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.
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
10,747 posts, read 23,804,636 times
Reputation: 14660
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare
This is why I think it would be In Concord, NH. It’s common in Western societies to put your capital between two most important cities. Well Boston is much more dominant than Providence. It’s also common to put your capital in the middle of the country, regardless of what the population center is to maintain power. Everyone already knows the three southern states but especially Massachusetts holds all the economic power. If it was some sort of coming together between the states it would have to be a place away from the economic power that would bring the outskirts into the fold. That’s why I think Concord makes so much sense.
Like I said it would quadruple its population and likely take power and people away from Hartford, Providence and especially Boston. But those cities would still be the most relevant.
I would imagine it plus Manchester-Nashua and Dover-Portsmouth would become a metro area of about 1,000,000 people, in that scenario as Concord would likely be bigger than Nashua and Manchester population wise and use the port and airport in Portsmouth as its main hub for goods in and out of the city as well of course as Boston which is close from a time perspective but in a world with Concord as the capital the connections to the coast of New Hampshire would be much better.
Manchester would do much better as a capital than Concord. Manch already has an existing infrastructure footprint to grow on with its own commercial airport and more direct highway access to Portsmouth and Boston (NH 101 and I-93), a good highway network around it on I-293. It's more easily accessible from most of the region.
Last edited by Champ le monstre du lac; 04-02-2024 at 05:00 PM..
I think I said this earlier in the thread, but to me it makes a huge difference if we’re talking “New England is a country” versus “New England is a state”.
If it’s the former (which I think is the intent of the OP), then it has to be Boston. It’s the Paris to New England’s France. The London to its England. The Rome to its Italy. The Copenhagen to its Denmark. Etc.
Now, if we’re talking New England being a state, then the game changes. In that case, my vote is for either Worcester or Nashua. The former as it’s probably the largest city close to the true center of balance for all of New England’s population. The latter cuz it’s close to that same center while also appealing to Northern New England, who might get mad about having the capital in MA.
If a smaller city is allowed and if we completely give up on appeasing VT/NH/ME, then Southbridge or Webster could be nice.
Last edited by Boston Shudra; 04-02-2024 at 06:34 PM..
I think I said this earlier in the thread, but to me it makes a huge difference if we’re talking “New England is a country” versus “New England is a state”.
If it’s the former (which I think is the intent of the OP), then it has to be Boston. It’s the Paris to New England’s France. The London to its England. The Rome to its Italy. The Copenhagen to its Denmark. Etc.
Now, if we’re talking New England being a state, then the game changes. In that case, my vote is for either Worcester or Nashua. The former as it’s probably the largest city close to the true center of balance for all of New England’s population. The latter cuz it’s close to that same center while also appealing to Northern New England, who might get mad about having the capital in MA.
If a smaller city is allowed and if we can’t completely give up on appeasing VT/NH/ME, then Southbridge or Webster could be nice.
My thing is-- Springfield provides greater connectivity to Vermont and CT and is more of a real city than Worcester, IMO. Boston has so much gravitas and power you don't really need a capital that's still in its CSA.
I'm pretty sure as a state, it should be Worcester or Springfield; I'm not sure which one, though.
I think I said this earlier in the thread, but to me it makes a huge difference if we’re talking “New England is a country” versus “New England is a state”.
If it’s the former (which I think is the intent of the OP), then it has to be Boston. It’s the Paris to New England’s France. The London to its England. The Rome to its Italy. The Copenhagen to its Denmark. Etc.
Now, if we’re talking New England being a state, then the game changes. In that case, my vote is for either Worcester or Nashua. The former as it’s probably the largest city close to the true center of balance for all of New England’s population. The latter cuz it’s close to that same center while also appealing to Northern New England, who might get mad about having the capital in MA.
If a smaller city is allowed and if we completely give up on appeasing VT/NH/ME, then Southbridge or Webster could be nice.
I tend to agree with this. A nation state New England would almost certainly be a primate city state ala UK, Japan or France. No other city comes close. It just makes sense especially when you consider any New England state would originate in the largest city in the largest state which already is a State capital. What reason would they have to change it. It’s already the regions largest port. It’s already geographically central. It’s the social capital of the region, the economic capital of the region. It has all the prestigious research universities. It would totally dominate so there wouldn’t need to be a comporomise between subregions for the capital (usa, Australia) nor would they need to build a capital for the purpose of populating an area (brasilia, Abuja, Ankara).
I tend to agree with this. A nation state New England would almost certainly be a primate city state ala UK, Japan or France. No other city comes close. It just makes sense especially when you consider any New England state would originate in the largest city in the largest state which already is a State capital. What reason would they have to change it. It’s already the regions largest port. It’s already geographically central. It’s the social capital of the region, the economic capital of the region. It has all the prestigious research universities. It would totally dominate so there wouldn’t need to be a comporomise between subregions for the capital (usa, Australia) nor would they need to build a capital for the purpose of populating an area (brasilia, Abuja, Ankara).
Just saying Brasilia is the only capital that was done with the purpose of populating an area. Ankara and Abuja are both centralization projects like the folks saying Concord/Manchester/Worcester. They had to move away from one region for cultural and ethnic regions. Anatolia and Central Nigeria has a ton of people.
This could be the kicker, then, since neither Western nor Northern New England has a ton of people. If you draw a circle around Boston large enough to include Providence, Worcester, Manchester, and Portsmouth, you have within it about 8mil of New England’s 14.8mil. The rest of Northern NH might have 2.5mil, Western MA has maybe 1mil, and CT has 3.6mil. However, of the residents of CT about 1mil live in Fairfield County, which is going to be far from the new capital regardless of where it’s put due to how the county stretches down toward NYC. That leaves only about 2.5mil in CT outside of SWCT.
New England is also much smaller than Turkey or Nigeria with only 72k square miles of land area versus 300-350k for those countries. And close to half of New England’s land area is Maine, the northern and western portions of which are largely empty. The trip from New Haven or Burlington to Boston is a fraction of the distance from Kano to Lagos or Adana to Istanbul. You only start talking about trips from Boston that are remotely comparable when talking about the Caribou/Presque Isle area, but that part of ME is very sparsely populated.
If the current capitals of each state would retain governmental importance under a unified New England nation, then Springfield could take the designation of “capital of the Massachusetts region”.
Last edited by Boston Shudra; 04-06-2024 at 12:54 PM..
This could be the kicker, then, since neither Western nor Northern New England has a ton of people. If you draw a circle around Boston large enough to include Providence, Worcester, Manchester, and Portsmouth, you have within it about 8mil of New England’s 14.8mil. The rest of Northern NH might have 2.5mil, Western MA has maybe 1mil, and CT has 3.6mil. However, of the residents of CT about 1mil live in Fairfield County, which is going to be far from the new capital regardless of where it’s put due to how the county stretches down toward NYC. That leaves only about 2.5mil in CT outside of SWCT.
New England is also much smaller than Turkey or Nigeria with only 72k square miles of land area versus 300-350k for those countries. And close to half of New England’s land area is Maine, the northern and western portions of which are largely empty. The trip from New Haven or Burlington to Boston is a fraction of the distance from Kano to Lagos or Adana to Istanbul. You only start talking about trips from Boston that are remotely comparable when talking about the Caribou/Presque Isle area, but that part of ME is very sparsely populated.
If the current capitals of each state would retain governmental importance under a unified New England nation, then Springfield could take the designation of “capital of the Massachusetts region”.
Fairfield County is not really further from Springfield than Rhode Island or New Hampshire. Let alone Maine.
Springfield is equidistant from the three majormpopialtion centers. FFC, Boston, and Providenc. While alsongiving you proximity to VT. Boston automatically bring NH ntto the fold. Maine doesn't matter that much. They'll do as theyre told lmao
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.
