system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: The US Senate was a mistake.

The two chambers of Congress originated from a “compromise” between two opposing groups of thought. One group that that each state should be proportionally represented according to their population. The other thought that each state should have the same number of legislatures regardless of how many people they are representing. I put “compromise” in quotes, because the deal was basically “There will be one chamber that is proportionally representative and another that will have 2 members from each state. However, the one one with the equal number of representatives from each state will have more power and terms that are three times as long.”

The entire idea of equal representation by state regardless of population is ridiculous, anyway. Basically, it is saying that because you live in an area where nobody else lives, your opinions should matter more than the majority of the people in the country.

I can understand that there may be certain issues that would be better off being decided bu more rural states or areas that understand the issues better. Things that directly relate exclusively to farmers could maybe benefit from being decided by farmers rather than those who live in the cities. But we need to find a better way to make sure their voices are heard on those issues without giving them all of the power.

The argument that proportional representation would mean that the country would be ruled by the coasts/the cities is also ridiculous. The country would be rules by the people! As opposed to by a minority of the people with a majority of the power.
gpt
The problem with your argument is your basic premise is faulty. It appears you are under the understanding that the federal government was designed to regulate and govern people. It is not, and never has been the role of the federal government to regulate and govern individuals. The federal government was designed to regulate states. It was designed to make sure that the states played nice with each other and worked toward a common goal. After seeing the Indian nations be divided and conquered, the founding fathers new that a single unit, formed of smaller parts, was stronger then its individual sub parts by themselves. Thus they formed the federal government to govern them. They also wanted to avoid one type of government  because it could easily run away with no check on its power. This is why we constantly have a tug of war between states and the feds (which is good for us). 

However, we can all agree that because population is unevenly distributed, smaller states naturally should get less of a say. But it should not mean they do not get a say at all. If there was only the house and no senate, there would be no reason for smaller states to even exist. They would essentially be ants under the boots of everyone else. And if they get no benefit of being apart of the United States, they would just create their own nation where the power would be balanced among them. Thus the entire idea of even having a federal government would fail. Therefore a compromise must be struck. That compromise is the division of the house and senate. Large states do have more of a say overall due to this concept but are not allowed to rule outright.While population is smaller is some midwestern states, their importance to a nation as a whole should not be overlooked.