主要问题。我们今天处理的大多数问题源于 A）治理，B）财政——我们总是“仰人鼻息”地依赖政府各级部门，而没有自己的税收增长来源。第三，我们现在已经取消了现任政府的所有“聪明规划政策”，比如麦坚蒂（McGuinty）政府的那些政策，那些政策实际上正将我们引向正确的方向，并因此受到高度赞扬。但现在这一切都消失了。所以，我们还有很多工作要做。但正如肯所说，我们拥有能量、才华和想法来做到这一点。如果存在意愿，我们的希望是这能促进公众和政界舆论环境的改变。
Original English >> It's a good question. And the megacity for sure was a major problem that was done shortly after I had the opportunity to do the report on the future governance of Toronto, and it went in the exact opposite direction. So it's not the only reason. For sure. I'll start with this point that Toronto's the fastest growing city in North America and has been for a few years, certainly the last two years, not counting. Yeah, actually the fastest growing city in North America. How do we manage growth? We manage growth by sprawl, not by building within existing urban borders, even though there's room both for employment growth and for people to live. So by doing that, we're creating a system that we as cities that we can't support. The problem with megacity was that it was both too big and too small. It was too big to be accountable to, to. The people who live there. And at the same time, it's too small to do the regional planning for the environment, for land use and transportation planning, and for, I would say, services in particular, like policing. So it's the wrong size. And so what you have is a province now stepping in and micromanaging. And that is the main problem right now. Most of the issues that we're dealing with today stem from A the governance, B, the finance that the we are cap in hand always to the levels of government with no growth source of revenue of our own. And thirdly, that we have now eliminated the current government has eliminated all of the smart planning policies of the McGuinty of the McGuinty government, which in fact was moving us in the right direction and was much praised for that. But now all of that is gone. And so we've got a lot of work to do. But as Ken says, we have the energy, talent and ideas to do it. If there was the willingness, and that's our hope that this will contribute to the change in the climate of opinion, both for the public and for politicians.
### 省府越权与城市自治的必要性 **Host**: 让我们来谈谈“微观管理”这个想法。我希望我没记错这里的说法，但“联邦政府拥有钱，省政府拥有权力，而城市拥有问题”。请解释一下，加拿大城市为何需要更多自治权？
Original English >> Let's pick up on the idea of micromanaging. I hope I don't get the phrase wrong here, but it's the feds who have the money, the provinces that have the power, and the cities that have the problems help us understand. Can why do cities Canadian cities need more autonomy?
**Ken Greenberg**: 有一个概念叫做“**层级节制原则**”（subsidiarity），意思是决策应下放到最适合的、有能力的层级。当然，我们生活在一个多层级的体系中：市政、省级、联邦，它们都有不同的角色。我认为现在发生的是，我们的省级政府，在**省长福特（Premier Ford）**的领导下，实际上想成为多伦多的市长，以及省内所有城市的市长，并深入基层做出本应由地方社区做出的决定。例如，在选举期间将市议会人数减半，就是一个极端例子。但现在正在发生的事情非常危险。最高法院正在审理一个关于**安大略公园（Ontario Place）**的案件。案件的核心是：省政府是否可以豁免自己遵守所有法律？我今天早上刚听到另一个例子：省长为了扩展岛屿机场以容纳喷气式飞机，希望废除所有现有的**环保**考量和法律。这样做会导致失去**社会凝聚力**，人们不再相信自己能在塑造自身命运方面有发言权。对于一个拥有 300 多万人口的城市来说，无法拥有有效的规划立法，无法感觉到主要的环保问题能够得到科学处理，而非仅仅基于当天的政治意愿。像**遗产保护**这样的东西可以被完全抛弃。这非常成问题。当人们觉得政府听不进他们的话，或者无处可去时，他们就会变得愤世嫉俗、宿命论，你会听到人们说：“我不在乎谁当选。反正他们都会做同样的事情，对我没用。” 我认为，城市和城镇拥有……我也会将这一点应用于较小的地区……拥有“**无代表不纳税**”这样的口号，以及“波士顿倾茶事件”，这非常重要。嗯，我们现在就处于这种情况。我们面临的局面是，我们对之毫无发言权的“**面子工程**”项目正以数千亿美元的成本获得批准。而我们有一个省级政府说，我们不必遵守自己的法律。
Original English >> There's a concept called subsidiarity, and it means you take decision making down to the lowest competent level. And of course, we live in a system where we have multiple layers. We have municipal, we have provincial, we have federal, they all have different roles. And I think what's been happening now is our provincial government with Premier Ford really would like to make itself the mayor of Toronto and the mayor of every city in the province and reach down and make decisions that local communities should be able to make. So cutting the council in half in the middle of an election, for example, was an extreme example. But what's going on now is really dangerous. The Supreme Court is actually hearing a case about Ontario Place. And the gist of the case is, can the provincial government exempt itself from all of its own laws? And I just heard this morning that an additional example of that is the Premier wants to remove all of the environmental considerations, all the environmental laws in place over the issue of the expansion of the island airport to accommodate jets. And what happens when you do that is you lose the ability for social cohesion, for people to believe that they have some say to shape their own destiny. And for a city of over 3 million people to not be able to have planning legislation that's effective, to not feel that major environmental concerns can be dealt with scientifically, not just based on political whims of the day. The things like heritage can be entirely dispensed with. This is really problematic. And when people don't feel that government is listening to them or they have anywhere to go, then they become cynical, they become fatalistic, and you'll hear people say, I don't care who gets elected. They're all going to do the same thing anyway, and it's not going to help me. And I think it's really important for cities and towns. And I would apply this to smaller areas to have, you know, that phrase in the American Revolution, no taxation without representation and the Boston Tea Party. Well, we're there now. We're in a situation where vanity projects that we have nothing to say about are getting approved for untold billions of dollars. And we have a provincial government that's saying we don't have to follow our own laws.
### 美国政策影响与自我反思 **Host**: 我想添加另一层政府。肯首先提到了这一点，让我们来谈谈美国政府。当我开始阅读这本书时，我想，嗯，我们会谈论很多关于多伦多的问题，但在书中我读到或听到了**唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）**的名字几次。我很好奇，当前的美国政府的威胁对多伦多这样的城市有什么影响？
Original English >> I want to add another layer of government. Ken had brought it up first, and let's talk about the US administration. I when I started reading this book, I thought, you know, we would be talking a lot of about Toronto's issues, but I heard Donald Trump or read Donald Trump's name a few times in the book. And I am curious, what effect is the threat from the current US administration having on cities like Toronto?
**Anne Golden**: 嗯……就正在做出的决定而言，我想在一点上进行补充。肯绝对是正确的。这破坏了**信任**。没有信任，人们就无法合作做出决定。这一点至关重要。现在，关于特朗普（Trump）发生的两件事——我写过，我们写过——第一，我认为来自美国现任领导层的文化，助长了我们提到的那种决策方式，比如过度使用 MZO（部长级区域规划令），经济区域。换句话说，赋予部长或内阁不当的权力。但第二件事，非常具体地说，围绕**关税**的所有混乱，在经济上非常影响安大略省。一方面，我们正在展望全球格局，人工智能（AI）正在改变未来，我们不知道会对就业产生什么影响，但很可能不太好。与此同时，关税正在严重损害商业，尤其是**小企业**，它们是商业的主导形式。因此，无论是在经济背景还是在政治文化背景下，边境以南正在发生的事情都真正影响着我们。而且，你知道，加拿大的韧性的一部分必须是关注城市。回到你刚才说的，就像“鬼城”一样，“国家也会随之衰落”。
Original English >> Well. >> In terms of the culture and the kinds of decisions that are being made, I just want to build on one point. Ken is absolutely right. It undermines trust. Without trust, people cannot work together to make decisions. And that's absolutely critical. Now, what happened to two things with the Trump and I've written about we've written about this. For one thing, I believe that the culture emanating from the current leadership in America has emboldened the kind of decisions that I've referenced. Like, over use of the M's & O's, ministerial zoning orders, economic zones. In other words, giving ministers or cabinet undue power. But the second thing is, on a very specific note, all of the chaos around tariffs very much affects Ontario from, from, from its economic standpoint. On the one hand, we're being we're looking at a global picture of AI doing. We know not what with the job picture, but likely not very good, not good. And at the same time, you've got tariffs really hurting business. And in particular small businesses, which are the dominant form of business. And so both in terms of the economic context and in terms of the political cultural context, what's happening south of the border is really affecting us. And, you know, part of Canadian resilience must be a focus on the cities. To go back to the point you said, Jeyan as ghost cities, so go our nations.
**Host**: 肯，我想请你补充一下，但我确实……我想稍微反驳一下，关于这些特殊经济区。这在某种程度上对经济有利，不是吗？我知道大家对法律和环境影响有担忧，但总的来说，这在某些方面是为了推动经济发展。难道没有吗？
Original English >> Ken, I want you to add on to that, but I do have to I want to push back a little bit with these special economic zones. Is there not some benefit to the economy when we see this? I know that there's concerns about, you know, laws and environmental impacts, but overall, this is to get the economy going in some regards. Is there not a no.
**Ken Greenberg**: 绝对。我们在联邦层面也有类似的情况。我们有一个类似的法案。但问题在于你如何处理这个法案？它有点像我们宪法中的“**不算数条款**”（notwithstanding clause）。你不想让人们轻易地推翻一切，将非常有用的立法搁置一旁，从而剥夺了……例如，为了适应喷气式飞机而延长跑道、增加噪音和喷气机频率，仅仅以这个例子为例，就会极大地扰乱**多伦多港（Toronto Harbour）**。我认为人们没有意识到，多伦多港是一个休闲场所，是享受自然和岛屿的地方。而另一方面，它将一直延伸到安大略公园。所以，应该有机会让人们看到正在提议什么，并审视诸如对环境的影响等问题。这同样适用于，例如，安大略省北部社区，对吧？是的，也许是**铁矿石项目“火环”（Ring of Fire）**，但你必须了解其影响。所以，这些事情，钟摆可能会摆动得太远。但我想补充安妮的观点，当我们开始写这本书时，特朗普的第二任期还没有开始，我们还兴致勃勃地看着多伦多，感觉相对安全，因为你知道，我们对自己的城市拥有主权，但突然之间，受到威胁的不仅仅是加拿大，而是多伦多。它是以如此多的方式受到威胁的城市。我们问题的根源之一，我发现我们必须不断将其与**地缘政治**联系起来，是我们如此依赖美国作为所有领域可靠的合作伙伴。例如，多伦多的许多公司没有进行创新。他们没有在世界范围内寻求合作关系，而我们现在正在这样做。他们没有推广本地人才。无论是在艺术、文化还是商业领域。而现在，我们被迫这样做，无论是否愿意。我认为这实际上是一件好事。我认为“**面纱已经拉开**”，我们知道了现实是什么，这可以激励我们更深刻地审视自己。所以这个主题就这样悄悄地融入了书中，一旦它进去了，你就无法忽视它。
Original English >> Absolutely. And we have the same thing at the federal level. We have a similar bill. But the question is what do you do with the bill? It's kind of like the notwithstanding clause in our Constitution. You don't want to have people just overriding everything and putting very useful legislation aside and taking away the ability, for example, extending the runways and the noise and the frequency of the jets, just to stick with that example is going to extraordinarily disrupt Toronto Harbour. And I don't think people realize that Toronto Harbour as a place of recreation, as a place of enjoyment of nature or the islands. And at the other end, it's going to extend all the way over to Ontario Place. So there should be an opportunity for people to see what is being proposed and to look at issues like the impact on the environment. And the same applies, for example, in northern communities in Ontario, right? Yes. The Ring of Fire, perhaps, but you want to understand what the implications will be. So these things, the pendulum can swing way too far. But I want to add to Anne's point, when we started writing this book, Trump 2.0 hadn't happened and we were merrily going along looking at Toronto through a somewhat secure lens in the sense that, you know, we had sovereignty over our city, and then all of a sudden it wasn't just Canada that was being threatened, it was Toronto. It was a city that was being threatened in so many ways. And one of the origins of our problem, and I find we have to keep relating this to geopolitics, is that we were so reliant on the US as a reliable partner in all kinds of areas. So, for example, all kinds of companies in Toronto were not making the innovations. They were not seeking relationships around the world, which we're doing now. They were not promoting local talent. And whether it was in the arts or culture or in business. And now we are being forced, like it or not. And I think it's actually a good thing. I think the curtain has been pulled aside. We know what the reality is and this can incentives us to look to ourselves in a much more profound way. So that theme kind of crept into the book, and once in there, you couldn't not see it.
### 多伦多的韧性与成功案例 **Host**: 好的，我想换个话题。你提到了“面纱已经拉开”。你在你的章节中写到了**雷格公园电影节（Regent Park Film Festival）**那个美好的场景。我想稍微谈谈多伦多市迄今为止取得的一些成功。所以，肯，我接着问你。多伦多最近有哪些项目让你对这座城市的积极变化感到充满希望？
Original English >> All right. I want to change gears a little bit. I want to talk about you bring up the curtains. You you write in your chapter this lovely scene at Regent Park Film Festival. And I want to talk a little bit about some of the wins that the city of Toronto has gotten so far. So, Ken, I'm going to stick with you. What recent projects in Toronto give you hope towards a positive change in the city?
**Ken Greenberg**: 我将举一个我们书中八个主题中的项目。顺便说一句，我们选择了我们能找到的最聪明的人，他们在所有这些主题上都比我们了解得多。这是本书的全部前提。这八个主题中的每一个都协同作用，那就是**波特兰的奥奎因、穆内辛格和米多苏吉公园**（O'Quinn, Moonesinghe and Midosuji Park in the Portlands）。在治理方面，有三个层级的政府合作了二十多年，期间各级政府都经历了行政更迭。资金方面，这个项目从一开始就获得了充足的资金，并按时按预算完成，持续获得额外资金支持。它为**防洪**做出了巨大贡献，并为城市中心创造了一个**绿色区域**，提供了**混合收入住房**，促进了**社会凝聚力**。它触及了所有方面，而它所展示的，也是我在最后一章提出它的原因之一：我们知道如何做到这一点。我们知道如何做到世界一流。当我们集中精力，拥有正确的资源时。
Original English >> I'm going to take one project that we're every one of the eight themes. And by the way, we chose the smartest people we could find who knew far more than we did about all these subjects. That was the whole premise of the book. Every one of the eight themes works together, and that's O'Quinn, Moonesinghe and Midosuji Park in the Portlands. So governance, you have the three levels of government collaborating for over 20 years, with changes of administration at every level. Funding. This project was well funded from the start and has come in on time and on budget, and has continued to get additional funding environment. It's making a huge contribution to flood mitigation and to creating a green area in the heart of the city, housing, mixed income, housing, mobility, social cohesion. It touches all the bases and what it demonstrates, and that was one of the reasons I brought it up in the last chapter. We know how to do this. We know how to do it as well as anybody in the world. When we put our minds to it, and when we have the right resources.
**Host**: 肯，我们就此打住。我真的很感谢你的见解，希望多伦多能从这本书中学到一些东西。非常感谢。
Original English >> Ken, and we are going to have to leave it there. I really appreciate your insights on this, and hopefully Toronto can learn a few things from this book, so I really appreciate it.
**Ken Greenberg**: 谢谢。
Original English >> Thank you.
**Host**: 非常感谢。
Original English >> Thanks very much.