The Akasha Colony wrote:New Septentrion wrote:Non-police related: Is it feasible to have some political subdivisions of a country be 100+ times the population of others?
I mean, the present-day US does it (Cali and New Yawk vs Alaska and Wyoming), but is it really a rational system or should the more populous ones be sliced up?
Yeah, it's fine. In many ways, it makes sense; for instance, a large metropolis may well have a hundred or more times the population of an empty, unincorporated county. But this doesn't mean that the city should be split up, since in many ways it is more efficient for services to be coordinated by a single government city-wide, rather than having a dozen individual governments duplicating services. That's leaving aside the matter of culture and such.
And for an example where "culture and such" is a factor, as well as location, consider RL India whose division into a set of 'states' & 'union territories' is partly based on ethnic lines: most populous state = Uttar Pradesh (the middle part of the Ganges valley, inhabited mainly by speakers of Hindi) @ c.200 million --- larger than many actual [RL] nations; least populous union territory = Lakshadweep (the 'Laccadive Islands', a cluster situated off of the south-western coast) @ 64'429 [census in 2011] which is roughly equal to the nation of Marshall Islands but is only 627th among the 640 districts in India even though almost all of the more populous ones are included inside states rather than counted as other union terrriories; Population Ratio > 3'000:1 !