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.
Just a hpothetical but whit if President Washington keeped the Capital in Philly instead of creating washington D.C. . Cerainly the dynamics of the east coast would be vastly different : Baltimoe would be a much larger city today .Would N.Y.C. be the financial capital of the world as it is today .
That one change moving the capital from Philly to a small cut out section of Maryland made hugh changes. Any thoughts?
Just a hpothetical but whit if President Washington keeped the Capital in Philly instead of creating washington D.C. . Cerainly the dynamics of the east coast would be vastly different : Baltimoe would be a much larger city today .Would N.Y.C. be the financial capital of the world as it is today .
That one change moving the capital from Philly to a small cut out section of Maryland made hugh changes. Any thoughts?
In that case, Philadelphia and its metro counties would be the highest income counties in the US. As it is now, six of the ten richest counties are in the Washington metro area.
Interesting to think how history may have unfolded differently. Maryland probably would have been a confederate state, for example. And the first battle may have been at Havre de Grace instead of Manassas.
I'm guessing Arlington/Alexandria/Georgetown would be an area equal to greater Wilmington in size and stature. Philly would be huge. NY because of the harbor alone would be big and important, but not sure if it would be as large and dominating as it is now.
I'm guessing Arlington/Alexandria/Georgetown would be an area equal to greater Wilmington in size and stature. Philly would be huge. NY because of the harbor alone would be big and important, but not sure if it would be as large and dominating as it is now.
I think that's accurate. New York probably would have still become the financial capital of the US, if only for the fact that it's best to keep those things physically separate.
Due to their proximity, I think there would also be a very integrated and connected New York-Philadelphia MSA--very similar to the Bay Area. This arrangement also would likely have produced an actual high-speed rail line between both cities by now.
Then I guess someone else besides George Washington would have been the premiere general of the usa.
He may still have been the premier general...just not our first president.
There is a theory that if Peyton Randolph hadn't died in 1775, he would likely have been our first President. And our capital would likely have been in Williamsburg VA.
He may still have been the premier general...just not our first president.
There is a theory that if Peyton Randolph hadn't died in 1775, he would likely have been our first President. And our capital would likely have been in Williamsburg VA.
Wow, no doubt. I'm pretty sure Williamsburg still has a lot of clout.
Wow, no doubt. I'm pretty sure Williamsburg still has a lot of clout.
Today, it's a great historic resource, but that's about it.
In the 18th century, it was, of course, very influential. But, once the capital of Virginia moved to Richmond, Williamsburg pretty much stopped growing.
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.
