U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Choose one
Denver, CO 13 19.70%
Kansas City, MO 11 16.67%
Atlanta, GA 4 6.06%
Omaha, NE 3 4.55%
Dallas, TX 7 10.61%
Chicago, IL 28 42.42%
Voters: 66. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-10-2013, 07:20 PM
 
Location: Where the heart is...
4,927 posts, read 4,851,159 times
Reputation: 10654

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBigGeo08 View Post
It should be Philadelphia--for God's sake the Declaration and the U.S. government were established here!
I agree, however...I also wanted N.Y.C, K.C. & Atlanta as well, but in the end I went with Chicago. That vote, however, does not take away anything from the obvious choices which were not an option, nor any of the ones which were offered...all GREAT locations in my view!

Best regards, sincerely

HomeIsWhere...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-11-2013, 05:54 PM
 
Location: MD suburbs of DC
607 posts, read 1,277,848 times
Reputation: 452
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'minformed2 View Post
KC is the closest of these to the center of population (which is in Missouri) and it is the only one that is really "without a region". It wouldn't be considered too "Eastern" by westerners (like Chicago or Atlanta might be and like DC often is considered by westerners right now)....nor would it be too far "Western" for easterners (Like Denver or Dallas, despite Dallas only being marginally further west than KC). Also it wouldn't be overly "Northern" for southerners (Chicago and possibly Omaha) or "Southern" for northerners (Dallas and Atlanta again). It would be the Goldilocks of capital regions.

But in all reality; the capital could never be anywhere but DC. It just has too much of the history and infrastructure built up. Sorry western US!
Very true.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2013, 06:27 PM
 
Location: Shaw.
2,226 posts, read 3,618,471 times
Reputation: 844
Random historic note: After the Civil War, DC was in such bad shape people considered moving the capital. The population boomed during the war, but the roads weren't paved and there was no sanitation. I believe the main contender was St. Louis at the time, but President Grant nixed the idea and they decided to actually fix DC instead.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2014, 11:49 AM
 
Location: Columbus, Ohio
275 posts, read 421,784 times
Reputation: 402
Columbus, Ohio.

Most of the nation is within a day's drive of Columbus. Easy to get to, the area is still growing and has plenty of room to expand.

I also think Indianapolis and Kansas City would be under consideration.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2014, 02:52 PM
 
Location: Ohio, USA
1,085 posts, read 1,632,449 times
Reputation: 996
Charleston West Virginia
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2014, 10:37 PM
 
Location: Howard County, Maryland
13,708 posts, read 7,719,084 times
Reputation: 30312
I wouldn't pick any existing city. Instead, I would pick someplace with lots of wide open land, on which can be built from scratch the infrastructure you would need for our nation's capital: an Executive Mansion, a Capitol Building, lots of office space, and plenty of room to build the new housing that all those government workers would need. Existing major cities are already too built up to allow for all of this new construction to be plopped down in their downtowns.

However, I would also want to locate near existing transportation infrastructure, especially interstate highways and a major hub airport, instead of having to create all of that from scratch.

Thus, to me, the perfect spot would be along I-70 east of Denver, near their airport. There's plenty of vacant land there, yet you've got a huge airport that can be expanded with relatively minimal difficulty. You've also got I-70, and I-25 and I-76 could be linked to the new city via "I-25E", which would form a half loop from Fort Collins in the north to Colorado Springs in the south.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2014, 11:51 PM
 
462 posts, read 672,822 times
Reputation: 421
New York is the biggest city, but on the east coast just like DC. Still, it would be a natural capital. It is also close to West Point.

Philadelphia was where the Declaration of Independence was signed. A lot of history there.

St. Louis is the "gateway to the west". It would have been ideal when riverboats were more common forms of transportation. I could easily see it as the capital. It has a nice "All-American" feel.

KC is very centrally located, but not really notable for anything other than its geography.

Dallas is where the east ends and Ft. Worth is where the west begins. Put it in Arlington, so some of the federal addresses don't have to change the name of the city. After all, it is home to "America's Team".

Denver already has military infrastructure set up for an emergency (Cheyenne Mountain, Air Force Academy, the Denver Airport, etc.). I just think it is a little too far west if you are going for centrality.

Oklahoma City may be ideal. Not too southern, not too northern, not to eastern, not to western. The only thing I would change is its name. I guess the same thing could be said about NYC. Their names tie them down to a single state.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2014, 12:46 PM
 
37,016 posts, read 37,161,372 times
Reputation: 25629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvin Ma View Post
Charleston SC, America's most historic city without tall buildings downtown, similar to DC. Given all the new growth is in the South and most of the intellectuals, it makes sense to locate it here.
You shouldn't pick a capital based on current growth trends. A more central location, based either on geography or population distribution, would make more sense.

"Most of the intellectuals"?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2014, 01:01 PM
 
Location: MMU->ABE->ATL->ASH
9,301 posts, read 19,803,809 times
Reputation: 10385
Adak, Alaska
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2014, 02:04 PM
 
12,713 posts, read 16,962,408 times
Reputation: 8659
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBigGeo08 View Post
It should be Philadelphia--for God's sake the Declaration and the U.S. government were established here!
I am in agreement with Philly. A very important city in our history.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top