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 doesn't mean it would be exploding in population, but it had a lot of similarities with Philly. Look at how Philly has been able to turn itself around with a lot of growth coming from suburbanites moving into the city.
Philly hasn't really turned it around much more than Baltimore has. Philly has always been a more prominent city than Baltimore and has always had a better downtown core. Since a lot of people visiting Philly will spend nearly all of their time in Center City and some of the surrounding areas, they might leave with the perception that the city is more gentrified than it is, especially if they happened to sleep the entire stretch between Penn Station and 30th Street.
This has been stated multiple times already; Baltimore was never on a trajectory to be a 4 million+ metro. It fell out of the Top 10 largest metros in the country after the 1920 Census when DC was still a bit smaller than Cincinnati. If anything, the stronger argument is that Baltimore would be a smaller metro than it is today without DC stemming some of the fallout from de-industrialization.
Does this guy not realize the entire premise of his argument is false? I've already shown that Philly is not receiving more in-migration from its suburbs than Baltimore is. But I guess the era we're currently living in is one in which you can repeat the same non-fact over and over and over again until it eventually becomes accepted as true.
Pretty much!
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
Philly hasn't really turned it around much more than Baltimore has. Philly has always been a more prominent city than Baltimore and has always had a better downtown core. Since a lot of people visiting Philly will spend nearly all of their time in Center City and some of the surrounding areas, they might leave with the perception that the city is more gentrified than it is, especially if they happened to sleep the entire stretch between Penn Station and 30th Street.
This has been stated multiple times already; Baltimore was never on a trajectory to be a 4 million+ metro. It fell out of the Top 10 largest metros in the country after the 1920 Census when DC was still a bit smaller than Cincinnati. If anything, the stronger argument is that Baltimore would be a smaller metro than it is today without DC stemming some of the fallout from de-industrialization.
Exactly. Along with Hopkins, it's the federal agencies in the suburbs that have prevented Baltimore's regional economy from going over the cliff and they most likely wouldn't be there without proximity to DC.
Exactly. Along with Hopkins, it's the federal agencies in the suburbs that have prevented Baltimore's regional economy from going over the cliff and they most likely wouldn't be there without proximity to DC.
Or more large corporations could move into the area if Baltimore wasn't competing with a city with business friendly suburbs. There would possibly be more incentive to make Maryland a more business friendly state.
But look at all the fights we have on here as to whether DC is Northeast or Southern I consider DC to be a Northeastern-looking city with a lot of liberal Southern people living in it. When you go there from NYC or Philly, you notice how differently people dress and how slow everyone walks, but the built environment is too urban to be anything but Northeastern.
I think that's led DC to be considered the exact balance between the two regions. Without DC creating the defining line, Baltimore would be the last major city before hitting a solidly Southern state (well VA isn't anymore, but it was and probably would still be without NoVa being what it is today). Without DC, Baltimore would be even more connected to Philly, but it would likely replace DC as the southernmost Northeastern city and the northernmost Southern city. Therefore, it could no longer use DC as the comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudlander
If the US decided to have the capital in Philly, or St. Louis, or somewhere besides D.C, I wonder what:
1) Would Northern VA and the Maryland portions of the DMV be like?
2) What would Baltimore be like in terms of it's regional influence?
-Would Northern VA/Maryland be a part of greater Baltimore?
-Would it be rural?
-Would Alexandria/Georgetown be to Baltimore what Worcester is to Boston?
-Would Baltimore to Maryland and the mid-atlantic be the focal point and have the relevance of say what Boston has to New England?
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton
I feel like in the absence of DC that Georgetown, MD and Alexandria, VA would be small urban cities on roughly the same scale as Annapolis, Frederick, Hagerstown, York, etc. The surrounding area would be for the most part undeveloped and rural, although each of the cities would likely have a small suburban belt of its own. The Patomac River is frankly a bit too minor to expect any serious industrialization to pick up in the area in DC's absence. Baltimore's suburbia would if anything be a bit smaller than it is today, both because some federal jobs are commutable from the Baltimore area and because areas like Columbia effectively function as suburbs of both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turnerbro
The perception of Maryland would be that it revolves around Baltimore. the Perception of Virginia would be that it's a largely rural southern state. Georgetown MD and Alexandria VA might eventually combine to make a metro of around 300-500k.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheseGoTo11
This is what happened to Georgetown. It had started to develop some industry due to its proximity to the Fall Line and then Federal expansion quickly pushed land prices up, making manufacturing far less cost effective.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudlander
Basic points:
1) Without DC, Baltimore would be a much more regionally important and influential city to the Mid Atlantic, like what Boston is to New England, right?
2) Northern VA would be like South Central PA, pretty rural outside of Alexandria and (in MD) Georgetown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheseGoTo11
It was a non-binding vote in 1789 when there was talk of putting the capital on the Susquehanna. The legend is inflated due to an update someone made to the Havre de Grace Wikipedia page based off a local news article.
The binding vote came in 1790 with the Residence Act, passed by both the House and Senate, that didn't specify an exact spot, just somewhere on the Potomac between the Hagerstown area and the Anacostia (the Eastern Branch). The existing location was always in the lead through due to the proximity of the Fall Line near Georgetown.
There was no "choice" of cities in the Residence Act though. The Southerners wanted the Potomac, not the Susquehanna, and the Northerners who supported it did so because it meant the Southerners would cover Northern war debts.
Or more large corporations could move into the area if Baltimore wasn't competing with a city with business friendly suburbs. There would possibly be more incentive to make Maryland a more business friendly state.
How would Booz Allen, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, General Dynamics, Lockheed and Northrop Grumman make their way to Baltimore in a world where DC did not exist? I suspect those companies would still be located near whatever city became the federal capital.
How would Booz Allen, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, General Dynamics, Lockheed and Northrop Grumman make their way to Baltimore in a world where DC did not exist? I suspect those companies would still be located near whatever city became the federal capital.
I guess it wouldn't be any those companies that wanted/needed to be located to the federal capital; who's to day that Baltimore wouldn't be the federal capital? It's also not just companies based in the DC area, it could also be companies based in other cities who saw Baltimore as the best location for whatever reason.
Or more large corporations could move into the area if Baltimore wasn't competing with a city with business friendly suburbs.
Well for one, Baltimore isn't really losing companies to any of DC's suburbs so that's a bit of a moot point. Secondly, those companies are moving to DC's suburbs because of the presence of DC itself. If the capital remained in Philadelphia, then that's were most of them would be and the others would most likely go to another major metro area.
I guess it wouldn't be any those companies that wanted/needed to be located to the federal capital; who's to day that Baltimore wouldn't be the federal capital? It's also not just companies based in the DC area, it could also be companies based in other cities who saw Baltimore as the best location for whatever reason.
And these companies have chosen not to move to Baltimore because of DC?
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.
I consider DC to be a Northeastern-looking city with a lot of liberal Southern people living in it. When you go there from NYC or Philly, you notice how differently people dress and how slow everyone walks, but the built environment is too urban to be anything but Northeastern.
