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.
Yeah, it's completely made up. Philadelphia is about the 29th largest economy in the world, not 8th. It has about $312-320 billion. Spain ranks in at 8th with about $1.4 trillion.
I have a couple of historical ones and then the ultimate answer!
1. Plymouth, Massachusetts - Once the capital of the independent Plymouth colony (the old colony) where the pilgrims landed. Plymouth Colony was annexed by the Massachusetts Bay Colony and lost the capital spot to the slighter newer town of Boston.
2. New Haven, Connecticut - same exact situation as above except the victim was the New Haven Colony and the villians (lol) was Connecticut and Hartford.
3. Milleridgeville, GA - you are probably saying what? This central Georgian town was the former capital city of Georgia until after the civil war. Population today less than 20K now. Capital was moved to Atlanta - the rest is history!
And the ultimate decline! Brooklyn - independent Dutch town (Breukelen) early 1600s, major city by 1800s, annexed all of Kings County by 1890s, lost its independence to New York City in 1898. Its downtown stunted for years, its concerns ignored, housing projects built all over even on Coney Island. It could do nothing when NYC stood by and allowed its pride and joy to leave - The Brooklyn Dodgers.
I suppose there is one good thing. Much of the borough of Brooklyn is caught in a time warp - a giant 19th century museum of architecture.
3. Milleridgeville, GA - you are probably saying what? This central Georgian town was the former capital city of Georgia until after the civil war. Population today less than 20K now. Capital was moved to Atlanta - the rest is history!
I still think that Savannah is in the "Top 3" biggest underachievers in the US because that city was 1733 and was the capital of the colony. Savannah 60-70 years ago should have been what Atlanta is right now. Savannah would be great if you took metro Atlanta's population, companies, building, and Peachtree streets and blended it all in.
I still think that Savannah is in the "Top 3" biggest underachievers in the US because that city was 1733 and was the capital of the colony. Savannah 60-70 years ago should have been what Atlanta is right now. Savannah would be great if you took metro Atlanta's population, companies, building, and Peachtree streets and blended it all in.
I was thinking of Savannah and Charleston also but wanted to throw out a couple of cities not being mentioned. These two cities were important seaports in colonial times but sort of fell behind their more northern counterparts in later years. On the other hand that it is why so many people love them today.
Williamsburgh, VA is similar. It is not just a museum but an actual city that lost its capitol spot to Richmond 200 (?) years ago.
Detroit's population peaked at about 1.85 million. It's now down to around 890,000. That's very close to a decline of ONE MILLION!!
Detroit has LOST more residents than these cities currently have:
Boston, MA
San Fransisco, CA
Indianapolis, IN
Austin, TX
Charlotte, NC
Atlanta, GA
Seattle, WA
Denver, CO
Nashville, TN
Mind Boggling.
I'm not surprised Detroit lost so many residents. Sure, some northern cities had the "white flight" to the suburbs, but at least places like Boston had enough jobs to keep some people around. Ford and GM went to the toilet for many reasons and so did the jobs. That is part of why Detroit's population nosedived so far. In a way, Detroit's case is much worse. Factor in the high murder rate, then things look even worse.
Boston. Boston's downfall is not as obvious as some other places, but Boston is going downhill regardless. High school students in Massachusetts are 3 times as likely to leave the state compared to the national average. New England's cold weather and high cost of living are driving people out of the region. In colonial times, the Northeast was prosperous. But now, the Sunbelt is the place to be. The South and The West are the future.
^yes, and the N.E. is going to have a future also.
It may be shocking, but when 75% of the country's population immigrated through the N.E. coast, that population shifts would eventually move to the south and west over the next centuries.
I lived out west. It isn't peaches and cream out there either. I will admit that the natural beauty out there is amazing. But it is very, very difficult to see it when you only got 2 weeks of vacation, and it takes a whole day to get through a state.
I liked the city I lived in, but I get more out of the neighborhood I live in now.
I'm not surprised Detroit lost so many residents. Sure, some northern cities had the "white flight" to the suburbs, but at least places like Boston had enough jobs to keep some people around. Ford and GM went to the toilet for many reasons and so did the jobs. That is part of why Detroit's population nosedived so far. In a way, Detroit's case is much worse. Factor in the high murder rate, then things look even worse.
Detroit's case is an unusual one. Post WWII, the middle class began moving to the burbs, just like every other American city. From what I have read, it was the 1967 riot that turned the trickle to a flood, as middle class whites and blacks left the city in droves. Housing values declined, and previously safe neighborhoods became dangerous almost overnight. In the early 70s, the US auto market began to decline, and the big three began shuttering their original plants in the city and building new ones in the suburbs and exurbs. Many people prefer to live near where they work, so they followed. In the meantime, forced school busing in the city meant the loss of neighborhood schools--you could no longer get your kid into a good school by moving close to one. Another reason to go. As the city emptied out, it became more and more of a desolate place to live, and more and more of the city's residents who lived there did so because they couldn't afford to move.
Meanwhile the metro area continued to grow. If you think of a metro area as synonymous with "city", essentially what happened was that 50 years ago, the city's "bad" neighborhoods were concentrated in a few areas within the city limits. Today, the "city's" bad neighborhoods comprise much of the area within the Detroit city limits. What used to be a trhriving, vibrant, diverse American city with a self-contained economy is now but a single, depressed, "bad" neighborhood of the "city" of Metro Detroit.
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.
