Good thing every one of their votes is worth as much as everyone's in those green states, right? Hahhaa... right???
"but we need agriculture to vote". That's what I hear, that they'd be downed out of we went off pure population. Except, the population IS being drowned out by a few very conservative states right now who have populations of a fraction of that of our cities, and now they want to implement things that actively hurt our cities simply because they don't like them.
Fine we still need a system that has some balance, but right now I'd hardly say there's a balance at all
Rural people make up 20% of the US population. They SHOULD be drowned out by the other 80%, or putting it less antagonistically they should have their fair share of influence, which is 20%. The Senate is a giant thumb on the scale that gives rural voter representation a stranglehold on the government. Talkin' to you, Moscow Mitch.
And I'm okay with it being disproportionate because they also run a good chunk of our agriculture and do have a good chunk of land, but the scales are definitely too too far . They shouldn't be drowning out 80% of our population just because they have a lot of space.
This is also just neglecting the value that the rest provide
For example, what about the people who make the farming machines? And then to take it further what about them making software for it? What about the people making software to make software? What about the ones making the parts to make the machines? And so on
We don't live in a vacuum anymore. You don't do farming with just a few simple tools, and farmers aren't self sufficient, they participate in society and use all the other society stuff too
Trying to weight voted by provided value gets super complicated and messy fast, especially if you start including stuff like disabilities and such. Is this really the way to go?
Under our current system, "weight by value" just means that we are actually instantiating an olligarchy. I mean we already are, but that would be full blown mask off.
Or what, they'll stop producing food? States that are big on financial companies could claim they deserve more representation because they finance everybody else. Or states with a lot of military because they pertect Freedum. Etc. Nope, you're a citizen, you get equal representation.
Generally people like to eat. AG is going to be safe.
Nah fuck them farmers. We live under capitalism, let that shit system ride. If we defund the farmers, either new farmers take their place or we starve and capitalism collapses. Both of these seem like net positives
I remember when I moved to L.A. getting to the start of L.A. county and thinking, "finally! I'm here!" The apartment I rented was in Hollywood. I was surrounded by urban sprawl. I assumed I'd be there in at most 45 minutes or an hour because it was the middle of the day and traffic was going smoothly.
And then L.A. county just keeps going... and going... and going...
And then I saw the Hollywood sign. Almost there!
And then L.A. county just keeps going... and going... and going...
Idk how accurate this is anymore. LA county is 9.7 million while Michigan, North Carolina and Georgia all have a population over 10 million.
based on 2023 estimates: ca, tx, fl, ny, pa, il, oh, ga, nc, and mi all have populations over la county's 9.66 million.
Looks like you're right, but frankly LA County having more people than 40 states instead of 43 doesn't drastically change the picture.
That's only if the 2020 US census is accurate (it's not)
So what perfectly accurate data source do you propose this map be based on?
I work in municipal government. We pretty much ignore the 2020 census where we legally can. It was a shitshow that was intentionally sabotaged. With the while country on lockdown for several months, it should have been the most precise census ever, but Trump had to fuck it up like everything else he touches.
We do our local estimates based on number of housing units and the demographics of the type of housing (e.g. houses that cost 5 million dollars have fewer occupants per bedroom than $200,000 homes).
I'm talking about the above claims that certain states are ESTIMATED to have more people than LA county.
Shouldn't you ask OP?
Putting it another way, only six states + California have more people than LA county.
How, no one actually lives in LA it's just a tourist attraction
The county is a bit larger than the city.
LA state movement when?
Louisiana
Yeah yeah we'll give them LX as an abbreviation. But they're the size of Rhode Island and obviously extremely populous. Maybe we should think about NYC too?
NYC is NA.
New Amsterdam? I do believe that will piss off the maximum number of people. I like it.
Why'd they change it? I can't say. People just like it better that way.
Sounds like it should break off into its own state, getting us two more senators and EC votes.
That's too many. They should stop it
Huh, didn't realize Ohio was that populous
Cincinnati and Cleveland both have decently-sized populations and there are enough smaller cities like Columbus and (ugh) Youngstown to add to that.
Remember that the reason Illinois doesn't fit that map is mostly due to Chicago.
Columbus population is larger than Cincinnati or Cleveland. Not sure why you think it's smaller.
Since we are talking county and not city, metro area must be accounted for. L.A.'s metro area is actually far larger than L.A. county, but that's another issue.
Cleveland metro area: 3.7 million people Cincy metro area: 2.2 million people Columbus metro area: 2.1 million people.
I admit that was more people than I realized, but it's definitely not larger.
Cleveland-Akron-Canton metropolitan statistical area is 3.7 million, Columbus metro stat area is 2.1 million. Cleveland proper is only 362K while Columbus proper is 913K. Direct size comparisons of "cities" almost always are dependent upon arbitrary border definitions.
Interesting
Jacksonville is Florida's most populous city. The Nashville metro area has more than double the population of San Francisco. When people talk about cities in contexts like this, they usually account for the adjacent suburbs as well, which usually has a lot more of the people. The cities may have the center and the commerce, but arbitrary lines separating it from other cities don't mean the area is any bigger or smaller.
This is also why the above map is based on LA County and not the City of Los Angeles, because LA County is full of small ~100k population cities that make up the larger Los Angeles area. This is also part of the challenge in larger efforts to improve LA's urban design, as every couple of miles you have an entirely different city government to work with
I'm honestly surprised, what with the rate of suicides due to people having to live with the fact that they live in Ohio.
English failure. 2 counts.
For the map enthused!
Rules:
post relevant content: interesting, informative, and/or pretty maps
be nice
