first, hyderabad is more cosmopolitan. its now recognized all over(thanks to the likes of CBNaidu, VVS Laxman, Gopichand, Malleshwari... to name a few).
There is no scope even in your dreams to think tat Vijaywada is better than Hyd. . Well Hyd is gud in its location, u knw wat it is one of the desnsely populated capitals in India.
So what? Even though Hyderabad lacks quite a lot technologically (speaking realistically), it is on the world map. My non-Indian professors have heard about Hyderabad at some point.
I think this is a good topic to discuss. Not making vijayawada capital, but the reason why hyderabad should be capital.
The above postors have indicated that Hyderabad should be capital because a)its more cosmopolitan b) its the biggest city in AP c) people world over now hyderabad, but not other cities.
Thats all good. But the question is, does a capital have to be cosmopolitan and famous to serve its purpose, which is, a place where the administive arm of the state functions?
A capital is a place where all the administrative work to run the state is carried out. It has all the government offices and the legislative assembly. So, does the city have to be cosmopolitan to have a legislative assembly? I dont think so. A capital should be a very small town, just big enough to host all government offices. When the assembly is in session, it should cause minimum inconvenience to people of the city or the businesses. The secutiry threat should be maneagable.
If some other city is made capital, then it will free up valuable office space in Hyderabad which can be utilized by private enterprises and Hyderabad will remain the IT/business capital of AP. Same with Vijayawada, which is already the business capital of AP. Some other insignificant town can be made capital.
My two cents.