Are people in their 60s in Tottori 6.8 times more important than people in their 20s in Kanagawa?

This morning, there was the ground-breaking ceremony for M Nursery School, and in the afternoon, the topping-out ceremony for K House in Nishinomiya.
It was a day filled with events. Recently it has been very cold.
Despite all that, the weather was good and it was relatively warm, which was great.
I think many of you may have looked at today's title and wondered what it meant.
This is the disparity in one vote that I have always found strange.
This is the result of further thinking on my own.
Currently, there is a 5.01-to-1 disparity between Kanagawa and Tottori in the House of Councillors.
It is said that there is a 2.3-fold disparity between Chiba and Kochi in the House of Representatives.
To put this very succinctly:
The law in this country is
Tottori prefecture residents are five times better than Kanagawa prefecture residents.
Or
The people of Kochi Prefecture are 2.3 times more powerful than the people of Chiba Prefecture.
It can also be said.
More generally, people in the countryside are superior to people in the city.
It can also be said that this is the case.
This is often written in newspapers etc.
I thought there were a lot of old people in the countryside and young people in the city.
It was something that seemed to be common.
When we actually looked into it, the ratio of people in their 20s in Kanagawa and Chiba was about 11%.
The proportion of people in their 60s in Kochi and Tottori is around 15%.
In general, these regions have a high ratio of working-age population to elderly population.
There is a difference of about 6%.
First, ignore the voter turnout.
The disparity in the votes of people in their 20s in urban areas and people in their 60s in rural areas, and the strength that comes from the population ratio
In comparison, in the House of Councillors the difference is 6.8 times.
Similarly, when comparing the House of Representatives, the difference is 3.1 times.
Looking at this, it seems that each political party is only concerned with the current welfare for the elderly, rather than trying to look to the future.
It is clear that, in principle, it is inevitable that we will end up placing importance on this issue.
In short, the electoral system itself is flawed.
Moreover...
To make matters worse, the voter turnout rate for people in their 20s and 60s in the most recent House of Representatives election was
When you look at it, they are 49% and 84% respectively.
The difference is nearly double.
This is a difference in public opinion, not a difference in the system, but in the election.
This is evident in the difference in strength between generations.
If we take this difference into account
House of Councillors: 11.7 times
This is 5.3 times the number of seats in the House of Representatives.
It is true that young people in cities will be the ones to support the majority of the country's income in the future.
I think everyone would agree. However, in this current situation, for the sake of the future and the young people,
It is hard to imagine that any policy will be implemented.
We do not look down on the elderly, but it is the young people who support them.
As far as I know, there is no one who is currently promoting the idea of completely correcting this disparity in the value of one vote.
Only the Minna no To party.
So, the results of the calculations were pretty much what I expected, so I was feeling a bit confused.
It was sunny and refreshing.