23 June 2004 23:59
okay, this is interesting (at least to me, i'm trapped in the middle of it).i heard on jeporady last week that the 1790 census of the USA counted four million citizens.
now idon't know how many states were in the union in 1790, and i'm currently too lazy to look it up, but they were definately all east of the mississippi, more than likely, ohio territory and kentucky weren't even in existance yet. even so, we have four million people "crammed" onto the eastern seaboard.
now that same day, i heard on the radio that the current population in the greater Los Angeles area is fifteen million. [shock]. that is four times the population of the entire east coast 215 years ago, all smashed into an area much less than 10,000 square miles.
okay, here are some quick specs i just found on LA itself (losangelesalmanac.com): 2000 census gave LA only (not the entire basin) population as 3.7 million, and the population density as over 7800 persons per square mile. ugh.
but i'm not done. Brian just told me today that the national population of Canada is thirty million. the LA basin contains half the population of Canada. that's insane!! i gotta get out of this place.
montana has a population density of 5.5 people/sqmi. hmmmm.....
I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks.
—Daniel Boone, who always felt it time to move on when he
could see the smoke from his neighbor's chimney.
PS, if your reading my last post, photobucket.com was having an issue or two this evening, try it again tomorrow if the two pictures don't work...
23:59 email me permalink / commentary (0)
