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.
None of the above...No city dominates the United States anywhere near the way cities like R
Tokyo, London, Stockholm, Paris, Budapest, Seoul, Manila, Bangkok, Dhaka etc, dominate their respective countries. If New York were to play the same role in America that Seoul plays in South Korea it would have to grow to about 150,000,000 people, become the national capital, take over the country's entire music and film industries, and somehow become home to the top 10 universities in America. It would also need to be home to some 450 out of the nations Fortune 500 companies.
Short of a major disaster that would wipe out the city, I don't see anywhere having this title but New York.
I completely agree. If we're talking about 2050 there's no way any city in the US could overtake it unless something catastrophic happened to New York. Cities just wouldn't be able to handle that growth that quickly.
As for suitable candidates- no way Chicago could become it. I like Chicago, but their grand days are over. I don't think LA will become the next superpower either. Washington DC and San Francisco are a bit plausible for becoming a new dominant power(let's be honest, they won't overtake NYC unless something horrible happens, but they could be suitable candidates). I think Atlanta, Seattle and Minneapolis have a lot of potential, Denver too. I see that Miami has a few votes, and it does have the potential but with it's low-lying land and waterfront it could easily be wiped out by a hurricane. No, I'm not getting into a global warming argument, but it is probably in the most precarious situation in terms of flooding and hurricanes. Seriously- the highest point in all of South Florida is fifteen feet.
Last edited by Frostbite82; 08-17-2014 at 02:49 PM..
I completely agree. If we're talking about 2050 there's no way any city in the US could overtake it unless something catastrophic happened to New York. Cities just wouldn't be able to handle that growth that quickly.
As for suitable candidates- no way Chicago could become it. I like Chicago, but their grand days are over. en feet.
People said the same thing about Chicago in the 70s and 80s...and it then went on to experience a major renaissance in the 90s. Chicagois experiencing a massive boom in tourism and hotel development, had the fastest growing central city population growth over the last decade, is seeing an increasing amount of development announcements, just attracted the corporate headquarters of a major Fortune 500 corporation (ADM),is expanding its river walk, is building a new massive Eco park on Northerly Island, was just awarded the most impressive cultural prize in awhile with the Lucas Museum, has a tech scene that is exploding, is attracting numerous headquarters from the suburbs, has an exploding population of young students studying /living downtowand is the likely future home of the Obama Library.
Add to that the fact that it's cost of living is significantly lower than its peer cities and it seems to me Chicago is positioning itself quite well for the future....never count it out.
You see, by 2050 Bay Area, NYC and other coastal cities will be largely submerged or devastated by mega storms. LA, Phoenix will no longer sustain their swelled populations due to multi-year droughts. This leaves us with Minneapolis, Chicago and other cities with adequate water supply located in milder climate belts of the future.
You see, by 2050 Bay Area, NYC and other coastal cities will be largely submerged or devastated by mega storms. LA, Phoenix will no longer sustain their swelled populations due to multi-year droughts. This leaves us with Minneapolis, Chicago and other cities with adequate water supply located in milder climate belts of the future.
Even if all of the New York low lying areas were flooded, it would still be the most populous city. I suspect building a dam in New York harbor would be cheaper though, than flood Downtown Manhattan.
Phoenix might be double it's size by then....the way it's 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.
