Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The biggest difference pure and simple would be Philadelphia would be more prominant and nothing like it looks today, conversely DC may not even exist, there would be a cit called Alexandria VA
Oh and maybe the Smithsonian on the parkway in Philly, would have made the Rocky run look a bit different
Deac, I checked on Mapquest and it is roughly 35 miles from Washington to Baltimore. Its over 100 miles from Washington to Richmond.
Now when you can drive 60+ miles an hour you can make it to Richmond in a hour and a half like you said. But that is without traffic and I don't know if you know I-95 but there is often going to be alot of traffic. Certainly something people would not want to do a rush hour commute through every day.
So yes I would say that Baltimore is alot closer to DC than Richmond. I mean look at a map.
I did look at a map, in addition to having driven between all the cities in question several times. Obviously Baltimore is closer to D.C. than Richmond, but not significantly so. Plenty of people commute from Richmond to D.C. - it isn't uncommon.
The point isn't which city is closer...we know the answer to that. The point is that Richmond is definitely close enough to D.C. to have been negatively affected by Metro D.C.'s massive size. If you think differently, then I don't have a problem with that.
What Philadelphia "dominance over government and finance"? Cities like New York, Boston, Baltimore and Charleston might take issue with that. Nobody in the Carolinas cared about Philadlephia, it was a village by todays standards.
The dominant cities in the colonies (in order): Philadelphia, Boston, New York, and Charleston. If everything stayed in Philadelphia, history would be much different and New York would enjoy the status in the scheme of things that Philadelphia instead enjoys today.
Philadelphia was once the largest English-speaking city outside of London considering that the population of the world was much less back then.
The point isn't which city is closer...we know the answer to that. The point is that Richmond is definitely close enough to D.C. to have been negatively affected by Metro D.C.'s massive size. If you think differently, then I don't have a problem with that.
Possibly. But probably more so because of its relative small size in area; Richmond city itself is only 63 square miles. Also city of Richmond can't annex because of laws in va. The surrounding counties of Richmond have a notably higher population though.
I did look at a map, in addition to having driven between all the cities in question several times. Obviously Baltimore is closer to D.C. than Richmond, but not significantly so. Plenty of people commute from Richmond to D.C. - it isn't uncommon.
The point isn't which city is closer...we know the answer to that. The point is that Richmond is definitely close enough to D.C. to have been negatively affected by Metro D.C.'s massive size. If you think differently, then I don't have a problem with that.
I personally do not see it. DC didn't really start to become a huge metro of 5 million until recently and it didn't start affecting Fredericksburg until early in the 2000s decade. There is still a great number of rural area that does not look like it will developed for the next 50 years between Fredericksburg and Richmond. It can actually take me 30-45 minutes to get to Baltimore, not an hour.
I guess I see more of DC affecting Baltimore negatively than it does Richmond because Baltimore was bigger than DC for most of it's existence.
In which year was Annapolis ever the US capital? Possibly during the war of 1812 for a short time? Anyway if that were true it would have become exactly like DC is today, just shifted a few miles closer to the coast. No repercussions for any other east coast city. Of course Maryland would need a new capital.
In which year was Annapolis ever the US capital? Possibly during the war of 1812 for a short time? Anyway if that were true it would have become exactly like DC is today, just shifted a few miles closer to the coast. No repercussions for any other east coast city. Of course Maryland would need a new capital.
1783
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPerone201
If Philly was the capitol, Camden might of ended up like Baltimore...
...not a complete ghetto?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
