underpaidgenius: - Tim De Chent, If the world’s population lived in one city… via Per Square Mile So, if we can move past the haphazard historical, cultural, and biological reasons that people live where they currently are, we could pick a few hundred places in the world where there are good reasons to live, and move all the people to those places. Places with reliable water, equitable climates, available farmland. And then we can rewild the rest of the world. The problem with geographically based infographics is that land area bears no relationship to population. This infographic is not about population, and neither is it about land area. It is about the relationship between population and land area: the vast differences in population density among the world’s large cities. Montana is David and New Jersey is Goliath in terms of population, the inverse of their geographical relationship. Politically this greatly skews the perception of influence among the lightly populated states in the middle of the country and the heavily populated states on the coasts. Most media use state outline maps to represent winners and losers in elections (the Red States vs the Blue States) even though a state’s geography is not visually representative of its population (or Electoral College votes). The same is true for county-based maps in state elections. So what does this infographic really say? People who live in Paris, New York, and Singapore live closer to their neighbors than those who live in San Francisco, London and Houston. Of course, Houston is the outlier here. It’s the fourth largest city in the US, larger in area than New York and Chicago combined, and more than 100 square miles larger than Los Angeles. Its 2 million residents have plenty of elbow room. Density matters.
Pop-upView Separately

underpaidgenius:

- Tim De Chent, If the world’s population lived in one city… via Per Square Mile

So, if we can move past the haphazard historical, cultural, and biological reasons that people live where they currently are, we could pick a few hundred places in the world where there are good reasons to live, and move all the people to those places. Places with reliable water, equitable climates, available farmland. And then we can rewild the rest of the world.

The problem with geographically based infographics is that land area bears no relationship to population. This infographic is not about population, and neither is it about land area. It is about the relationship between population and land area: the vast differences in population density among the world’s large cities.

Montana is David and New Jersey is Goliath in terms of population, the inverse of their geographical relationship. Politically this greatly skews the perception of influence among the lightly populated states in the middle of the country and the heavily populated states on the coasts. Most media use state outline maps to represent winners and losers in elections (the Red States vs the Blue States) even though a state’s geography is not visually representative of its population (or Electoral College votes). The same is true for county-based maps in state elections.

So what does this infographic really say? People who live in Paris, New York, and Singapore live closer to their neighbors than those who live in San Francisco, London and Houston. Of course, Houston is the outlier here. It’s the fourth largest city in the US, larger in area than New York and Chicago combined, and more than 100 square miles larger than Los Angeles. Its 2 million residents have plenty of elbow room.

Density matters.

Source: persquaremile.com

247 Notes/ Hide

  1. whereartimitateslife reblogged this from bayisbetter and added:
    Yo they got both...my cities on here, Singapore has 5 milli and
  2. alfon reblogged this from stoweboyd
  3. vanillaicecube reblogged this from philmcandrew and added:
    :( growing up in Houston has been one of the main reasons why I want to pursue urban planning in college… I love...
  4. himynameisshorty reblogged this from thesoundofsettling-
  5. thesoundofsettling- reblogged this from visualturn
  6. mmanal reblogged this from utnereader
  7. ratelkrieg reblogged this from clubjacobin
  8. straight-white-christian-cismale reblogged this from clubjacobin
  9. clubjacobin reblogged this from bayisbetter and added:
    Not necessarily sure I’m onboard with...“rewilding”, but this
  10. planetarydisorder reblogged this from visualturn
  11. patientofcatharsis reblogged this from visualturn
  12. bjaminholland reblogged this from metropolitansoul
  13. impracticalinconceivableabsurd reblogged this from acuriouscity
  14. thekazzu reblogged this from philmcandrew
  15. surfing-the-crimson-wave reblogged this from canering
  16. crumbsofsociety reblogged this from michellekondrich and added:
    There would still be the problem of deregulated industries polluting the environment for profit.
  17. dara--dara reblogged this from everythingisacasestudy
  18. motheatenmusicalbrocade reblogged this from stoweboyd
  19. beautifulanonymous reblogged this from waterlostinthesea
  20. everythingisacasestudy reblogged this from philmcandrew
  21. shosti reblogged this from loudthinkersoftspeaker
  22. bayisbetter reblogged this from utnereader and added:
    Wait, this means the population of San Francisco is more dense than London? That’s surprising.
  23. loudthinkersoftspeaker reblogged this from lovely-freckles
  24. dankk reblogged this from lovely-freckles and added:
    Dont forget all the french Canadians in Florida. and Haitian people!
  25. lovely-freckles reblogged this from philmcandrew
  26. waterlostinthesea reblogged this from lay-under-bright-lights
  27. lay-under-bright-lights reblogged this from winddrake
  28. wow--cool reblogged this from justintoddsmith
  29. justintoddsmith reblogged this from visualturn
  30. verparacreer reblogged this from philmcandrew
  31. winddrake reblogged this from philmcandrew
  32. trroublesleeping reblogged this from visualturn
  33. goldilockks reblogged this from utnereader