BHM's Homesteading & Self-Reliance Forum

Posting requires Registration and the use of Cookies-enabled browser


Go Back   BHM Forum > Self-Reliance & Preparedness > Self-reliance

Self-reliance Self-reliance topics that do not have a dedicated board.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-28-2015, 03:12 PM
Jjr's Avatar
Jjr Male Jjr is offline
Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NWLA
Posts: 837
Default Population Density, A New Look

I recently read an interesting article. I do not actually doubt its accuracy, but I am only repeating what I read, so here goes............

50.03% of this nations population (159,524,138 people) is located in only 144 of its Counties which consist of and surround locations like, Los Angeles, Phoenix, New York, San Francisco, Miami and similar locations.

The remaining 49.97% of the population (159,332,918 people) is scattered throughout the remaining 2,998 Counties of this nation.

The population density in major cities, has long been known and is no surprise, but for that entire population to be concentrated in less than 5% (4.58%) of the nations counties does provide a new perspective on the population topic.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-28-2015, 04:27 PM
backlash's Avatar
backlash Male backlash is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Dry side of Washington
Posts: 1,930
Default



This is the election map by county.
It probably supports your information.
Obvious but the red is Republican and the blue is Democrat.
This is a 2004 map sorry for the old information.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-29-2015, 10:38 AM
Ciderman's Avatar
Ciderman Male Ciderman is offline
Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Central Indiana
Posts: 578
Default

Jjr I am not trying to pick a fight but I do not think the county county is accurate. I added it up and it comes to 3142 counties. I am involved in a hobby that we try to talk to someone in every county. For our award there is 3079 counties we condensed AK from 25 to 4 for our award. Which makes 3104 counties. I also went to this website http://www.clickandlearn.cc/FreeBlac...s/Counties.htm and came up with 3100. Like I said I am not picking a fight just trying to educate.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-29-2015, 03:15 PM
MissouriFree's Avatar
MissouriFree MissouriFree is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: central missouri woods
Posts: 18,705
Default

Here is the county results of 2012 presidential election

https://www.google.com/search?site=&...tpevE7vwxUM%3A
__________________
I find out of long experience that I admire all nations and hate all governments- Steinbeck
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-29-2015, 09:13 PM
Jjr's Avatar
Jjr Male Jjr is offline
Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NWLA
Posts: 837
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ciderman View Post
Jjr I am not trying to pick a fight but I do not think the county county is accurate. I added it up and it comes to 3142 counties. I am involved in a hobby that we try to talk to someone in every county. For our award there is 3079 counties we condensed AK from 25 to 4 for our award. Which makes 3104 counties. I also went to this website http://www.clickandlearn.cc/FreeBlac...s/Counties.htm and came up with 3100. Like I said I am not picking a fight just trying to educate.
I said in the first line....."I am only repeating what I read." If the article was incorrect, it was incorrect, and that is what it is. It was incorrect and not me, so no offense is taken.

Just looking around a little, I found the following site: rochester.nydatabases.com/database/population-us-counties. It prominently declares in a line before the counties are listed in descending order by population, that there are 3,221 counties in the U.S.

I don't know who has the correct number of counties, but the discrepancy in the total number of counties by different sources does remind me of an old math teachers favorite statement, "Figures don't lie boys, but there are a lot of liar's that figure!"

Possibly with a little more research, someone can come up with a precise and absolute answer to the number of counties in the nation. [Then on the other hand, could this evasive number of counties be some slight of hand maneuver used by the politicians in their attempt to sway the results of elections, like the continual rumor of dead folks voting.]
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-30-2015, 02:16 AM
Tim Horton's Avatar
Tim Horton Male Tim Horton is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Deep in the BC Bush
Posts: 6,043
Default

It is said that in some counties in many places in the US, the highest voter turn out is from the cemeteries there...

That could make some big differences...
Just sayin....
__________________
Always fresh.
Keep your stick on the ice. Red Green
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-03-2015, 08:04 AM
doc doc is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
Posts: 1,525
Default

A couple thoughts on the subject:

-as an example of why the Electoral College system impacts on the population density issue: in the Ill. gubernatorial election 2008, the Dem candidate won (election decided by total popular vote) by winning only 2 of the 104 counties. His vote total in the two major metropolitan counties was on the order of 9:1, while he lost the other 102 counties ~4:5.

-worldwide, 50% of the population lives within 50 miles of an ocean. That leaves one heckuvalot of dry land for the other half.

-world population ~8 Billion. About 12 billion could all tread water in Lake Superior at the same time (except for me. I can't tread water.) Just to give the "over-population" argument some perspective.

-pop density in big cities like NY, Mex City, etc is something like 50,000/sq mi. Some people like that lifestyle. ???
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-05-2015, 02:43 AM
MissouriFree's Avatar
MissouriFree MissouriFree is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: central missouri woods
Posts: 18,705
Default

Jmho
But the electoral college concept is fine.
The trouble, if there is one , is not the concep it is how the states divy up thier electoral college votes after all the counting.
Nearly all the states do an all or zero. ( I.e no mater how close the popular vote was in a state the winner get all the electoral college votes )

But two states, Maine and Nebraska I think ,
divy up the electoral votes proportionally based on the popular election votes results. A much more representative method .

Interestingly in nearly half the states the electors are not bound to vote based on popular vites. They can change thier mind and do anything they want ( even though they never do ). My state of Missouri is one - so is Illinois.

That is s state decision on how it is done not federal govt.
__________________
I find out of long experience that I admire all nations and hate all governments- Steinbeck

Last edited by MissouriFree; 12-05-2015 at 02:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-05-2015, 12:43 PM
Bones Bones is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,601
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissouriFree View Post
Jmho
But the electoral college concept is fine.
The trouble, if there is one , is not the concep it is how the states divy up thier electoral college votes after all the counting.
Nearly all the states do an all or zero. ( I.e no mater how close the popular vote was in a state the winner get all the electoral college votes )

But two states, Maine and Nebraska I think ,
divy up the electoral votes proportionally based on the popular election votes results. A much more representative method .

Interestingly in nearly half the states the electors are not bound to vote based on popular vites. They can change thier mind and do anything they want ( even though they never do ). My state of Missouri is one - so is Illinois.

That is s state decision on how it is done not federal govt.
I agree with this, makes no sense to give all the votes to one candidates in the state if 49% want the other guy. Then give 49% of the electoral vote to that candidates. At least then I would feel my vote counted.
__________________
" I void warranties"
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-05-2015, 02:17 PM
doc doc is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
Posts: 1,525
Default

But if electoral votes are divvied up proportionately, it defeats the purpose of the system. If one electoral vote = x popular votes, you don;t need to bother with the arithmetic. Just go straight to the popular vote.

Madison et al, realized that one or two very populous, single minded states (analogous to Cook County/Chicago in an Ill. election) could swing an election to their candidate and the preference of all of the other states would be negated.

Remember that originally the country was comprised of independent, but federated states. It was the states that were deemed the most important, not the fed govt. Post roads and provide for the common defense was all The Constitution called for (only slightly exaggerating here) from the Feds.

When Lincoln spoke at Gettysburg, he was the secondary speaker that day. Senator Everett spoke for 4 hrs. Lincoln spoke for 15 minutes. The importance of the Fed Gov and the Presidency has gradually, insidiously increased thru the years. FDR's programs were the first really big fed projects that changed the way we think of things.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-05-2015, 07:01 PM
Doninalaska Doninalaska is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,994
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doc View Post
The importance of the Fed Gov and the Presidency has gradually, insidiously increased thru the years. FDR's programs were the first really big fed projects that changed the way we think of things.
I agree that FDR was a big changer, but he took his lead from his cousin Teddy and Mr. Wilson.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-05-2015, 07:42 PM
MissouriFree's Avatar
MissouriFree MissouriFree is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: central missouri woods
Posts: 18,705
Default

B
Quote:
Originally Posted by doc View Post
But if electoral votes are divvied up proportionately, it defeats the purpose of the system. If one electoral vote = x popular votes, you don;t need to bother with the arithmetic. Just go straight to the popular vote.
good point so what is you opinion then ? Leave it alone. - a democracy ??

Quote:

When Lincoln spoke at Gettysburg, he was the secondary speaker that day. Senator Everett spoke for 4 hrs. Lincoln spoke for 15 minutes.
Non sequitur - Lincoln hated speeches . I may be wrong but I think he only gave three speeches as president- the Gettysburg one and the two inaugural speeches. In realty you have no idea why the order. But note it is same as today - highest ranking person speaks last. So protocol then is same as today

Quote:
The importance of the Fed Gov and the Presidency has gradually, insidiously increased thru the years. FDR's programs were the first really big fed projects that changed the way we think of things.

Ref fdr I have always thought we know nothing except hindsight about that era. Only the people that lived through it know.
__________________
I find out of long experience that I admire all nations and hate all governments- Steinbeck

Last edited by MissouriFree; 12-06-2015 at 01:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-05-2015, 10:29 PM
Bones Bones is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,601
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doc View Post
But if electoral votes are divvied up proportionately, it defeats the purpose of the system. If one electoral vote = x popular votes, you don;t need to bother with the arithmetic. Just go straight to the popular vote.
No it does not. States decide how the votes are spread out. And if it changed it would take into account those in less populated counties having an actual say in who is elected. This was one of the original reason for the electoral, Instead of one or two populated states deciding who was elected. Now its a few large populated cities in counties in a state decide the vote for everybody while those out in the country really do not get a say.

Look at this vote in Nevada two counties decide that Obama should be president over all the other counties that voted for different candidates. Exactly what our founding fathers did not want to happen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...n_Nevada,_2012
__________________
" I void warranties"

Last edited by Bones; 12-05-2015 at 11:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-09-2015, 04:49 AM
doc doc is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
Posts: 1,525
Default

No, Bones. We're saying the same thing. I meant if each state's votes were split proportionately, then less populous states would have even less say in the presidential election. It's bad enough that states with large urban populations get decided by the urban vote alone.

If there were no Elec Col, or if the EC votes were proportional (same thing) then LA, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, NY, Boston & DC, voting 9:1 Dem, and the whole rest of the country voting a more reasonable 55:45 GOP, the Dem would win.

Even with the EC, we saw a disparity in the voting. With African Americans only representing 13% of the population, their 9:1 vote swung the last two elections to BO, who lost 6:4 (considered a landslide) among the other 87% of the population. Fair?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-09-2015, 08:26 PM
MissouriFree's Avatar
MissouriFree MissouriFree is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: central missouri woods
Posts: 18,705
Default

Electoral voted do not equate 1:1 for voters . They are based on population now.

The electoral college is based on numbers of representatives and that is based on total population in districts not voters. Why. It ensures all people have representation in the govt not just the voters .

To many mistakenly thing electoral college number equates to number of voters and it does not

So right now it is loosely based on population with strong influence of political gerrymandering but not voters .

What that means is that states could decide thier electoral votes based on voting results and that would not repeat not be based on population density . Eg a heavy urban are would only need one got to gain the electoral votes no matter how many popular votes the winner got.

Btw the myth that blacks swayed the election is a just that a myth due to this very thing. It did not matter if all blacks voted for Obama or just the one that put them over the amount needed.
__________________
I find out of long experience that I admire all nations and hate all governments- Steinbeck

Last edited by MissouriFree; 12-09-2015 at 10:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-09-2015, 09:25 PM
Bones Bones is offline
Grand Master Pontificator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,601
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doc View Post
No, Bones. We're saying the same thing. I meant if each state's votes were split proportionately, then less populous states would have even less say in the presidential election. It's bad enough that states with large urban populations get decided by the urban vote alone.

If there were no Elec Col, or if the EC votes were proportional (same thing) then LA, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, NY, Boston & DC, voting 9:1 Dem, and the whole rest of the country voting a more reasonable 55:45 GOP, the Dem would win.

Even with the EC, we saw a disparity in the voting. With African Americans only representing 13% of the population, their 9:1 vote swung the last two elections to BO, who lost 6:4 (considered a landslide) among the other 87% of the population. Fair?
So maybe we are talking the same thing. States that give an all to one candidate instead
of breaking the electoral into even areas based on area and not population. Example of Nevada 6 votes it might have been 2 Obama 3 to Romney and 1 to somebody else. Spreading the votes via area instead of population ensures that those in less populated areas get their vote counted.
__________________
" I void warranties"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -2. The time now is 02:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 1996 to Present. Backwoods Home Magazine, Inc.