Want this question answered?
Much bigger population from which to recruit armies.
They would support it because they had very large populations. In the Virginia Plan, the greater the population, the greater the voice. Therefore, larger states would support the plan, but smaller states would have low population, and therefore little voice.
some of the disadvantages that the south had were that: 1. They relied on the europeans for their supplies while the north had their own 2. The population was 4 times smaller if you dont count the slaves 3. the slaves could not participate in the war but if they did the population would have been much larger 4. They had less factories, mills, and railroads 5. They basically lost the war so that was a disadvantage.
The simple answer would be yes... while some states would later be considered free states in the 1700's slavery was an establish institution.. that was looked down upon in the North however it was legal.... oh... know that only 1% of the population of the North was African...
. . . . . . . . . .If I can recall, the North had the most advantages when the Civil War began in 1861. Mainly because:1. The North had thousands of more railroads for transporting goods than the South, which caused a huge problem for the Confederates later on.2. The North had more factories, and they could produce their own goods rather than buying them, but the Confederates had to buy supplies.3. The North had a larger population than the South, and a ready army and navy to fight.4. The North had already established a Commissary Department (The Food Supplier for the troops), whereas the South had not when it seceded from the Union. It meant that the Confederate troops would face starvation later on if their Commissary Department failed to get enough food.- S0L. . . . . . . . . .
I wouldn't say that it was certain that the North would win; the outcome of a war, like the outcome of a baseball game, is seldom certain. But the North did have both a larger population and a larger industrial capacity, so it was very unlikely that the North could have lost.
Population cannot be accurately determined in North Korea, however since there are reports of people dying of starvation, i would think that South Korea has a larger population.
larger population which means more activities involving water
If they were represented by population the larger states would have all the legislated solely in their benefit.What about the states with a smaller population, they got less than they deserve?
Spain would have a much larger population, with about 47 million compared to Dominican Republic's 10 million.
The larger continent land wise speaking would be Africa
By population, it would be USA.
An Empire is usually a large number of kingdoms ruled over by one conquering kingdom or nation, and therefore an empire would usually have a much larger population
A pico is larger and faster, but a topper would be easier to sail for a youngster.
There would be a larger population of algae on the earth.
It said the larger states would have more representatives than states with a small population. Three fifths of the slaves would count in the population.
North Korea: Land area and Natural Resources is bigger then South Korea. South Korea: Population and Economy is alot bigger then North Korea. Both Korea's even out in the end. If you combine or unite Korean peninsula into one state. It would be alot better and bigger for all Koreans Economically, Politically, Military, and Culturally, Geographicaly.