Cities that could have been much larger

[Alexniko]

Nuremberg. It was one of the major centers of trade, manufacturing and culture during the middle ages (it was a Freie Reichsstadt after all, subordinate only to the Kaiser). During the Third Reich, the city hosted the Reichsparteitage, and was regarded the second most important city (after Berlin) by the nazis. Both the First and Third Reich considered Nuremberg as"Des Reiches Schatzkästlein" (the Reichs treasure chest).

Minor changes in germanies history could easily butterfly Nuremberg into a city with millions of inhabitants.

 

[Jürgen]

Schleswig (town) and Ribe would both would be much bigger, if not for the different partition of Schleswig, Flensburg also suffered from the new border being placed as it did.

I fact if Denmark had kept the Duchies Flensburg would likely have around 300-400K inhabitants, while Altona would be a independent city with around a million inhabitants instead of being a borough in Hamburg.

If Sweden kept Finland (and also if it gotten independence later) Turku would be the biggest city in Finland.

 

[BlackDragon98]

Is it at all possible for any Canadian cities to get bigger?
Or is that just the crazy dream of a patriotic Canadian?

 

[Roches]

Is it at all possible for any Canadian cities to get bigger?
Or is that just the crazy dream of a patriotic Canadian?

Wikipedia's list of largest cities by census year shows some possible ones. Note that many cities, especially Montreal and Toronto, suddenly increase in size because of amalgamations. That's why Toronto isn't the largest city until the megacity amalgamation of 2001. (New York City's amalgamation happened in 1898, and you can see Brooklyn as one of the largest cities in the US before that happened, just like North York appears on the Canadian list.)

Anyway, in Ontario, Hamilton, London and Windsor could have been bigger, and Halifax didn't grow as much as it possibly could have either. Two of those cities are separated from another reasonably large city by a narrow body of water -- Halifax and Dartmouth, and Hamilton and Burlington -- so there are possibilities to add those. Windsor and Detroit are also separated by a narrow body of water. With the help of the Channel Crossing Department of the ASBs, fiends that they are, you could get both of those cities amalgamated and in the same country.

 

[BlackDragon98]

Wikipedia's list of largest cities by census year shows some possible ones. Note that many cities, especially Montreal and Toronto, suddenly increase in size because of amalgamations. That's why Toronto isn't the largest city until the megacity amalgamation of 2001. (New York City's amalgamation happened in 1898, and you can see Brooklyn as one of the largest cities in the US before that happened, just like North York appears on the Canadian list.)

Anyway, in Ontario, Hamilton, London and Windsor could have been bigger, and Halifax didn't grow as much as it possibly could have either. Two of those cities are separated from another reasonably large city by a narrow body of water -- Halifax and Dartmouth, and Hamilton and Burlington -- so there are possibilities to add those. Windsor and Detroit are also separated by a narrow body of water. With the help of the Channel Crossing Department of the ASBs, fiends that they are, you could get both of those cities amalgamated and in the same country.

But there's a big problem with Canadian megacities.
The best farmland in Canada now lies under the concrete jungle called Toronto and Canada isn't exactly full of excellent farmland.
We have plenty of land but most of it's permafrost or mountain or just not good farmland.

 

[Workable Goblin]

So? Japan doesn’t have a ton of farmland...but still has plenty of huge cities. Singapore has no farmland at all...still a huge city. Farmland is irrelevant to how large a city can grow past the 19th century or so, because once you get modern food preservation techniques it’s hardly any problem to import food from somewhere else.

 

[BlackDragon98]

So? Japan doesn’t have a ton of farmland...but still has plenty of huge cities. Singapore has no farmland at all...still a huge city. Farmland is irrelevant to how large a city can grow past the 19th century or so, because once you get modern food preservation techniques it’s hardly any problem to import food from somewhere else.

Canada's agricultural industry is very important.
It's one of Canada's few remaining industries that hasn't been almost completely absorbed into some global conglomerate that sucks all the profit out of Canada.
He/She who controls the farmland shall control the world when hell is let loose.

 

[phx1138]

By the way, are the Saskatchewan Rivers still used in river transportation these days?

Not AFAIK. Not since the '10s & the last riverboat to hit a bridge.

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

But there's a big problem with Canadian megacities.
The best farmland in Canada now lies under the concrete jungle called Toronto

No it's not.

and Canada isn't exactly full of excellent farmland.

Actually we have quite a lot, a lot of which isn't even under cultivation.

 

[BlackDragon98]

No it's not.


Actually we have quite a lot, a lot of which isn't even under cultivation.

Nunavut?

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

No, not Nunavut (to my knowledge) but there are plenty of fertile regions further north, such as the Clay Belt, which are largely untapped.

 

[BlackDragon98]

No, not Nunavut (to my knowledge) but there are plenty of fertile regions further north, such as the Clay Belt, which are largely untapped.

But those places have lots of mineral resources, so it's probably not a good idea to farm there.
And it's too cold most of the time, unless greenhouses are your go to solution.

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

But those places have lots of mineral resources, so it's probably not a good idea to farm there.

one can do both you know...

And it's too cold most of the time, unless greenhouses are your go to solution.

Greenhouse gasses are my solution. It's quite a bit warmer than it was during the last attempt to settle it.

 

[knightdepaix]

Wikipedia's list of largest cities by census year shows some possible ones. Note that many cities, especially Montreal and Toronto, suddenly increase in size because of amalgamations. That's why Toronto isn't the largest city until the megacity amalgamation of 2001. (New York City's amalgamation happened in 1898, and you can see Brooklyn as one of the largest cities in the US before that happened, just like North York appears on the Canadian list.)
Anyway, in Ontario, Hamilton, London and Windsor could have been bigger, and Halifax didn't grow as much as it possibly could have either. Two of those cities are separated from another reasonably large city by a narrow body of water -- Halifax and Dartmouth, and Hamilton and Burlington -- so there are possibilities to add those. Windsor and Detroit are also separated by a narrow body of water. With the help of the Channel Crossing Department of the ASBs, fiends that they are, you could get both of those cities amalgamated and in the same country.

But there's a big problem with Canadian megacities.
The best farmland in Canada now lies under the concrete jungle called Toronto and Canada isn't exactly full of excellent farmland.
We have plenty of land but most of it's permafrost or mountain or just not good farmland.

Canada's agricultural industry is very important.
It's one of Canada's few remaining industries that hasn't been almost completely absorbed into some global conglomerate that sucks all the profit out of Canada.
He/She who controls the farmland shall control the world when hell is let loose.

Not AFAIK. Not since the '10s & the last riverboat to hit a bridge.

Does it make sense to use those Saskatchewan rivers for transport again?
Regarding the largest cities, are their economies paramount if they can grow larger?

 

[phx1138]

Does it make sense to use those Saskatchewan rivers for transport again?
Regarding the largest cities, are their economies paramount if they can grow larger?

Except the rivers are frozen about 8mo/yr, IDK why not. Depth might be an issue, but big European-style grain barges would seem to be a good idea, freeing farmers from the railway monopoly. It might also be possible to bulk ship potash. (Other benefits, IDK.)

Given that's credible, IMO Saskatoon might be a fair bit larger. The Battlefords, too. Maybe P.A.

 

[BlackDragon98]

Except the rivers are frozen about 8mo/yr, IDK why not. Depth might be an issue, but big European-style grain barges would seem to be a good idea, freeing farmers from the railway monopoly. It might also be possible to bulk ship potash. (Other benefits, IDK.)

Given that's credible, IMO Saskatoon might be a fair bit larger. The Battlefords, too. Maybe P.A.

Icebreaking barges.
That's the first solution that came to mind.

 

[Baldrick]

If the USA conquers Canada at some point, Buffalo might end up absorbing a lot of territory to its west

 

[phx1138]

Icebreaking barges.
That's the first solution that came to mind.

It crossed my mind, too, but IDK how practical that is. The ice isn't quite Arctic, but it's going to be pretty thick.

 

[WolfNeuron]

Pretty much every single one in Eastern Europe, France, Spain, Scandinavia and Ireland.

The entirety of the Americas can also be much more populated, as well as Africa

We aren't even close to hitting maximum population - we'll reach it soon as birth rates in Europe jump up (and not from the immigrants btw).

Can i ask what you mean by ‘we’ and why you think birthrates in Europe will increase?

 

[phx1138]

we'll reach it soon as birth rates in Europe jump up (and not from the immigrants btw).

More likely from immigration, since rising standards of living in Europe (and Japan, & North America) mean birthrates have been going down steadily since 1850 or so (contrary to what the Malthusian nitwits in the green movement believe, which is contrary to over 200yr of evidence... )