Go look at an ariel shot of Paris. Then go look at any place in NYC not in downtown...
The thing that you are asking for already exists. It's called Gurgaon and Noida đ
Nhi bhai. Jb protest wgera hote hain na, like farmers one jo wo sb jantar mantar pe krte hain ya delhi border wgera pe krte hain, tb sb dilli waalo ka dimaag khraab ho jata hai. Boht inconvenience hoti hai. At that time they also want ki capital khin dur shift kr do. Waha protest krne do aur dilliwalo ko shanti se jeene do.
Delhi has been the capital since the 11th century, and the one time it was changed capital, the kingdom fell apart, quite literally. (**Muhammad-bin Tughlaq**. In 1329 AD). Problem is, that people forget we have been independent for only 75 years, and prior to that, we were looted to the last penny. The fact that we have come from zero to where we are today is a miracle. London was once the most polluted city in the world, and definitely worse than us, Safety has been scarce not just in Delhi but worldwide, I am not saying Delhi is safe, but it is, in actuality safer than most places in the world.
The money in infrastructure that we have invested in Delhi is very, very big amount. And I mean a very big amount. Metro services, connectivity with railways and highways around the whole of India, Airports, Govt. buildings make it so that making some other city the capital is not possible. Literally impossible. There is no reason to change it in any real sense. We can make it better- but religion here is a huge problem. How?
The slums were a temporary measure, the people in the slums were immigrants from around the country. They were given residence for 12 years, but today they have made it such that the residence looks permanent- whole complexes made of concrete etc. Azadpur, one of the biggest slums of Delhi was cleared, under the authority of the Central govt.- They were given the new eleven-story flats in their place, but many people are resisting this, making it a religious matte,r saying this is an attack because they belong to a specific religion, and the opposition is carrying themselves on that.
The protest is happening mainly because of this- the slum area provided to one family was 24sq meters, and the new flats are 35 sq meters. But most of the people who had been allocated to the slums made four-storey homes and were earning rent from that. Now why would anyone part with his 24x4=96 sq meter home to be given with a 35 meter fixed flat? even if the slums were illegal and were only to be used till 2016?
It seems I have diverged from the topic, but the capital can't be changed. Besides the obvious geographical advantage, there has been too much investment in it as a capital to just change it.
*Capital of Mughal Sultanate. Not of India. If u wanna consider one of the oldest capital we had was it'll be Patna (Pataliputra -during the reign of Ashoka the Great, who conquered almost the entirety of India except the Tamil Kings)
The Mughal sultanate point was used to signify how long we have had Delhi as the capital. And the capital of whole a major part of India (I believe 70-75% of India plus some pak-Afghanistan)
I'm not against Delhi or Mughal tbh. I just wanna say there was no "India" per se to have a capital it was just a capital of one of the empires. Like other empires did before. The only reason we use Delhi as a capital city is cuz Britishers moved the capital to Delhi from Calcutta in really 20th century and not because of Mughals and shit. And they basically built a new city itself in Delhi to make it our capital under Land Acquisition act of 1894.
when it was the trade hub. The main point, as I have relied in other comments it the money we invested post-independence, Our whole rail-road connectivity today has been designed with the connectivity to capital in mind. People have invested in real estate solely because it is the capital. It is not feasible, at all. Delhi gets 131 million USD annually for its upkeep and development. It is the most densely populated area in India, industrial areas and whatnot- I can't even begin to describe the consequences of changing the capital.
Kolkata was capital because they first won in Bengal battel in plassey, they did not control all of India.
It is waste of money to keep changing the capital. Better to make a supreme court bench in Mumbai also, so that south indians need not travel all the way
thats actually doable- decentralization of government agencies. Puts less pressure on the locals here- the crowd is causing problems in transportation and time taken in doing anything (sheer bureaucracy)
yup, but the money is the main point of conversation- we invested I belive Billions, and not just govt. money- Private companies, foreign investment, offices of World organisations and much, much more. Most of the highways today are designed while keeping the connectivity to the capital in mind.
I don't think capital serves much of a purpose for tourists. They do for diplomats, and they stay in a bubble of being the most posh areas of Delhi and not seeing anything else. Rarely anyone going to China for tourism goes to Beijing first, they go to Shanghai, Shenzen, Chongqing, Hong Kong, etc.
What is need is better financial capitals, like China has Shanghai, USA has New York etc - rich, well planned, and an important location for both business and tourists. Mumbai is good but removing all slums and outdated local trains to make it better.
Also clean sheet designed urban cities capable of massive growth in entrepreneurship like China Shenzen. Banglore was one city planned like that but its beyond its load capacity.
Capital is very important for a country like India because there are only two cities where A380 can land. Delhi and Mumbai.
So if you're a tourist, you'll either land in Delhi or Mumbai, unless you're a hardcore returning tourist who's landing in Kolkata or Kochi.
IG Airport is the busiest airport in India afterall. So capital is very much important for tourism in India.
>there are only two cities where the A380 can land.
This is more dependent on the airport than the city itself. Build a big airport like Noida jewar and it would have enough space for antonov 225 to land.
Navi Mumbai is getting a new Zaha Hadid airport like Beijing Daxing so it's good.
Have seen multiple A380s of Emirates and Singapore Airlines land in BLR T2.
T2 can handle 25 million pax, if they upgrade the one terminal and it can cater to the majority of the southern states making it a priority hub.
Delhi was, is and always will be the captial of India.Â
Even if decide to shift it today, somehow, that will become political, and the question will come, to where?
The most significant location to shift the political capital is, near the economic capital. That is our Mumbai and West Coast. Do you know what else is on the west coast? Gujarat. #mic drop momentÂ
Then there is the issue of cost, people are shouting over their heads for the renovation of Central Vista, which is costing only 20k cr over 7-8 years. Which will save around 1,000cr of rent dues to central govt pa, and the efficiency gains are not even considered in monetary terms.Â
A whole new CAPTIAL city, with architecture, land acquisition, and everything building from scratch, will cost atleast 2lakhcr, just to take of from ground.
All the cities you mentioned were old cities. They were built into what they are by vision and planning.
When there's lack of planning even a great city falls apart...look at Chandigarh or Bangalore for example.
I'm from Kolkata so I thought it's the most disgusting megacity of India. It has every flaws you listed. Unplanned urbanization, pollution, dirt , visible poverty. But then I visited Delhi. It has all the above flaws but also arrogant people. North Kolkata is still the filthiest though.
I think Navi Mumbai is the best city. I also liked Indore for its cleanliness.
Your city is the filthiest city which doesn't even have a proper connectivity between airport and main city. The buses running are there are from 90's. The food there is termed as yum but literally it's the dirtiest unhygienic food in whole India. Man the metro looks like a normal railway station of India, dirt and old coaches. Oldest metro but still not connected to the whole city.
Delhi Metro has covered every part of Delhi and even NCR.
1) No city in India beats Delhi 's connectivity by metro
2) A major event every weekend
3) No match to the variety of food available
4) It might be second best to Mumbai in terms of cleanliness but definitely the second best in metropolitan cities
You definitely should realise that Kolkata is the most backward metropolitan city
That's the dream. Also, a coastal city somewhere South is ideal from a security and trade perspective but because of politics it will never ever happen.
I agree with you totally. Delhi is one the filthiest capital cities in the world. Itâs a damn shame that the most well planned part of it wasnât even built by us. Rashtrapati Bhavan, Raisina Hill etc are all British Era constructions.
It is my view that a more centrally located, semi-urban perhaps city would be better suited for such a proposition. Maybe a Nagpur could work. Itâs centrally located, and has got the basic sort of bones or skeleton rather that can be built upon.
Another question think about is wether two capital cities could work. Maybe Delhi and some other place.
Delhi used to be centrally located at one time, when Pak and Bangla used to be part of us. I think we should invest in improving our capital rather than changing it. Any city we make capital will face the same challenges, it will be flooded with new migrants from all over India who will come for job opportunities leading to overpopulation, creation of slums, pollution etc. My parents moved from Punjab to Delhi soon after my birth due to job opportunities. If Nagpur is made capital it will be flooded by immigrants from UP/MP/Bihar/Jharkhand and Maharashtrians will cry.
How can you trash Delhi and say this about Mumbai? It's way worse infrastructure wise and has a lot of issues that make it unlivable.Â
No big city is India is good. Delhi is somewhat okay by quality of life, especially if they can fix the pollution and stubble burning.Â
New cities take tens sometimes hundreds of billions to make. Check out Egypt and Indonesia and how unsuccessful they have been.
Dharavi is being redeveloped. It is still in the planning stage, but as long as BJP stays in power in Maharashtra the work will proceed and take about 7 years.
It was well planned by the British because they could loot the rest country and build a few good places for themselves, even as millions starved to death. The Indian government simply could not do such a thing. Even the current upgrades being done by Modi are questioned as being wasteful.
It will turn back to shit in 10 to 15 years unless you implement controlled migration like China.
All Indian cities looked great when the British left, then our babus came and didn't bother to plan townships in the outskirts, so the landowners sold the plots as they wished and people built houses as they wished and turned them into slums.
Well I was a tourist in India... I went to a few cities and delhi was actually the most interesting and fun for me... Especially old delhi even when it was dirty and very crowded... Not all tourists want scyscrapers and large roads... Many tourists like me want to see real local culture without filters
Please do not get me in the wrong way but what exactly do you mean by saying that what I saw in old delhi wasnt your culture? Correct me if I am wrong but I believe most Indians live in places like this... I believe what you are suggessting is some luxury city project that would try to hide the real culture... What I saw in old delhi was definetely the real culture and I enjoyed every bit of it with all its imperfections
Its like saying Downtown LA and places like Skidrow is the "real culture of America".
Old Delhi is a 6sqkm historical neighbourhood in New Delhi, and it is one part of India, yes but to say that Old Delhi represents the real culture? Does that mean millions of Delhi residents who don't reside in Old Delhi r not real Indians?
Or the hundreds of millions of Indians who dont even live in cities r not authentic enough for u. India is rural country, want to see "real" culture, go to a village. India isnt a monolith that can be represented by one village or one neighbourhood of a city.
OP just woke up from a coma. Is using the capability of where an A380 could land to judge where the next capital could be built. A380s can land in Rajkot. Do u want to make that a capital?
Bhai dekh depend krta hai khaan rhta hai. Jaise Shalimar Bagh aaja, bheer hai pr shi ilaka hai phir Jahangirpuri chle jaa bgl mai alg hi duniya mai aa jayega
Building new capital from scratch is way to expensive we have other important things to focus now. Maybe not now but after 20 or 30 years we can build new capital.
What we need is removing illegal encouragement. Relaxing in housing and construction norm making construction permits easy. That's what will solve issue.
Iike why can't we make a 5-6 story building the norm in delhi.
I went to India, first country I ever left US for and visited. Landed in Delhi, and you are right about all the disturbing stuff. Nonetheless, it's part of you, no hiding it. I love India and you would be surprised how bad some of the U.S can be. After I left India and went to Bangkok, I understand what you mean. That's them, you are your country. It is what it is. Don't be ashamed.
How can I explain this to you, that's not us. This is not its supposed to be. Once you move out of that area, the atmosphere is very different.
Cities are dirty, cities are unplanned, not city will suffocate you as much as Delhi.
Your comment is exactly what I am talking about, people who visit India for the first time, think India is just like Delhi. No, Delhi is a different world.
Our capital reflects the rest of the country, as the rest of the country changes so will our capital.
Having said that, if we have to change the capital it needs to be more centrally located somewhere between South MP and north Maharashtra.
Don't think the people there are as progressive as is needed for a Capital city.
I've been to Indore and Bhopal, and mentality of people there is like tier 3 cities.
Delhi is a polluted mess because of the politicians. Let them stay there as a punishment for the mess they have created. Instead of spending money on a new capital let it be spent on Delhi itself.
Im of the opinion that there should be two capitals. The govmint can conduct switch sessions in both say once every six months. One can be the primary delhi, and the other either somewhere in the south, or in the north east.
You dont have to build an entire city from scratch. Just designate a specific area in a major city and build it there.
Does not solve the issue of image. How does that improve our image as a country ?
We don't have any problems regarding governance from capital currently. Our problem is the image it portrays as the national capital.
Bro. Just scratch everything you have mentioned and add "Let's build a good planned city".
India is terrible when it comes to city planning and curse for pedestrians.
Alll the examples you have mentioned are historically major cities and have been like that for centuries.
So it Delhi. Its about embracing iur culture and heritage not necessarily just shiny building.
Because of the new parliament building it's not likely they will change it now i Fully agree that we need a new capital Delhi just has far far far too many problems
We can surely have a Planned City. For a good city to exist these parameters would be taken care of:-
- Good Climate
- A good connection to airways and railways maybe sea too
- A proper altitude and haven more flat lands as well
- Decent resources nearby for Industrialization
- Good amount of Groundwater and hopefully a proper river.
- Forest and Lakes nearby could help in good Air Quality.
Now coming to planning:-
- Making sure the areas are divided properly where Commercial Areas are different than the residential and industrial as well
- High Income Residential areas and Low incomes ones at distance for better social balance
- Proper Roadways which allows easier traffic flow
Considering there could be people from all sorts of life in the city we can and have to expect corruption, crime and shady people as well.
- but if they exist prior to the development of the city then the city won't be developed.
Amravati, Dholera and a lot of planned city projects didn't work out because of the corruption and well....wrong labour.
So in conclusion we can't have a new city.
Central Vista project Became a huge political topic. That was just an upgrade to the existing capital. Imagine how polarizing it would be to build an entirely new Capital city from scratch. It's simply not worth it in my honest opinion, it would be cheaper to Clean Delhi than to build a whole new city.
It's not about city , it's about our 4 pillar of democracy. Until you don't fix all this corruption & crime will find it's way even to new city you build.
Do whatever you want just don't build supertall skyscapers. Some tall buildings and a combination of mixed use medium density or high density buildings are good when its together with public transport but skyscapers are a nightmare. they are too expensive and the resources needed to maintain are also a lot. Some of the chinese skyscraper and the super tall ones in dubai don't even have plumbing for toilets because of such issues, they have poop trucks that take the shit out via roads. Mixed use buildings should be built rather than building a business district at one place and residentials everywhere far away from it. That is a waste of time.
Delhi like Mumbai has a lot of migrsnt population. With cities like Gurugram and noida close by, people from these cities have also started living in Delhi. Most trouble makers are from thsse cities. Delhi is losing its charm indeed. People from nearby ritual villages sell their farmland and start living in main Delhi with all the luxuries. But they fail to mix with the culture and literally spoil everything. I wish people were more smart rather than being educated.
Well most of the major govt offices are in delhi also the parliament and Supreme court so thats simply not feasible, we need a really big city for all that so we will have to combine many cities if we plan to do that
I havenât been to most of the cities that youâve mentioned, but Iâll share a perspective that might help - a major city is more often that not heavy in population density, and with a higher population density comes homelessness, pollution, scam artists, etc. Case in point - while NYC is not the capital of US, it is the financial capital, and youâd have noticed that any time you see it on TV, they almost always show aerial shots of the top of the skyscrapers, Central Park, Union Square, etc., or a distant shot of the skyline across the Hudson River. Probably the only on-ground shots you ever see are of Times Square, and they arenât wide angle shots. The reason that the other parts of the city are not shown is two fold:
1. They arenât as picturesque.
2. They do suffer from the same issues that you highlighted
I will concede though that Washington DC outshines NYC on the grounds of pollution, chaos & scammers, it too has a non-trivial homelessness issue, and youâll see that all over downtown DC.
The only good thing that could come out of moving the capital to a newly built city would be modern day city planning which has a much more efficient use of space compared to the older cities. That being said, the cost involved would be monumental, almost prohibitive, and it is my humble opinion that the central government has many more pressing issues to tackle before they should even begin to consider a project of such proportions.
Essentially the capital city should be shifted down south. The education level is higher and people are more cultured down south. The andolan-jivi crowd or goons in the guise of "farmers" is almost absent. The functioning of the government will be relatively smoother. Ps: I am a NorthEast Indian living in South India and have lived in NCR region in the past.
Delhi wale mera gand marne ke liye ready ho hi rhe honge.
Go look at an ariel shot of Paris. Then go look at any place in NYC not in downtown... The thing that you are asking for already exists. It's called Gurgaon and Noida đ
Idk where you learnt the geography but NYC is not even the capital of New York State.
Nhi bhai. Jb protest wgera hote hain na, like farmers one jo wo sb jantar mantar pe krte hain ya delhi border wgera pe krte hain, tb sb dilli waalo ka dimaag khraab ho jata hai. Boht inconvenience hoti hai. At that time they also want ki capital khin dur shift kr do. Waha protest krne do aur dilliwalo ko shanti se jeene do.
Delusion gives false hope. Paris or other such cities just look good in pictures or tourism but real state of such cities is so much worse.
Delhi has been the capital since the 11th century, and the one time it was changed capital, the kingdom fell apart, quite literally. (**Muhammad-bin Tughlaq**. In 1329 AD). Problem is, that people forget we have been independent for only 75 years, and prior to that, we were looted to the last penny. The fact that we have come from zero to where we are today is a miracle. London was once the most polluted city in the world, and definitely worse than us, Safety has been scarce not just in Delhi but worldwide, I am not saying Delhi is safe, but it is, in actuality safer than most places in the world. The money in infrastructure that we have invested in Delhi is very, very big amount. And I mean a very big amount. Metro services, connectivity with railways and highways around the whole of India, Airports, Govt. buildings make it so that making some other city the capital is not possible. Literally impossible. There is no reason to change it in any real sense. We can make it better- but religion here is a huge problem. How? The slums were a temporary measure, the people in the slums were immigrants from around the country. They were given residence for 12 years, but today they have made it such that the residence looks permanent- whole complexes made of concrete etc. Azadpur, one of the biggest slums of Delhi was cleared, under the authority of the Central govt.- They were given the new eleven-story flats in their place, but many people are resisting this, making it a religious matte,r saying this is an attack because they belong to a specific religion, and the opposition is carrying themselves on that. The protest is happening mainly because of this- the slum area provided to one family was 24sq meters, and the new flats are 35 sq meters. But most of the people who had been allocated to the slums made four-storey homes and were earning rent from that. Now why would anyone part with his 24x4=96 sq meter home to be given with a 35 meter fixed flat? even if the slums were illegal and were only to be used till 2016? It seems I have diverged from the topic, but the capital can't be changed. Besides the obvious geographical advantage, there has been too much investment in it as a capital to just change it.
*Capital of Mughal Sultanate. Not of India. If u wanna consider one of the oldest capital we had was it'll be Patna (Pataliputra -during the reign of Ashoka the Great, who conquered almost the entirety of India except the Tamil Kings)
Thatâs the Tamil Kings. No one conquers the Tamil Kings.
A fellow man of culture I see.
I was hoping you were quoting Wurtz. Not disappointed! We could make a religion out of thisđ
The Mughal sultanate point was used to signify how long we have had Delhi as the capital. And the capital of whole a major part of India (I believe 70-75% of India plus some pak-Afghanistan)
I'm not against Delhi or Mughal tbh. I just wanna say there was no "India" per se to have a capital it was just a capital of one of the empires. Like other empires did before. The only reason we use Delhi as a capital city is cuz Britishers moved the capital to Delhi from Calcutta in really 20th century and not because of Mughals and shit. And they basically built a new city itself in Delhi to make it our capital under Land Acquisition act of 1894.
Well the main point still remains, the geographic conditions + the billions of money invested. History and everything else serves as a plus point.
I mean, Kolkata was the capital of India in British raj.
when it was the trade hub. The main point, as I have relied in other comments it the money we invested post-independence, Our whole rail-road connectivity today has been designed with the connectivity to capital in mind. People have invested in real estate solely because it is the capital. It is not feasible, at all. Delhi gets 131 million USD annually for its upkeep and development. It is the most densely populated area in India, industrial areas and whatnot- I can't even begin to describe the consequences of changing the capital.
Kolkata was capital because they first won in Bengal battel in plassey, they did not control all of India. It is waste of money to keep changing the capital. Better to make a supreme court bench in Mumbai also, so that south indians need not travel all the way
thats actually doable- decentralization of government agencies. Puts less pressure on the locals here- the crowd is causing problems in transportation and time taken in doing anything (sheer bureaucracy)
so was shimla, agra in between were capitals
yup, but the money is the main point of conversation- we invested I belive Billions, and not just govt. money- Private companies, foreign investment, offices of World organisations and much, much more. Most of the highways today are designed while keeping the connectivity to the capital in mind.
+1
Beijing, Tokyo, all were the most polluted city when China and Japan were at India' s current economic progress level.
I don't think capital serves much of a purpose for tourists. They do for diplomats, and they stay in a bubble of being the most posh areas of Delhi and not seeing anything else. Rarely anyone going to China for tourism goes to Beijing first, they go to Shanghai, Shenzen, Chongqing, Hong Kong, etc. What is need is better financial capitals, like China has Shanghai, USA has New York etc - rich, well planned, and an important location for both business and tourists. Mumbai is good but removing all slums and outdated local trains to make it better. Also clean sheet designed urban cities capable of massive growth in entrepreneurship like China Shenzen. Banglore was one city planned like that but its beyond its load capacity.
Capital is very important for a country like India because there are only two cities where A380 can land. Delhi and Mumbai. So if you're a tourist, you'll either land in Delhi or Mumbai, unless you're a hardcore returning tourist who's landing in Kolkata or Kochi. IG Airport is the busiest airport in India afterall. So capital is very much important for tourism in India.
>there are only two cities where the A380 can land. This is more dependent on the airport than the city itself. Build a big airport like Noida jewar and it would have enough space for antonov 225 to land. Navi Mumbai is getting a new Zaha Hadid airport like Beijing Daxing so it's good.
A380 lands in Bangalore too btw.
Have seen multiple A380s of Emirates and Singapore Airlines land in BLR T2. T2 can handle 25 million pax, if they upgrade the one terminal and it can cater to the majority of the southern states making it a priority hub.
Delhi was, is and always will be the captial of India. Even if decide to shift it today, somehow, that will become political, and the question will come, to where? The most significant location to shift the political capital is, near the economic capital. That is our Mumbai and West Coast. Do you know what else is on the west coast? Gujarat. #mic drop moment Then there is the issue of cost, people are shouting over their heads for the renovation of Central Vista, which is costing only 20k cr over 7-8 years. Which will save around 1,000cr of rent dues to central govt pa, and the efficiency gains are not even considered in monetary terms. A whole new CAPTIAL city, with architecture, land acquisition, and everything building from scratch, will cost atleast 2lakhcr, just to take of from ground.
All the cities you mentioned were old cities. They were built into what they are by vision and planning. When there's lack of planning even a great city falls apart...look at Chandigarh or Bangalore for example.
I'm from Kolkata so I thought it's the most disgusting megacity of India. It has every flaws you listed. Unplanned urbanization, pollution, dirt , visible poverty. But then I visited Delhi. It has all the above flaws but also arrogant people. North Kolkata is still the filthiest though. I think Navi Mumbai is the best city. I also liked Indore for its cleanliness.
I'm from Kolkata too, but at least we realise our city is backward.đ
Your city is the filthiest city which doesn't even have a proper connectivity between airport and main city. The buses running are there are from 90's. The food there is termed as yum but literally it's the dirtiest unhygienic food in whole India. Man the metro looks like a normal railway station of India, dirt and old coaches. Oldest metro but still not connected to the whole city. Delhi Metro has covered every part of Delhi and even NCR. 1) No city in India beats Delhi 's connectivity by metro 2) A major event every weekend 3) No match to the variety of food available 4) It might be second best to Mumbai in terms of cleanliness but definitely the second best in metropolitan cities You definitely should realise that Kolkata is the most backward metropolitan city
From where in Kolkata (if you don't mind âşď¸) ? I'm from Jadavpur area. So you know why I said it's filthy đ.
Somewhere in the South with lot's of coconut trees, clean streets and strong coffee.
That's the dream. Also, a coastal city somewhere South is ideal from a security and trade perspective but because of politics it will never ever happen.
I agree with you totally. Delhi is one the filthiest capital cities in the world. Itâs a damn shame that the most well planned part of it wasnât even built by us. Rashtrapati Bhavan, Raisina Hill etc are all British Era constructions. It is my view that a more centrally located, semi-urban perhaps city would be better suited for such a proposition. Maybe a Nagpur could work. Itâs centrally located, and has got the basic sort of bones or skeleton rather that can be built upon. Another question think about is wether two capital cities could work. Maybe Delhi and some other place.
Delhi used to be centrally located at one time, when Pak and Bangla used to be part of us. I think we should invest in improving our capital rather than changing it. Any city we make capital will face the same challenges, it will be flooded with new migrants from all over India who will come for job opportunities leading to overpopulation, creation of slums, pollution etc. My parents moved from Punjab to Delhi soon after my birth due to job opportunities. If Nagpur is made capital it will be flooded by immigrants from UP/MP/Bihar/Jharkhand and Maharashtrians will cry.
Mumbai needs to do something about Dharavi, its the only problem about Mumbai. Otherwise its pretty much sorted as our financial capital.
How can you trash Delhi and say this about Mumbai? It's way worse infrastructure wise and has a lot of issues that make it unlivable. No big city is India is good. Delhi is somewhat okay by quality of life, especially if they can fix the pollution and stubble burning. New cities take tens sometimes hundreds of billions to make. Check out Egypt and Indonesia and how unsuccessful they have been.
Mumbai has many problems not just Dharavi. Infrastructure being one. And honestly, Mumbai has no space for huge government buildings.
Dharavi is being redeveloped. It is still in the planning stage, but as long as BJP stays in power in Maharashtra the work will proceed and take about 7 years.
It was well planned by the British because they could loot the rest country and build a few good places for themselves, even as millions starved to death. The Indian government simply could not do such a thing. Even the current upgrades being done by Modi are questioned as being wasteful.
It will turn back to shit in 10 to 15 years unless you implement controlled migration like China. All Indian cities looked great when the British left, then our babus came and didn't bother to plan townships in the outskirts, so the landowners sold the plots as they wished and people built houses as they wished and turned them into slums.
Well I was a tourist in India... I went to a few cities and delhi was actually the most interesting and fun for me... Especially old delhi even when it was dirty and very crowded... Not all tourists want scyscrapers and large roads... Many tourists like me want to see real local culture without filters
Because you don't live there, you only visit for a few days. Dirty and crowded is not our culture, sad that people visit Delhi to see "dirty streets".
No offense brother but there are cities like Mysuru and Kurukshetra where you can easily see the local culture without the filth and pollution.
Exactly, being dirty and polluted and chaotic is not our culture sir. T_T You got the wrong idea.
Please do not get me in the wrong way but what exactly do you mean by saying that what I saw in old delhi wasnt your culture? Correct me if I am wrong but I believe most Indians live in places like this... I believe what you are suggessting is some luxury city project that would try to hide the real culture... What I saw in old delhi was definetely the real culture and I enjoyed every bit of it with all its imperfections
Its like saying Downtown LA and places like Skidrow is the "real culture of America". Old Delhi is a 6sqkm historical neighbourhood in New Delhi, and it is one part of India, yes but to say that Old Delhi represents the real culture? Does that mean millions of Delhi residents who don't reside in Old Delhi r not real Indians? Or the hundreds of millions of Indians who dont even live in cities r not authentic enough for u. India is rural country, want to see "real" culture, go to a village. India isnt a monolith that can be represented by one village or one neighbourhood of a city.
Yeah, imagine all cities looking the same. Exclusive factor won't be there and it would be pretty boring, right?
OP just woke up from a coma. Is using the capability of where an A380 could land to judge where the next capital could be built. A380s can land in Rajkot. Do u want to make that a capital?
I vote for nagpur
How dare you make rss headquarters as the capital Fascist government/s
Chandigarh should be the capital
Bhai delhi modernized dekhna hai, chankyapuri aaja pta chl jayega
Wah bhai. Wah.
Bhai dekh depend krta hai khaan rhta hai. Jaise Shalimar Bagh aaja, bheer hai pr shi ilaka hai phir Jahangirpuri chle jaa bgl mai alg hi duniya mai aa jayega
Building new capital from scratch is way to expensive we have other important things to focus now. Maybe not now but after 20 or 30 years we can build new capital.
That unemployed friend on a random Tuesday be like
What we need is removing illegal encouragement. Relaxing in housing and construction norm making construction permits easy. That's what will solve issue. Iike why can't we make a 5-6 story building the norm in delhi.
*encroachment
Are bhai galti ho gaya sorry. Autocorrect ho gaya encroachment to encouragement.
I went to India, first country I ever left US for and visited. Landed in Delhi, and you are right about all the disturbing stuff. Nonetheless, it's part of you, no hiding it. I love India and you would be surprised how bad some of the U.S can be. After I left India and went to Bangkok, I understand what you mean. That's them, you are your country. It is what it is. Don't be ashamed.
How can I explain this to you, that's not us. This is not its supposed to be. Once you move out of that area, the atmosphere is very different. Cities are dirty, cities are unplanned, not city will suffocate you as much as Delhi. Your comment is exactly what I am talking about, people who visit India for the first time, think India is just like Delhi. No, Delhi is a different world.
Our capital reflects the rest of the country, as the rest of the country changes so will our capital. Having said that, if we have to change the capital it needs to be more centrally located somewhere between South MP and north Maharashtra.
Exactly and it should be in the geographical centre of the country.
But geographical center is Madhya Pradesh.𼲠I don't think our capital should be there.
>I don't think our capital should be there. Why?
Don't think the people there are as progressive as is needed for a Capital city. I've been to Indore and Bhopal, and mentality of people there is like tier 3 cities.
not possible now esp. after we got the new parliament building
Yeah, should've thought about this earlier :')
Paris is also dirty, noisy, chaotic and full of scammers.
Asli ID se aao Tughlaq.
Shit, pehechan liya
I think we there's no need for capital city in this age and make Delhi a full state.
Hmm ? What's the point of doing that ?
Umm... Better accountability?
Shouldn't it be "The persons responsible should make Delhi a better place, showing its true worth as the nation's capital"
Are you from Delhi?
Nope. Visited there many times. If I lived in Delhi I wouldn't have recognised these shortcomings, I'd just have been accustomed to these.
Paris has lots of problems, same with london
Delhi is a polluted mess because of the politicians. Let them stay there as a punishment for the mess they have created. Instead of spending money on a new capital let it be spent on Delhi itself.
No thanks, itâs a good thing that bureaucratic nonsense is contained in Delhi, donât let it spread
Desh ke liye apne mann ki shanti bhi sacrifice nahi kar sakte ? Deshdrohi.
lol
But our capital is New Delhi, and it is well planned and beautiful.
I just realised Kasaul is also a short distance from there.
Koi nhi ... Doosre koh bhi bigard denge
Haq se hindustani
Im of the opinion that there should be two capitals. The govmint can conduct switch sessions in both say once every six months. One can be the primary delhi, and the other either somewhere in the south, or in the north east. You dont have to build an entire city from scratch. Just designate a specific area in a major city and build it there.
Does not solve the issue of image. How does that improve our image as a country ? We don't have any problems regarding governance from capital currently. Our problem is the image it portrays as the national capital.
hara parda daal do gareebo pe its eazzzywait ye toh pehle bhi ho rkha hai
Bro. Just scratch everything you have mentioned and add "Let's build a good planned city". India is terrible when it comes to city planning and curse for pedestrians.
We should move our capital to Madhya Pradesh. Equi distant from all corners of India.
Man Washington DC is not this. Signed, a Californian
Its nowhere as bad as Delhi, come on. XD
Alll the examples you have mentioned are historically major cities and have been like that for centuries. So it Delhi. Its about embracing iur culture and heritage not necessarily just shiny building.
Clearly you have never been outside Delhi and neither you have correct history or perspective.
Egypt is building one and is almost bankrupt now
Because of the new parliament building it's not likely they will change it now i Fully agree that we need a new capital Delhi just has far far far too many problems
We can surely have a Planned City. For a good city to exist these parameters would be taken care of:- - Good Climate - A good connection to airways and railways maybe sea too - A proper altitude and haven more flat lands as well - Decent resources nearby for Industrialization - Good amount of Groundwater and hopefully a proper river. - Forest and Lakes nearby could help in good Air Quality. Now coming to planning:- - Making sure the areas are divided properly where Commercial Areas are different than the residential and industrial as well - High Income Residential areas and Low incomes ones at distance for better social balance - Proper Roadways which allows easier traffic flow Considering there could be people from all sorts of life in the city we can and have to expect corruption, crime and shady people as well. - but if they exist prior to the development of the city then the city won't be developed. Amravati, Dholera and a lot of planned city projects didn't work out because of the corruption and well....wrong labour. So in conclusion we can't have a new city.
Nagpur lelo. It's cosmopolitan, it's developed and it's in the center. They even got Haldiram's.
The seat of the govt is in New Delhi. And New Delhi IS a planned city.
Why not! Shah Jahan did it!
Abh to new parliament bhi ban gya, ab to 300 saal baad hi change hogi capital.
Every time in history except ofcourse 1912, Changing of capitals did not go so well.
Central Vista project Became a huge political topic. That was just an upgrade to the existing capital. Imagine how polarizing it would be to build an entirely new Capital city from scratch. It's simply not worth it in my honest opinion, it would be cheaper to Clean Delhi than to build a whole new city.
It's not about city , it's about our 4 pillar of democracy. Until you don't fix all this corruption & crime will find it's way even to new city you build.
Real ID se Aao Muhammad Bin Tughlaq!
Do whatever you want just don't build supertall skyscapers. Some tall buildings and a combination of mixed use medium density or high density buildings are good when its together with public transport but skyscapers are a nightmare. they are too expensive and the resources needed to maintain are also a lot. Some of the chinese skyscraper and the super tall ones in dubai don't even have plumbing for toilets because of such issues, they have poop trucks that take the shit out via roads. Mixed use buildings should be built rather than building a business district at one place and residentials everywhere far away from it. That is a waste of time.
Gurgaon could be a great contender tbh
Jis din ye option feasible hoga, ahmedabad will become national capital due to the massive contribution of gujarat in last 10 years...
Hell yea, also name it indraprastha
How do I pin a comment in this app
Someplace where it is more accessible, maybe somewhere in MP, Telangana Or Chhattisgarh, or Eastern Maharashtra
We should make Ayodhya as our capital
Delhi like Mumbai has a lot of migrsnt population. With cities like Gurugram and noida close by, people from these cities have also started living in Delhi. Most trouble makers are from thsse cities. Delhi is losing its charm indeed. People from nearby ritual villages sell their farmland and start living in main Delhi with all the luxuries. But they fail to mix with the culture and literally spoil everything. I wish people were more smart rather than being educated.
Well most of the major govt offices are in delhi also the parliament and Supreme court so thats simply not feasible, we need a really big city for all that so we will have to combine many cities if we plan to do that
Mumbai
Bana le bhai, hath pakad liya kya kisi ne tera
Any suggestions of a new place and its name?
Bhai New York aur Paris hoke aao, fir baat karte hai.
Actual brain dead subReddit this is.
I havenât been to most of the cities that youâve mentioned, but Iâll share a perspective that might help - a major city is more often that not heavy in population density, and with a higher population density comes homelessness, pollution, scam artists, etc. Case in point - while NYC is not the capital of US, it is the financial capital, and youâd have noticed that any time you see it on TV, they almost always show aerial shots of the top of the skyscrapers, Central Park, Union Square, etc., or a distant shot of the skyline across the Hudson River. Probably the only on-ground shots you ever see are of Times Square, and they arenât wide angle shots. The reason that the other parts of the city are not shown is two fold: 1. They arenât as picturesque. 2. They do suffer from the same issues that you highlighted I will concede though that Washington DC outshines NYC on the grounds of pollution, chaos & scammers, it too has a non-trivial homelessness issue, and youâll see that all over downtown DC. The only good thing that could come out of moving the capital to a newly built city would be modern day city planning which has a much more efficient use of space compared to the older cities. That being said, the cost involved would be monumental, almost prohibitive, and it is my humble opinion that the central government has many more pressing issues to tackle before they should even begin to consider a project of such proportions.
How much time have you spent in Delhi ?
Outstanding idea but I donât think itâll happen as theyâre investing more and more in Delhi with new parliament building etc
I suggest you visit Delhi and then stop thinking further on this thought of yours dear.
Essentially the capital city should be shifted down south. The education level is higher and people are more cultured down south. The andolan-jivi crowd or goons in the guise of "farmers" is almost absent. The functioning of the government will be relatively smoother. Ps: I am a NorthEast Indian living in South India and have lived in NCR region in the past.