<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Myanmar: A Glimpse of the New Capital City</title>
	<atom:link href="http://globalvoicesonline.org/2007/02/28/myanmar-a-glimpse-of-the-new-capital-city/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://globalvoicesonline.org/2007/02/28/myanmar-a-glimpse-of-the-new-capital-city/</link>
	<description>The world is talking. Are you listening?</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 20:21:38 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Liberator</title>
		<link>http://globalvoicesonline.org/2007/02/28/myanmar-a-glimpse-of-the-new-capital-city/#comment-844494</link>
		<dc:creator>Liberator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2007 05:51:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2007/02/28/myanmar-a-glimpse-of-the-new-capital-city/#comment-844494</guid>
		<description>There is nothing wrong with moving the Capital. In fact it is a bold, dynamic and smart move indeed. Creating a new Capital is better and wiser than renovating or remodeling the old one for space, design, modern technology, location is better compare to old City BUT did the rulers give sufficient compensation to the original land owners/farmers/peasants? Also, does the people living inside Nay Pyi Taw have sufficient incentives, benefits, necessary basic needs etc.??? Peace, progress and prosperity goes hand in hand and modern development should go in par in all sectors of life inside Myanmar. So far the moving of Capital City is a good and wise move to me after all Myanmar has the history of changing Capital Cities from time to time for example from "Amarapura" to "Mandalay" and from "Mandalay" to "Rangoon/Yangon" and now from "Yangon" to "Nay Pyi Taw" not to mention "Bago/Pegu" was once the Capital City during King Bayintnaung era.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is nothing wrong with moving the Capital. In fact it is a bold, dynamic and smart move indeed. Creating a new Capital is better and wiser than renovating or remodeling the old one for space, design, modern technology, location is better compare to old City BUT did the rulers give sufficient compensation to the original land owners/farmers/peasants? Also, does the people living inside Nay Pyi Taw have sufficient incentives, benefits, necessary basic needs etc.??? Peace, progress and prosperity goes hand in hand and modern development should go in par in all sectors of life inside Myanmar. So far the moving of Capital City is a good and wise move to me after all Myanmar has the history of changing Capital Cities from time to time for example from &#8220;Amarapura&#8221; to &#8220;Mandalay&#8221; and from &#8220;Mandalay&#8221; to &#8220;Rangoon/Yangon&#8221; and now from &#8220;Yangon&#8221; to &#8220;Nay Pyi Taw&#8221; not to mention &#8220;Bago/Pegu&#8221; was once the Capital City during King Bayintnaung era.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
