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.
Let's imagine the following. Suppose you won a contest on some reputable game-show in your respective country, and the prize was a trip of a lifetime. The length of the trip excluding airfare time, was exactly one week or 7-days, 7-nights, however, you could only visit one of the following cities during the duration of your week stay: New York, Rio De Janeiro, Rome, Cape Town, Tokyo or Sydney. While at your destination city, you are not allowed to go further than 2-hours outside of the city limits for exploring during the duration of your visit. Which city would you then choose to visit, and why?
It wouldn't be a trip of a lifetime as I've been there, but I'd choose Rome. There is so much to see and do there that I never get tired of visiting.
I wouldn't go to the others because I'm from New York and that's "going home" as opposed to taking a vacation, Tokyo and Sydney are just too far to go for only a week. By the time you got over your jet lag it would be time to leave. Rio just doesn't interest me all that much. I'm not comfortable with crime rates in Cape Town right now.
Sidney.
Why? It's the only city on the list I have not visited.
However, being limited to the city is not my idea of a trip of a lifetime. And if anything was deemed "a trip of a lifetime", I would have been there already. If I go to Australia, damned if I am going to spend all my time in Sidney, and I don't need to win a contest to travel. So my ultimate choice would be no thanks.
I'll take Tokyo, and ask the contest coordinator to book the plane tickets so I've got an extra week there to explore on my own dime. (Apparently it's a common enough request with travel contests, and they generally go along with it as long as your dates don't go into contest blackout periods)
The only city I would actually want to visit on that list is Tokyo. I have already been to New York City multiple times and I have already been to Rome twice so it doesn't really hold any appeal to me. While I would not mind visiting Australia generally speaking I would need more than a week just to adjust/get rid of jet lag.
There are a couple more that should definitely be on that list, especially Paris which could be the one I would vote for. In addition there is London, Berlin, Moscow, Munich, etc. the choices are endless but I think there are many that are much better choices in the ones you listed.
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.
