How "centralised" is your country, int? In the US, the population is around 325 million...

How "centralised" is your country, int? In the US, the population is around 325 million, and the biggest urban area (NYC) has around 22 million people, or 6.8% of the total. So, it's not all that centralised.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World's_largest_cities
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Shield
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Warsaw metro is 3 million so 8,3% of the total
Not really centralised

Istanbul
Population:17-20 million
Roughly %25

A third of the population lives here, like 14 million people

I'm in that picture

buenos aires is also the worst place in argentina right?

What goes on here? It looks like a grid pattern.

Yes, stay away, go to Uruguay instead

That's La Plata

no

the worst is Santiago del Estero and Formosa.

In Argentina we have provinces unoficially called Feudal Provinces.
Poor provinces ruled by Governors who treat the province as their own duchy, who put their relatives in key positions and are reelected for decades, in which all the people work for their state (and therefore, the governor is the boss of everybody, the man who pays the salary of everybody), and everything is paid by money taken from wealthy provinces and redistributed to poor provinces.
They are like arab sheiks whose oil money is the money from the wealthy provinces.

In Santiago del Estero there are cities in which people dont work, they just falsify certificates that say they have a chronic disease and get subsidy bucks from that and from other subsidies.
And in Formosa the governor is a dictator who gave argentine nationality to thousands of paraguayans, pays them a subsidy even if they live in Praguay, and brings those Paraguayans to Formosa when they are elections only to make them vote for him.
Also, they have some native tribes, like Tobas, Wichis, or Qoms, who used to be hunter gatherers, and now are half starved people who depend on subsidies.

Some provinces are modern and democratic, and some others are like dictatorships. That is whaty federalism means in a third world country.

US is like most countries - most of the people live on the coasts.

Coasts are where the most economic activity happens so therefore the most jobs.

>buenos aires is also the worst place in argentina right?

yes, is better be dead than live in greater buenos aires

whoever says otherwise is a nigger living there

google La Plata Vista Aerea

Buenos Aires city used to be the capital of the Buenos Aires province.

After a small civil war between Buenos Aires and the Argentine state, Buenos Aires city was taken from Buenos Aires province and turned into the capital of the country, so Buenos Aires province founded La Plata as their new Capital.

oh wow, so where would you say is the best?
a lot of americans really like patagonia for the nature

London has all of our 8 million niggers and shitskins, about 8% of the cunt.

Santiago has 6 million people of 17 million chileans so it's basically a third
Weird thing is that it's situated in the middle of a valley instead of the coast
I'm from Coquimbo that barely has 200000 people

Santiago has that many people?
I´m from Loja and it has aroun 170 k. I moved to Guayaquil and it´s overwhelming with only 2 million.

the dark blue area, known as "Pääkaupunkiseutu", literally translated means capital region and it has a population of 1,1M

finland as a whole has 6M people

...

>centralised

Buenos Aires city proper (not the suburbs which are other cities with their own majors, unlike the USA, here the city is wealthier than the suburbs)
3 suburb cities are pretty wealthy, Vicente Lopez, San Isidro and Tigre, there you have people who play rugby and polo. and Tigre is quite touristic because it is on the river delta.

Patagonia near Chile is great, the Andes there are like switzerland but wilder, with great ski resorts and glaciers, but the steppe part of Patagonia isnt nice, it is a desert, the kind of place in which people find good dinosour fossils.

the agricultural cities of the Pampas, like Tandil, are the best place to live, but I dont know how touristic they would be, unless you want to do gaucho stuff like ride horses etc

many tourists like the part close to Bolivia, where Salta and La Quebrada de Humahuaca are.

Also, Iguazu falls are a must see, you can only see them from the Brazilian side, it it close to the triple frontera of Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil.

Brazil has 206 milion people. Our largest city, São Paulo, has 32 milion people, about 15% of our population. The are other big cities like Belo Horizonte and Rio de Janeiro. We have lots of large cities spread all across the country, but its not centralized at all. Our capital (Brasília) have only 3 milion people. My state, Santa Catarina, have like 10 cities of 200,000 inhabitantes and smaller cities around them.

About 2.2 mil, a fifth of the population live in "stockholm" (the greater region, real stockholm is around 1.4 mil)

Yeah i went there last week and honestly it wasn't that bad save for a few rude people here and there plus the public transport wasn't horrible
I didn't use the metro at peak hours though

denmark
2 million
22% of population
but its okay because its mostly muslims and stuff like that the real Denmark is Jutland anyway

I was watching vinesauce the other day and Joel said that the south of Sweden sucks, is it true?

Greater Mexico City is one sixth the population

so yeah that's bad

Nigga, like 6 percent of the population of Central america lives in guatemala city.

Depends on what you want from life. Even in the most densely populated parts of southern Sweden it quickly just becomes empty forests and lakes if you drive for an hour

>Iceland ~330k
>Capital, Reykjavik ~130k
>Capital area ~213k

I'd call that pretty centralized

Sounds nice to be honest.
I live in the northern central part of this country and it's mostly a semi-desert area so forests are a novelty for me.

Did you use the public buses? They are among the worst of the country, Though they have improved. A few years ago it wasn´t rare to get robbed in a bus around the roughest parts of the city.

Yeah, the metro is quite dangerous too

iktf

I thought I heard Birmingham had a lot of shitskins too

Wait are we talking about loja or santiago?
I'm talking about santiago lol
Though I have plans to go up north this summer, seems like I will have to be careful

I really wish we hadn't fucked up Central and South America. That's too pretty of a landscape for such a scary place.

Very centralised, all the important shit has been clustered in London

>Sao Paulo has 32 million

Wot

very neat
i hope to visit some day, i'm learning spanish currently

We dont count Birmingham, it's basically the Pakistani UK embassy...you just drive around it and pretend it doesn't exist.

lol is that montevideo, its so manlet

This is it, further south.
Like a third of Uruguay lives here.

>we

It's the most politically centralized country in Europe and I have the documents to prove it.

In population terms I don't know but it's also one of the if not the most centralized as well.

I abhor this but unsurprisingly discussing this topic is extremely taboo in Portugal. What surprises me is that the people who see this injustice no only do not give a fuck but even get offended when we point it out.

lol nope. You are embarrassing me.

Why is the water so brown?

I could not believe the gap in quality of life between cities and villages in portugal. Your cities are western europe tier but everything in between looks like the slavlands.

>Panama
>Almost half of the population lives in the capital.

I call that centralized.

Yes, especially you, faggot.

That sounds kinda cozy desu

River Plate is very dirty because of Buenos Aires, and it's not very deep near the coast.

I mean the metropolitan area. And its actually 36 milion. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World's_largest_cities

Something like 2/3rd's of Canadians live near the US border around the great lakes/st.lawrence river

The only other relevant regions is the Vancouver area and the Edmonton-Calgary corridor

It's not, and it's why portugal gets memed on so hard in maps

wrong pic

I met a Serb that said our countryside is poorer than theirs, at least Romania tier.

Of course this is not by accident, and by cities I hope you mean Lisbon and it's neighboring protectorates because apart from tiny urban cores spread across the country it's the same everywhere.

It's utter shit senpai

>I met a Serb that said our countryside is poorer than theirs, at least Romania tier.
I was riding in the train with three Croats and they were saying it looks exactly like home

80% live "within 100km" of the border. Which is a stupid metric, because while the country is huge, once you get further North than that it's mostly tundra, or has shit growing seasons, or is just garbage to live in for one reason or another.

Also, while I technically live about 100km from the border, it's from the water. It would still take me three or four hours of driving (about 300km) to reach a border crossing.

That said, the largest concentration of people is in the GTA (Greater Toronto Area, not the game). Something like 6% of the population lives here. About a quarter live in the Toronto-Ottawa-Montréal corridor, though (IIRC).

Sri-Lanka has a population of 21 million
Colombo City has a population of 750k
The metro about 2.3 million
The greater urban area about 5.6 million, expected rise to 8.5 million by around 2030

so pretty centralized

1/6th of the population live in this chunk of land that used to be a lake.
All the good schools, libraries, museums and public programs are in there. All public institutions resides there, management, infrastructure, besides that cost of living in there is way cheaper (except rent) than most of the country.
Electricity is heavily subsidized (even though they don't produce a single MW), water is cheap as fuck and industry get great tax reliefs in certain parts of the state.
Everything left for the rest of the country is non polluted air, untouched wilderness, beaches and a deficient government that heavily relies on state income taxes (because everything else gets poured into Mex metropolitan area).

What you described sounded like New England
>utter shit
Bummer. I might still like it, though. After all, I love New Mexico.

wonder how will global warming change that map in the next 50 years when the north becomes increasingly more habitable

Depends on the countryside. Alentejo (due to electing a lot of commies that manage to rack up the subsidies), Ribatejo and Vale do Tejo may look like Croatia, but go farther inland or north and it starts looking a lot worse.

I mean that shit has been permanently destroyed. Almost everyone I know from the countryside has a life goal of studying in the city and emigrating. And most of them follow through. A section of the interior north of the country as already made a desert during the Salazar years, but more people have left in the past 15 than during his entire dictatorship it's insane

*centralised

btw, pinpoint the best university in Mexico without googling it
Is really easy tbqh

It's not uninhabitable because the temperature it's mainly because the ground is literally rock and you can't grow any food, either that or extremely dense forest

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Shield

Best city, worst sorroundings
Tecnologico de Chimalhuacan

Doubt it, apart some pristine tourism villages a lot of it will look like the pic on the left, outside of the touristy areas. And directly in front of pic on the left lies pic on the right, because that way the government can fill the pockets of construction companies (all in the same city and always the same people) while saying the gave the money to locals. The vast majority of funds to infrastructure outside the capital go to useless projects that fill up the pockets of the same select group of people.

Portugal has just insane levels of political and economic centralism that in other countries would be grounds for a revolution. It's that much of a third world shithole in this regard.

Se habla un poco de la UNAM acá por sus papeles de derecho y sus traducciones

The electoral system may actually favour this. Even ignoring that parties have too much power, the way the number of representatives is distributed along the territory makes the more urban areas have a overwhelming influence over the less urban ones.

Global warming won't make the land fertile because it's all fucking rock. Look up Canadian Shield.

This is because there is one huge caveat which is that the constitution has articles that demand both this voting system AND a proper regionalization of the country.

The truth is that the constitution was written by intelligent people with long political experience and was designed to be fair and balanced but that only happens if every article is upheld. The Tribunal Constitucional upheld the ban on regional parties while at the same time conveniently neglecting the unconstitutionality of a non-regionalized country.

Municipios were meant to elect their own representatives to the regional assembly that would handle the bulk of taxation and redistribution. But people from the interior are de facto being taxed without adequate representation because it is illegal to elect people to the national assembly on grounds of their origin.

Portugal elects 250 representatives, and any government will need a majority support of them in order to form itself. 74 of them are all from the capital an neighbouring regions (Lisbon + Santarém + Setubal). Yup, almost 30% of the total...

Very

13 million cunts live in our capital
Half of our population live in the main island luzon
While other half of the population live in bunch of islands around 300k each

I was told it was Tecnológico de Monterrey

>The truth is that the constitution was written by intelligent people

Oh my sweet summer child...

The constitution was written (let's just ignore the extensive revisions) under duress and extremely influenced by the day to day situation. Let's face it, the guys that wrote it were under siege at the time. And it was mostly a case of copying stuff from other countries at the time, than actually thinking on what made sense for Portugal.
The extensive revisions removed something of it but still... it is not exactly a thought out thing...

>living in a county dominated by one city

But that's just in theory.

In practice only parties get elected to the assembly and people from Lisbon and it's protectorates will make the majority of influential and money politicians in every party and thus will have a disproportionate effect on politics since parties based on a specific place are made illegal.

There is no way for you to vote in the interests of those closest to you, your immediate family, friends, acquaintances and surroundings in Portugal atm.

By was written I mean the last revision, it's well known the first one was written by commies.

If you actually read it you will see most of the stuff makes sense, the big problem is that it should not be in a constitution because those things have to change over time but that makes it almost impossible.

Doesn't tell the whole story when it comes to centralisation, but it's a cool map. Spain surprised me, considering their relatively large population.

My state of California is dominated by the liberal urban centers. This is a big problem for us without proper political representation

Yes, you're not actually voting for people, but for a party. But my argument still holds, the influence that each region has is heavily unbalanced.
Even knowing very well the influence the party HQ has on everything, if the 'interior' of the country had let's say 50% of the number of representatives, it would be different. They would need to focus more on them.

I have read it, and my thoughts are: 'o que nasce torto tarde ou nunca se endireita'.
It is just crazy, they failed to realize what a constitution is supposed to be, and wrote more of a government program... Not to mention the incongruences that people just ignore on it...

Yup, had to recheck, the thing has 295 articles, many with multiple sub lines.

You're right but being from the interior I don't mean the harm of people in Lisbon even though indirectly they might be ok with mine. If the interior had 50% of representatives there would be very little representation for the people elsewhere and plus with the regionalization efforts it might start jeopardizing the integrity of the country, even though I believe this centralization also puts that integrity into cause.

I didn't have to read it all but the economic part seems well written albeit being way to long and restrictive. In that sense it is like a government program, and mind you I'm only referring to the revised one because I never had to read the original, that artifact of gommie literature is of no importance to me.

But the tragic thing is that it's too late. The desertification of the country will keep going and the next generation will fell the full force of the one that left the country's interior just like they felt that during the Salazar years.

A third lives in auckland

Also 75% of the country lives on the North Island and 25% on the south, so there's a big split

the water is brown because it is full of sedimentos, dont know how it is called in English, not because of pollution.
The Islands of the Parana Delta before the River Plate estuary are created by those sedimentos, and the delta is still expanding and creating new Islands. Buenos Aires will be in the Delta in less than 200 years.
basically, it is brown because it is full of earth.
and it is also very shallow.

50% may be too much but that would still leave the coast with a very large representation considering the territory. And the interior north is different from the interior south, it is not like all the interior would form a single cohesive block.
And the integrity of the country would be hardly at risk. You said it yourself: 'Portugal has just insane levels of political and economic centralism that in other countries would be grounds for a revolution.' Portugal can be heavily centralised, but it is an unitary country. One of the few in the world.

'commie literature'

Well, the joke is that the commies at the time were not too concerned on what got written, they figured that they would get they're anyway. (one of the rules for commies is that constitutions are just for show, read the constitution of Soviet Union if you don't believe me)
But that doesn't mean the rest of the non soviet socialists didn't want to imprint they're views...

Back on topic, yes Portugal is very centralised, ~50% of the population lives in two major urban areas.

It's still very dirty though, at least in Buenos Aires

...

Que Linda!

That's true for almost every state

Most people live on the coasts in cities.

But our cities, at least mine, are geographically much larger and less densely occupied. Bigger than Tokyo like twice the size of Mexico City.

Also Perth is the second most isolated city in the world. So yeah people are centralised in cities but everyone is very far away from each other.

Canada has the MTV (Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver), 14 million of Canada's 33 million people live there. One in two (1/2 of) Canadians live in Montreal, Toronto or Vancouver.

The MTV has been described as a single city separated by vast distances, because they share a lot of the same features and similar urbanite cosmopolitanism. Montreal is the French Metropole, Toronto is the Ontarion Metropole and Vancouver is the western Metropole, and these three poles makes up most of Canada.

I can't be the only person that looks at that mess of a shithole and imagines one Tsar Bomba right in the middle of it.

>my state is dominated by big urban centers
No its not pretty much the entire state votes blue majority, there are a lot of Republicans but they live in majority blue areas.

California is one of the few states where it just has (hyperbole) everyone vote Democrat. Massachusetts is the same, also Vermont. New York, Illinois, Michigan and Florida can legitimately complain about this as single parts of their state heavily influence the rest (NY And IL would be a red-leaning swing and solid red without NYC and Chicago, Michigan and Florida woukd both be solid red).

The worst part isn't the lack of political power, as in all of the states listed governers and legislatures are pretty common from both sides (except NY we get fucked in the ass with a constantly deadlocked legislature), its the insane corruption. I live and was born in NY and the corruption from so much power and constant deadlock from everyone hating each other is so bad that when Cuomo (I want him to die) created a commission to investigate NY corruption he promptly disbanded it when it started to investigate his insane corruption.

About 13 million live in two biggest cities (Hà Nội and Sài Gòn). There are also some other cities with over 1 million people.

But the Northeast Megalopolis is 17% of the population on 2% of the land...

So, yes, quite centralized. The Northeast dominates the US in every way

They lied to you.

ORLY?