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.
New York or London because of their influence on the world economy and their status as multicultural cities, with every race, ethnic group, major language, and religion represented.
um....wouldn't it depend on which country the whole world would end up being? If the whole world were China, the capital would obviously be Peking. So what you're actually doing, is asking us to vote on which country we'd want the world to be. This is a scenario I prefer not to contemplate.
I would choose a neutral setting, and I would pick Ponta Delgada in the Azores Islands https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponta_Delgada it is located on an island in between the old and new worlds. Or any other Island nation. Also it could be somewhere in central Africa, hopefully it would boost the economy and add a bit more light in that corner of the world. Also I would not pick New York or London specifically because of their influence and power. And a new city from scratch would be best, and the most talented and brightest people would live there from all over the world.
There are three cities I would put on my shortlist because of their locations on the most important waterways on earth. These are, in order of importance, Alexandria/the Nile delta, Panama City, and Singapore.
Alexandria controls the Suez Canal, Panama City controls the Panama and perhaps Nicaraguan canal, and Singapore controls the straits of Malacca. A majority of world trade passes through these waterways, and in the long run these cities will be very important. The current state of these cities should not bias our perceptions of their eventual importance. Remember Constantinople was just the sleepy town of Byzantium until Constantine saw the importance of its location.
It would 100% be a new capital, NYC would be impossible as the streets would not be able to handle the 2 million+ politicians and their relatives etc. that would move to the capital and the 10 million or more immigrants city would be in Asia. No city in the world even represents 10% of the world's population so any currently large city would be unsupported, it would have to be a small city or a completely new city, their is a 100% chance this city would be in Asia or Africa as those are more central areas (clockwise), A fantastic area would be in the edge of the Sahara (Western Sahara- Country), or it would be in North-Central Africa- Niger/Chad. In Asia it would be most likely in one of the Stans, Western China, Mongolia or Northern Pakistan/Afghanistan. It may also be in Saudi Arabia. out of the cities presented London seems most likely as they would be able to support the flood of people and it is relatively a small city(About the Size of Houston or less in area covered and would easily be able to spread out, also their are very few poverty stricken areas, and out of the ones there most of them are generally safe, and they speak English.
Like I said not even 10% of the world's ethnic makeup with population is represented in any city besides maybe a Chinese city because china has 10%+ of the world's population.
NYC absolutely no question. London would be number 2 for me.
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.
Think geography
