You're in a dark alley in an unfamiliar neighborhood. A man in a hoodie approaches you, face obscured, and asks: "Do you wanna see countries of Ikea stores?"
@@us3rGwow I forgot how much I used to watch toycat and all the side channels, I used to be a huge fan and I even own to longboy but I haven't watched in like a year, thanks for bringing up some memories
This channel is SO much fun. Just a guy rambling on about facts you sort of had an idea about but didn't really know. And he seems to just stick to the facts instead of preaching some agenda. Really love it.
5:10 this is the map that should be used for greenhouse gas emissions. It is annoying how these highly populated countries get shat on for have high emission without stating its population. China is being shat on, for example.
@@SilvanaDil yes but CO2 emmisions isn't one of them, you should complain about Hong Kong, about muslims getting sent to concentration camps, about them trying to take over the South China Sea (one of the most traveled trade routes and the main route of trade from and to South Korea and Japan)
@@greengreen110 - Yes, all those other complaints -- and more -- are valid. As for CO2 emissions, it's about more than that. Have you seen how polluted Chinese rivers, land, etc. are? It's disgusting.
China has CO2 problems for other reasons. For example, it's large corporate entities that burn most the coal and produce the CO2. Sure per capita the emissions are lower but really it would be much lower if China had environmental regulations for it's businesses to follow, but it doesn't. That's kind of why they have "Crazy bad" air pollution. Furthermore to say " Greenhouse emissions should be taught based on population of a country" implies that it's mainly an individual person that contributes to bad environmental practices, where the average human does some unsustainable things, I personally do not run huge factories or decide on how electricity must be generated, I have limited options to recycle and can't make artificial islands from landfill to then plant trees on. My point, it's people who has control over the large outputs of CO2 who can actually do something. I find it irritating that the average population gets "shat on" for something that the rich toffs have always had control over.
Fool, where I live we have like 10 parties! And proud about it! (there are only 3 big parties and the other 7 are as good as non-existent but let's not talk about that)
We have other partys they just have as much political sway for whatever reason for example the third most voted candidate of 2020 was of the libertarian party, who are they? Exactly and for some reason instead of pushing out to be their own thing the socialist party see them selves as a sort of group that allies with the democratic party which makes sense because why say your with the socialist party when you can simply say your with the popular party that most people will probably assume is socialist anyway but why this two party nonsense? I don't know and I'm too lazy to Google it.
2cat, how do you make a video every 24-12 hours, are you just really good at making videos, are you secretly a wizard with a time turner, or do you just use your god powers
So off center you can see it when he leans forward. As much as we crap on Victoria for struggling with covid, and some of it justified, they also have probably the highest state population density.
11:10 Look at Pennsylvania on that map. The highlighted counties (and a couple others) consistently vote Democrat, while the rest consistently vote Republican. The vast majority of PA counties vote Republican, but because so many more people live in the highlighted counties, the state ends up being close to 50/50 every election.
Imagine there was a country split right in half by another one, and even populations on both halves. The countries center of population would be in the other country.
I like how toycat is talking about how hard it is to find centred countries while somehow ignoring Europe in the corner where a large amount of countries are either close to being centred (France, Germany) or are basically in the centre (Spain, Poland).
18:53 Why are Egypt and Ethiopia both labelled as having less than 80 million people when in reality they both have over 100 million inhabitants? I see a similar problem with Brazil too, and doubtless loads of other countries too.
Table Top Not true, the population of Ethiopia in 2005 was 76.35 million, not 70 million. On top of that, there has never been a time when Egypt's population was 78 million and Ethiopia's was 70 million, Ethiopia passed 70 million in 2002 whilst Egypt passed 78 million in 2007, this map is just incorrect garbage.
I dont like how toycat uses examples for western canada in the middle of knowwhere instead of the actual cities like Vancouver Calgary Edmonton Winnipeg etc
According to a list I found on Wikipedia, Canada is the country with the lowest population per kilometer of railroad. St. Kitts and Nevis is pretty high too. Sweden 2nd and Australia is 3rd. "List of countries by rail transport network size" is the name of the Wikipedia article.
What I find kinda funny about the population map is how insanely large Singapore is on that compared to its actual size. Like it’s a very very tiny country and it appears as the same size as Ireland
With the price of beef, Australia is maxed out on the chart. In reality, beef in Aus costs on average $6.60 per kg. The average Australian makes $6000 per month which means if an Australian only spends money of beef they'd be able to buy 909kg of beef. It's more of a climate thing. Cows don't like to live in torrential rain so beef in the UK is hyper expensive to produce.
It's really not a good idea to base political power completely off of people. The lifestyles and needs of people in lower-density areas are often completely different from those of people who live in cities, thus they need to be governed differently. Let me pose an example: A budding young politician has the wonderful idea of shutting down a coal power plant and replacing it with a super clean and efficient hydroelectric dam, which will not only provide more electricity, but create a water reservoir for a city full of thirsty people. It's an absolute hit with the city people in this imaginary direct democracy, but for the farmers and ranchers who live away from the city's hustle and bustle, it's a death sentence. You see, for generations, the rural folk have been using the river (which the government intends to dam) to irrigate their crops, crops which feed them and their livestock, as well as pay their bills. The rural folk know they're at a political disadvantage because they don't make up the majority of the population, despite their best efforts the budding politician wins, and the dam's construction begins. It only takes one bad harvest season for people to take notice of the skyrocketing price of nationally-sourced food, and so they take their business elsewhere. The country now has a job crisis because farmers are simply unable to support themselves, and so they're desperately looking for alternatives. Money is worth less and it's harder to get, and before you know it, the entire country is in an economic recession. Now I know this is a hypothetical situation, but it's a very extreme example of a very real problem with direct democracy, and it happens all the time all across the democratic world. In a direct democracy, leaders are not focused on doing what's best for the country, but doing what the majority wants at the current time, which means that often times decisions are not made based off of careful consideration, but simply on what most people think would be a good idea. A lot of these changes might either seem insignificant or even beneficial to the city-dwelling majority, and due to their busy schedules, as well as their separation (be it geographical, political, and/or social) from those who live in more rural settings, they don't do their due diligence to truly understand the negative side effects of such decisions. This is why it's so extremely important to have a region-based representative democracy, because it guarantees that the person in office has at least some grasp on the needs of the country as a whole, not just the majority of the populace. Sure, that person who lives out in the middle of nowhere and milks cows to make a living might not think or live the same way that you do, but they depend on you, and you depend on them, and as uninformed as you think that person is/that person thinks you are, that inter-dependency is what keeps a country running.
About your point on trains, a major reason why Japan and Europe have train lines is that after the world war, Europe and Japan were razed and had an unique opportunity to build up a new, modern infrastructure.
Your point on London neglects to show that we need other cities to have a shared business interest and that transport link to places in the north for example, which is densely populated, should be remembered more - otherwise the economy isn't diverse.
Interesting Fact: Closest Megacity to World Population center is Delhi, and Delhi is set to become the largest city (population wise) in the world within 5 to 6 years. ( Don't know good or bad, but interesting fact none the less)
America is not Democracy it's a Republic. We didn't trade 1 tyrant 3,000 miles away for 3,000 tyrants 1 mile away. It's why we have a Constitution & the electoral system, so you have to win the largest area of the U.S & not the population. Like Bush & Trump. That's what the map illustrates.
I have never used public transportation in my life. I could never rely on someone else to make sure i get where i need every day. And having to deal with random people. I need my space
15:39 that's Nagoya. Niigata is a little bit further to the North. It's the one with the lightest orange shade on the West coast. It owns a small island that you can see right next to it. I'm both referring to the city (Niigata-shi) and the prefecture (Niigata-ken) Edit: he said it 2 seconds later. Nevermind
ibx2cat 14:20 good point about the railway.... but in Australia, the passenger routes that go to more than 1 city are done more for tourism. Don’t recon anyone uses an interstate train to actually commute. Like the only 3 train routes that do that which I can think of are all purely tourism. Here people just fly. That’s why Australia is the only country to have 2 of the top 10 most traveled flight routes 👍
14:49 so are you telling me that building a highway network across the entire country of the US is justifyable but building decent passenger railways is a bad idea? The US used to have one of, if not THE best railway network in the world back in the day.
Australia "sucks at railways" because the main cities with like over 95% of people are so far away from each other due to the uninhabitable area all over the country, that there is not much point to travel by trains, and, since all the cities are on the coast, no railway networks connect the more inland areas.
One thing that lets you know just how sparsely populated the center of the United States is, is the size of the lots people build their houses on. On many of them you could run livestock, but they reserve them for their children to play on, and for private recreation. You can't have your kids wallowing in chicken poop after all. The amount of land you live on also seems to increase with the size of your income with the exception of some major cities on the east coast such as New York where you can be wealthy hand live on no land of your own, or in Detroit which is almost an abandoned city where you can be very poor and if you want to risk living in some of the more dangerous parts of the city you can have as much land as you want. No one cares if you use the land next door because there is no one living next door, and it is unlikely that anyone will live next door anytime soon. So you get to use the land tax free.
Hokkaido population: 5.3 million Ireland population (whole island): 6.7 million Hokkaido has been connected by tunnel to Honshu since 1988. Meanwhile a land connection from Ireland to Great Britain is still viewed as a pipe dream.
11:25 "... wouldn't it be crazy if 51% of the people got to decide how 100% of the people did something..." Which is why these major decisions should NOT be placed in concrete when there is not broad agreement.
Hey toycat! Not sure if you’ll see this but I think it could be an interesting video idea. You’ve talked about Point Roberts WA before, and I live right near it in the same county. Because of the COVID border closures, support is growing in the community for a purchase to be made by Canada for the peninsula, meaning the US could be losing some land area including the most northwestern place in the US besides Alaska. Many government officials for the US government is also backing the plan because of the anomaly and annoyance of the whole situation. I would love to talk about it more!
@@KanyeTheGayFish69 Because of the distances between the major cities, trains take a long time. Trains are the cheapest (XPT, Vline) or most expensive options (rolling luxury hotels like The Ghan) to travel long distances. Flights carry many more people between the state capital cities. But trains are used a lot in the major cities and out to their surrounding towns and cities. (Sydney - Blue Mountains, Newcastle, South Coast or Melbourne - Geelong or Ballarat)
The commonly levied complaint that money gets funneled to certain areas with more population or that are the capital makes a little more sense when you also consider that people in those areas tend to earn higher incomes, and how much taxation burdens them in that area may in fact be lower than the lower population areas with less infrastructure (also that there being way larger numbers of people relative to how much the overall area contributes to tax revenue potentially, meaning we're also looking at them paying less per person). The other thing is, while it's usually true that the higher population areas (and any areas with fossil fuel industry, oil money is still huge) contribute more in tax revenue, that's only a small aspect of analyzing the complex relationships that hold an entire country together as a unit. The population centers and everywhere else are still ultimately benefitting each other by being attached (usually). Then there's the question of how this money is acquired in capitalism: If important labor for a business is occurring in a rural area where they earn less money for a company where the higher paying offices are all in one of the population centers, you can see how it starts to look unfair, and reminiscent of mercantilism and colonialism, only on a domestic scale. It's more obvious when you look at modern international examples: Coffee beans and other crops grown in Ethiopia that are sent to Switzerland who sells coffee products at a massive profit margin, diamond and coltan miners in the Congo, any and all sweatshop labor. If one can recognize these as exploitative, or China's construction of infrastructure at the expense of essentially buying up infrastructure as such, it shouldn't be too hard to see how things occurring domestically could be seen as much milder forms than that. Maybe not as dangerous, but important jobs outside of the richer area paying less, and the workers not seeing the benefits of their work or getting the most out of the fruits of their labor.
This post was mostly just supposed to be about infrastructure and spending, but some more stuff: In theory, it's supposed to be cheaper to pay for the infrastructure in a smaller area with more people, but it ends up being more expensive despite things running more efficiently. Yes, bigger and better buildings become more expensive to build and have stricter building codes, but that really isn't the driver behind costs. See, gentrification. Because things like housing are a commodity to be bought and sold on the market, more people living in an area raises rent and property taxes because the property is considered more valuable, both in terms of having more people to access and do business with, and just more people are bidding to be in the area. The fact that a residential building doesn't need to be at its occupancy limit, and non-stubborn sellers and renters can lower what they charge should be the kinds of things that tell you the pricing isn't really tied to their expenses. Things become a problem when there's high wealth inequality, or rich people decide they like the area, and either move in or buy properties they never actually go to (see China, again). If they'll pay a higher price for housing in a certain area, the other people selling housing will feel like they can charge higher prices too, and displace people already housed by pricing them out. If someone willing to spend more buys up the property, what's it to them? Not super relevant to the public funds thing, but I think gentrification does tie into the broader point about what can seem like domestic (or not) colonialism. Edit: I guess another part of the reason I brought this up is because not everyone in one of those richer areas is necessarily earning more. They may benefit more from the infrastructure than someone in a rural area does from not having infrastructure, and they might get paid more because it's a more expensive area (not necessarily to scale with the cost to live there), but wealth inequality in a capitalist system still hurts the poorer people.
I want to make ammends to your price of a cow at 13:00. Its likely that if you want an alive cow, un slaughtered, and provided its a steer (fertile bulls, female cows ingeneral, but especially dairy are worth more) you could pay somewhere between $400-$500 dollars on it. A full cow that's already been slaughtered nd prepared would be quite expensive. But if you had the means to purchase a living cow and got it slaughtered, it would be much cheaper. Edit: TLDR buying a whole cow from a grocery store is more expensive than buying a cow.
It’s a bit ignorant to say that the focus should be more on places with higher populations like around 18:00. Some people can’t afford to live in the bigger areas like London for example and have to move or live somewhere less populated and in demand. That doesn’t mean they should be neglected by the government because they aren’t in the centre of civilisation.
Makes sense central Asia was such a big part of the silk road, as wven though there aren't many people, they are close to a lot of big population centers
We ARE better at railways than American, the east coast (just the coast) has worse railway than Spain (which is supposedly way poorer than the US and has fucked up it's rail network by European standard.)
SilvanaDil, ya and the us relies way more heavily on air transportation, but the New England trains and jersey trains and Pennsylvania all have good passenger trains
ibx2cat I haven’t but I’m intimately familiar with the trains along the northeast corridor. I used to take the train between Philadelphia and Boston all the time, over a period of three years. It was much slower than equivalent train services in Japan, much less reliable, and more expensive as well.
@@ender3960 I know that when a Japanese train runs more than 5 minutes late, it makes the news. The trains on the northeast corridor often run 20-30 minutes late. The distance between Philadelphia and Boston is akin to the distance between Tokyo and Morioka. The Shinkansen between the two cities in Japan takes 2 hours and 15 minutes. The "high speed" option in America takes 5 hours and 10 minutes. And is somehow more expensive than the shinkansen.
Those railways in Europe arent because of population density i think a couple massive wars around the time of railways becoming a thing probably influenced it
I remember reading/hearing somewhere that the North American freight train network is better than its European counterpart, even as the reverse is true for the passenger train networks.
spain has the cross in the exact centre
Madrid
so does a lot of other coumtries
Pi152 best capital city placement ngl
We do
Not best capital placement by 500km away from sea acces
Spain is the most centered, and coincides with the actual capital (Madrid)
Hugo Sánchez DRC?
Vatican?
Poland is also pretty good
As a spanish, i agree, and the capital in the center helps
also ireland
You're in a dark alley in an unfamiliar neighborhood. A man in a hoodie approaches you, face obscured, and asks:
"Do you wanna see countries of Ikea stores?"
"You can have all my money fine sir!" - I answer
You mean maps?
@@luzellemoller6621 13:19
I love how these videos go from "here is a map of the world population" to "do male cows have balls"
😂😂
The power of the speed / meth / coffee / cocaine this guy does in copious quantities before recording
@@vibratoryuniverse308 walter white
Male cows lol
@@us3rGwow I forgot how much I used to watch toycat and all the side channels, I used to be a huge fan and I even own to longboy but I haven't watched in like a year, thanks for bringing up some memories
It's interesting to see how the crosses just "cluster away from", in Africa, the Sahara, and in South America the Amazon Rain Forest.
At around 13:30 Toycat became all of us at 3am
KhAnubis? Geotube is more intertwined than I thought...
lol
Researching sometimes leads to the most random yet interesting detours!
hahahahhahahahahaahahahaaaaahahaaaha
Moooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
This channel is SO much fun. Just a guy rambling on about facts you sort of had an idea about but didn't really know. And he seems to just stick to the facts instead of preaching some agenda. Really love it.
His main channel is ibxtoycat
I always forget how large a population Japan has. On a normal map it looks so small compared to how many people live there.
What about Bangladesh? You must be mind blown about that
Thx for uploading in 12pm, Love to start my morning with maps
"We do not vote as land areas we vote as individual people"
US: We don't do that here
Luxembourg nailed it at having the center of population being in the middel of their country
And Liechtenstein
And San Marino and Vatican city. Also Andorra
@@akash_4769 just not poor Monaco because of the shape of Monaco
Lesotho and Eswatini.
5:10 this is the map that should be used for greenhouse gas emissions. It is annoying how these highly populated countries get shat on for have high emission without stating its population. China is being shat on, for example.
ikr, China has like 8 tonnes of CO2 per capita and the US has 16
There are plenty of legit reasons for China to be shat on.
@@SilvanaDil yes but CO2 emmisions isn't one of them, you should complain about Hong Kong, about muslims getting sent to concentration camps, about them trying to take over the South China Sea (one of the most traveled trade routes and the main route of trade from and to South Korea and Japan)
@@greengreen110 - Yes, all those other complaints -- and more -- are valid. As for CO2 emissions, it's about more than that. Have you seen how polluted Chinese rivers, land, etc. are? It's disgusting.
China has CO2 problems for other reasons. For example, it's large corporate entities that burn most the coal and produce the CO2. Sure per capita the emissions are lower but really it would be much lower if China had environmental regulations for it's businesses to follow, but it doesn't. That's kind of why they have "Crazy bad" air pollution.
Furthermore to say " Greenhouse emissions should be taught based on population of a country" implies that it's mainly an individual person that contributes to bad environmental practices, where the average human does some unsustainable things, I personally do not run huge factories or decide on how electricity must be generated, I have limited options to recycle and can't make artificial islands from landfill to then plant trees on. My point, it's people who has control over the large outputs of CO2 who can actually do something.
I find it irritating that the average population gets "shat on" for something that the rich toffs have always had control over.
Me (an American) : third party? we don’t do that here.
Fool, where I live we have like 10 parties! And proud about it! (there are only 3 big parties and the other 7 are as good as non-existent but let's not talk about that)
Democracy? We don't do that here
Jo Jorgensen 2020
We have other partys they just have as much political sway for whatever reason for example the third most voted candidate of 2020 was of the libertarian party, who are they? Exactly and for some reason instead of pushing out to be their own thing the socialist party see them selves as a sort of group that allies with the democratic party which makes sense because why say your with the socialist party when you can simply say your with the popular party that most people will probably assume is socialist anyway but why this two party nonsense? I don't know and I'm too lazy to Google it.
@@appleslover That aged beautifully.
I find it weird how this channel is run by someone who usually makes minecraft videos
This is the only videos i watch and i did not know he did anything else. Cept he says second channel video.
@@bland9876 same haha
@@Cheaze56789 same hahaha
didnt even know bro was a minecraft player
@@newchoppak4124 thats his main channel
My nephew lives in the north of Canada, Yellowknife. 🇨🇦. We’re all offended. 👊
Kevin Cole if
S there any vehicle on earth that could drive from yellow knife to the southern border
@@briocheoleary5043 I would like to know the same
I would also like to know
@@briocheoleary5043 I believe there is a paved road network that connects to Yellowknife.
I Will fight all 5 of you!
2cat, how do you make a video every 24-12 hours, are you just really good at making videos, are you secretly a wizard with a time turner, or do you just use your god powers
I only make a video every couple weeks here these days though, right?
ibx2cat yeah that seems about right, although it still is confusing how you make so many on your main channel
@@whatthe5607 what main channel?
@@burgerkiller4438 his main channel ibxtoycat
@@burgerkiller4438 BRUH
toybowlcut is the new look
Most of Ireland's population lives in the east around Dublin. Most of the best road and rail infrastructure is around there.
3:23 tho in europe most countries have + in the middle, because europe is very evenly distributed since basically all of the land here is habitable
Because Europe has small countries.
I live in London Ontario, the British named it btw. And it's the Windsor Quebec corridor
The British named it you say. Which British city did they name it after?
The population center of Spain is almost exactly centered.
I'm glad to see that party popper from your "speedrun" livestream did not go to waste. 10/10 on its use here
I just realized that Udaipur in Rajasthan State of India is the world's population center.
Yes lol
Thanks! Keep helping us all ask the next questions. :)
You can buy a hole cow.
A cow isnt only made out of beef it also has bones, guts etc...
Also its probably cheaper without packaging because beef isn't sold in that high amounts.
The trouble is that people in cities seem to forget that food is important -- and it's not grown in cities.
It's 5am in the east coast
Very interesting video, keep up the good work
3:50 Standing in front of Australia, which is remarkably off-center in terms of center of population.
So off center you can see it when he leans forward. As much as we crap on Victoria for struggling with covid, and some of it justified, they also have probably the highest state population density.
11:10 Look at Pennsylvania on that map. The highlighted counties (and a couple others) consistently vote Democrat, while the rest consistently vote Republican. The vast majority of PA counties vote Republican, but because so many more people live in the highlighted counties, the state ends up being close to 50/50 every election.
I'll watch this later, gotta sleep
*Bean*
GOT SOME BEANS?
Bean bag
Beanie
sleeping in 12 pm I see
@@saulius1664 you know there is different time zones right
Imagine there was a country split right in half by another one, and even populations on both halves. The countries center of population would be in the other country.
I like how toycat is talking about how hard it is to find centred countries while somehow ignoring Europe in the corner where a large amount of countries are either close to being centred (France, Germany) or are basically in the centre (Spain, Poland).
You missed the purple splodge in Cardiff
Great video! Keep them coming :)
Thanks! Will do!
No way, i live in Churchill and Toycat mentioned it, what the-
18:53
Why are Egypt and Ethiopia both labelled as having less than 80 million people when in reality they both have over 100 million inhabitants?
I see a similar problem with Brazil too, and doubtless loads of other countries too.
It's an old map, made in 2005.
Table Top
Not true, the population of Ethiopia in 2005 was 76.35 million, not 70 million.
On top of that, there has never been a time when Egypt's population was 78 million and Ethiopia's was 70 million, Ethiopia passed 70 million in 2002 whilst Egypt passed 78 million in 2007, this map is just incorrect garbage.
Its an old estimate of what population is/will be, try making a better one if you feel like its that important.
Love and respect from India 😃
All westerners have 1000+ false stereotypes about us🤣🤣🤣
The thumbnail just looks like it hates South America
Fuck this area in particular
Great video as always
I dont like how toycat uses examples for western canada in the middle of knowwhere instead of the actual cities like Vancouver Calgary Edmonton Winnipeg etc
I SAW A PURPLE SPLODGE IN THE CARDIFF AREA!!! (Idk if it was actually the Cardiff area all I know is that’s Wales)
People live there?
@ibx2cat so would you support proportional respresentation in the UK?
According to a list I found on Wikipedia, Canada is the country with the lowest population per kilometer of railroad. St. Kitts and Nevis is pretty high too. Sweden 2nd and Australia is 3rd.
"List of countries by rail transport network size" is the name of the Wikipedia article.
Is this a reupload?
10:19 *CGP Grey has entered the chat*
It went from US counties and uk elections to "Do cows have balls?"
What you should expect on a second don’t care channel
What I find kinda funny about the population map is how insanely large Singapore is on that compared to its actual size. Like it’s a very very tiny country and it appears as the same size as Ireland
I do not believe this result for the DRC, have you seen Kinsasha?
Never have I ever been so happy when I checked my phone at 4:44 . Thank you for always being your awesome self
Did the view counter stop at 30k?
With the price of beef, Australia is maxed out on the chart. In reality, beef in Aus costs on average $6.60 per kg. The average Australian makes $6000 per month which means if an Australian only spends money of beef they'd be able to buy 909kg of beef.
It's more of a climate thing. Cows don't like to live in torrential rain so beef in the UK is hyper expensive to produce.
I live in bombay and yes Delhi (our capital ) has more population than that of Australia
Never seen anyone so hype for railways
wait didnt you do this before?
It's really not a good idea to base political power completely off of people. The lifestyles and needs of people in lower-density areas are often completely different from those of people who live in cities, thus they need to be governed differently.
Let me pose an example: A budding young politician has the wonderful idea of shutting down a coal power plant and replacing it with a super clean and efficient hydroelectric dam, which will not only provide more electricity, but create a water reservoir for a city full of thirsty people. It's an absolute hit with the city people in this imaginary direct democracy, but for the farmers and ranchers who live away from the city's hustle and bustle, it's a death sentence. You see, for generations, the rural folk have been using the river (which the government intends to dam) to irrigate their crops, crops which feed them and their livestock, as well as pay their bills. The rural folk know they're at a political disadvantage because they don't make up the majority of the population, despite their best efforts the budding politician wins, and the dam's construction begins. It only takes one bad harvest season for people to take notice of the skyrocketing price of nationally-sourced food, and so they take their business elsewhere. The country now has a job crisis because farmers are simply unable to support themselves, and so they're desperately looking for alternatives. Money is worth less and it's harder to get, and before you know it, the entire country is in an economic recession.
Now I know this is a hypothetical situation, but it's a very extreme example of a very real problem with direct democracy, and it happens all the time all across the democratic world. In a direct democracy, leaders are not focused on doing what's best for the country, but doing what the majority wants at the current time, which means that often times decisions are not made based off of careful consideration, but simply on what most people think would be a good idea. A lot of these changes might either seem insignificant or even beneficial to the city-dwelling majority, and due to their busy schedules, as well as their separation (be it geographical, political, and/or social) from those who live in more rural settings, they don't do their due diligence to truly understand the negative side effects of such decisions. This is why it's so extremely important to have a region-based representative democracy, because it guarantees that the person in office has at least some grasp on the needs of the country as a whole, not just the majority of the populace. Sure, that person who lives out in the middle of nowhere and milks cows to make a living might not think or live the same way that you do, but they depend on you, and you depend on them, and as uninformed as you think that person is/that person thinks you are, that inter-dependency is what keeps a country running.
hey great video, would really appreciate a link to all those maps thx!
About your point on trains, a major reason why Japan and Europe have train lines is that after the world war, Europe and Japan were razed and had an unique opportunity to build up a new, modern infrastructure.
Your point on London neglects to show that we need other cities to have a shared business interest and that transport link to places in the north for example, which is densely populated, should be remembered more - otherwise the economy isn't diverse.
Michael Houston the north cannot be described as densely populated compared to London
Cool vid. Subbed
Thanks for your work, you inspire me
Funny that the countries that can buy the most beef, also have the most human cows.
Interesting Fact:
Closest Megacity to World Population center is Delhi, and Delhi is set to become the largest city (population wise) in the world within 5 to 6 years.
( Don't know good or bad, but interesting fact none the less)
Toycat have you heard of pippenFTS?
America is not Democracy it's a Republic. We didn't trade 1 tyrant 3,000 miles away for 3,000 tyrants 1 mile away. It's why we have a Constitution & the electoral system, so you have to win the largest area of the U.S & not the population. Like Bush & Trump. That's what the map illustrates.
I have never used public transportation in my life. I could never rely on someone else to make sure i get where i need every day. And having to deal with random people. I need my space
15:39 that's Nagoya. Niigata is a little bit further to the North. It's the one with the lightest orange shade on the West coast. It owns a small island that you can see right next to it. I'm both referring to the city (Niigata-shi) and the prefecture (Niigata-ken)
Edit: he said it 2 seconds later. Nevermind
ibx2cat 14:20 good point about the railway.... but in Australia, the passenger routes that go to more than 1 city are done more for tourism. Don’t recon anyone uses an interstate train to actually commute. Like the only 3 train routes that do that which I can think of are all purely tourism. Here people just fly. That’s why Australia is the only country to have 2 of the top 10 most traveled flight routes 👍
Finally. A set of maps actually changed how I view the world.
14:49 so are you telling me that building a highway network across the entire country of the US is justifyable but building decent passenger railways is a bad idea?
The US used to have one of, if not THE best railway network in the world back in the day.
Scotland isn’t on the map of Centre of population for each country in the world :(
P K, well it’s not technically sovereign, neither is wales or Northern Ireland
Scotland isn't a country, they are still part of the uk
You should just rename this channel to ibxGEOcat ! BTW I love watching you talk about geography!
It’s funny how close many of the crosses are to the capital cities despite many of them not being the most populous in the country by a long shot
Toycat, the corridor is actually between WINDSOR and Quebec City.
Australia "sucks at railways" because the main cities with like over 95% of people are so far away from each other due to the uninhabitable area all over the country, that there is not much point to travel by trains, and, since all the cities are on the coast, no railway networks connect the more inland areas.
One thing that lets you know just how sparsely populated the center of the United States is, is the size of the lots people build their houses on. On many of them you could run livestock, but they reserve them for their children to play on, and for private recreation. You can't have your kids wallowing in chicken poop after all. The amount of land you live on also seems to increase with the size of your income with the exception of some major cities on the east coast such as New York where you can be wealthy hand live on no land of your own, or in Detroit which is almost an abandoned city where you can be very poor and if you want to risk living in some of the more dangerous parts of the city you can have as much land as you want. No one cares if you use the land next door because there is no one living next door, and it is unlikely that anyone will live next door anytime soon. So you get to use the land tax free.
Hokkaido population: 5.3 million
Ireland population (whole island): 6.7 million
Hokkaido has been connected by tunnel to Honshu since 1988.
Meanwhile a land connection from Ireland to Great Britain is still viewed as a pipe dream.
2:45 the dot for morocco isnt right on the coast, because morocco has more green than youd expect
11:25 "... wouldn't it be crazy if 51% of the people got to decide how 100% of the people did something..." Which is why these major decisions should NOT be placed in concrete when there is not broad agreement.
3:09 I found a country that has its population density in the middle Vatican City and a few small island nation
I lost at the confetti popper
Hey toycat! Not sure if you’ll see this but I think it could be an interesting video idea. You’ve talked about Point Roberts WA before, and I live right near it in the same county. Because of the COVID border closures, support is growing in the community for a purchase to be made by Canada for the peninsula, meaning the US could be losing some land area including the most northwestern place in the US besides Alaska. Many government officials for the US government is also backing the plan because of the anomaly and annoyance of the whole situation. I would love to talk about it more!
14:15 Pretty sure Australia has the most kilometres of railways per capita.
But most people don’t travel by train there
@@KanyeTheGayFish69 Because of the distances between the major cities, trains take a long time. Trains are the cheapest (XPT, Vline) or most expensive options (rolling luxury hotels like The Ghan) to travel long distances. Flights carry many more people between the state capital cities. But trains are used a lot in the major cities and out to their surrounding towns and cities. (Sydney - Blue Mountains, Newcastle, South Coast or Melbourne - Geelong or Ballarat)
The commonly levied complaint that money gets funneled to certain areas with more population or that are the capital makes a little more sense when you also consider that people in those areas tend to earn higher incomes, and how much taxation burdens them in that area may in fact be lower than the lower population areas with less infrastructure (also that there being way larger numbers of people relative to how much the overall area contributes to tax revenue potentially, meaning we're also looking at them paying less per person).
The other thing is, while it's usually true that the higher population areas (and any areas with fossil fuel industry, oil money is still huge) contribute more in tax revenue, that's only a small aspect of analyzing the complex relationships that hold an entire country together as a unit. The population centers and everywhere else are still ultimately benefitting each other by being attached (usually).
Then there's the question of how this money is acquired in capitalism: If important labor for a business is occurring in a rural area where they earn less money for a company where the higher paying offices are all in one of the population centers, you can see how it starts to look unfair, and reminiscent of mercantilism and colonialism, only on a domestic scale. It's more obvious when you look at modern international examples: Coffee beans and other crops grown in Ethiopia that are sent to Switzerland who sells coffee products at a massive profit margin, diamond and coltan miners in the Congo, any and all sweatshop labor. If one can recognize these as exploitative, or China's construction of infrastructure at the expense of essentially buying up infrastructure as such, it shouldn't be too hard to see how things occurring domestically could be seen as much milder forms than that. Maybe not as dangerous, but important jobs outside of the richer area paying less, and the workers not seeing the benefits of their work or getting the most out of the fruits of their labor.
This post was mostly just supposed to be about infrastructure and spending, but some more stuff: In theory, it's supposed to be cheaper to pay for the infrastructure in a smaller area with more people, but it ends up being more expensive despite things running more efficiently. Yes, bigger and better buildings become more expensive to build and have stricter building codes, but that really isn't the driver behind costs. See, gentrification. Because things like housing are a commodity to be bought and sold on the market, more people living in an area raises rent and property taxes because the property is considered more valuable, both in terms of having more people to access and do business with, and just more people are bidding to be in the area. The fact that a residential building doesn't need to be at its occupancy limit, and non-stubborn sellers and renters can lower what they charge should be the kinds of things that tell you the pricing isn't really tied to their expenses. Things become a problem when there's high wealth inequality, or rich people decide they like the area, and either move in or buy properties they never actually go to (see China, again). If they'll pay a higher price for housing in a certain area, the other people selling housing will feel like they can charge higher prices too, and displace people already housed by pricing them out. If someone willing to spend more buys up the property, what's it to them?
Not super relevant to the public funds thing, but I think gentrification does tie into the broader point about what can seem like domestic (or not) colonialism.
Edit: I guess another part of the reason I brought this up is because not everyone in one of those richer areas is necessarily earning more. They may benefit more from the infrastructure than someone in a rural area does from not having infrastructure, and they might get paid more because it's a more expensive area (not necessarily to scale with the cost to live there), but wealth inequality in a capitalist system still hurts the poorer people.
I want to make ammends to your price of a cow at 13:00. Its likely that if you want an alive cow, un slaughtered, and provided its a steer (fertile bulls, female cows ingeneral, but especially dairy are worth more) you could pay somewhere between $400-$500 dollars on it. A full cow that's already been slaughtered nd prepared would be quite expensive. But if you had the means to purchase a living cow and got it slaughtered, it would be much cheaper.
Edit: TLDR buying a whole cow from a grocery store is more expensive than buying a cow.
It’s a bit ignorant to say that the focus should be more on places with higher populations like around 18:00. Some people can’t afford to live in the bigger areas like London for example and have to move or live somewhere less populated and in demand. That doesn’t mean they should be neglected by the government because they aren’t in the centre of civilisation.
Sydney has a crazy good trainsystem
Talks about trains and railways, then the lifespan of a cows "getting back on TRACK" anyone else catch that (unintentional) pun?
11:35 HRE vibes
btw the postage to the Scottish isles are the same price as mainland UK :)
Thanks, very interesting!
You need to make a whole video just about cows
while rail does follow population density the population clusters in the US still have lackluster connection within
The popultation map is Outdated, South Africa has about 60 million people, not 43 million
5:05
the map is from 2005, sadly!
He should probably update it
DilliePlays he didn’t make it ahahhaha
@@ebsck911 I know, I was talking about the map creator
Makes sense central Asia was such a big part of the silk road, as wven though there aren't many people, they are close to a lot of big population centers
We ARE better at railways than American, the east coast (just the coast) has worse railway than Spain (which is supposedly way poorer than the US and has fucked up it's rail network by European standard.)
The US has bad *passenger* railway. It has excellent freight railway, roadway coverage, airport coverage, maritime coverage....
SilvanaDil, ya and the us relies way more heavily on air transportation, but the New England trains and jersey trains and Pennsylvania all have good passenger trains
Dude, if you’re saying Acela is on par with anything in Japan you’ve got another thing coming
have you been on the regional fast lines in Japan? Great and clean, but wildly expensive and not always fast
ibx2cat I haven’t but I’m intimately familiar with the trains along the northeast corridor. I used to take the train between Philadelphia and Boston all the time, over a period of three years. It was much slower than equivalent train services in Japan, much less reliable, and more expensive as well.
@@VulcanTrekkie45 You can't compare a thing you've done with a one you haven't.
@@ender3960 I know that when a Japanese train runs more than 5 minutes late, it makes the news. The trains on the northeast corridor often run 20-30 minutes late. The distance between Philadelphia and Boston is akin to the distance between Tokyo and Morioka. The Shinkansen between the two cities in Japan takes 2 hours and 15 minutes. The "high speed" option in America takes 5 hours and 10 minutes. And is somehow more expensive than the shinkansen.
Those railways in Europe arent because of population density i think a couple massive wars around the time of railways becoming a thing probably influenced it
That beef map really changed the way I see the world
Edit: love your vids toycat
I remember reading/hearing somewhere that the North American freight train network is better than its European counterpart, even as the reverse is true for the passenger train networks.