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.
It's not the stupidest question ever asked on here, but come on man, that's crazy. You're either talking about a forced exodus, or cutting off hundreds of thousands of people from the world.
Sooo, that's a mass exodus then. I know it's hypothetical, but why would it matter? If you don't live in [insert city name], maybe you live 100s of miles away, you know very little besides what you've read, maybe you've even been there, why would you condemn it to ruin? Surely it makes no difference to you. Or, if you do live there and have plenty of experience of it, and it would matter to you, why would you want to be forcibly moved and have your city condemned to ruin?
Sooo, that's a mass exodus then. I know it's hypothetical, but why would it matter? If you don't live in [insert city name], maybe you live 100s of miles away, you know very little besides what you've read, maybe you've even been there, why would you condemn it to ruin? Surely it makes no difference to you. Or, if you do live there and have plenty of experience of it, and it would matter to you, why would you want to be forcibly moved and have your city condemned to ruin?
I'm sucking all the fun aren't I.
Because for some cities theres just no hope, that or it'll take another century to fix its problems.
I put LA on the poll because its on a fault line, sooner or later that city is gonna go along with Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, SF bay, and San Diego.
As for the rest of the cities I mentioned, well the people who live in those cities probably won't be alive to it thrive again, if it ever does.
Not to brag but theres a certain city on the east coast between MD and VA that went from being murder capital (470+ murders for a pop of 580k) to one of the most desirable cities in less than 20 years.
Sooo, if something may take ages for it's problems to be fixed, it may as well be thrown to the wolves? If a fella is 35 and is a total screw up and may not get his life back on track, ever, should someone else be able to say 'we may as well euthanise him, he has no hope'? Just because a city is past it's prime and right now looks bad, it doesn't mean it won't get better, it doesn't mean it WILL get worse.
I'm pretty sure DC still has a very high murder rate.
It's not the stupidest question ever asked on here
Maybe not. But it's close.
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.
