Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Map: US States Renamed as Countries with Similar GDPs

thesoundingline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 175 posts

Re: Map: US States Renamed as Countries with Similar GDPs

#141

Post by classicsnoot »

kiliantics wrote: post #104
joeschmoe3 wrote: post #101

WOW... If you add up the population of the "similar GDP" countries its well over a a BILLION people.

That's what free movement of capital without free movement of people does. Military and economic dominance means USA has a lot of the capital and keeps out a lot of the people. That money is coming from somewhere, like e.g. Africa where you see the opposite trend: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/africa-subsi...

In regards to both your's as well as u/returnUD 's comments, i never cease to be amazed at the insidious spread of the thoroughly debunked Dependency Theory. For a primer on how the developing world can get stuck in a poverty cycle, look into the history of Ghana and the utter moron Nkrumah. More damage is done by humanities majors pretending to understand economics than ebbil capitalists stealing magical resources from noble savages.

Re: Map: US States Renamed as Countries with Similar GDPs

#142

Post by xtreme »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #100
alehul wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Swede living in the United States, I can agree that the average person has a higher quality of life in Scandinavia! I don't think it's possible to have that in the States, though; the country doesn't seem meant for it. The Scandinavian model relies on many incompatible tenets that could be mentioned, including but not limited to immigration. The Swedish system is already practically collapsing from its first maj…

Australia is a nation of immigrants. About 30% of the Australian population are immigrants, and rising. Less than 50% of Australians have both parents born in Australia. Australia still manages to have great quality of life (unless you are an Aboriginal). I'm not sure how they manage it, I haven't looked into it, but somehow they have.

Since we are just speculating, I hypothesize that not sharing a land border with relatively poor countries has something to do with it. Australia does take in immigrants, but since most of them come legally they can pick and choose. They don't get the huge number of illegal immigrants USA deals with. This is not a diatribe against immigration, I'm an immigrant myself.

Re: Map: US States Renamed as Countries with Similar GDPs

#143

Post by classicsnoot »

ReturnUD wrote: post #140
adventured wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hole in your sarcastic premise, is the fact that the US was once a developing nation, dealing with vastly more powerful colonial powers. It was the colonial powers and their capital that provided the seed capital for the US to become what it is. Just as China was / has been a developing nation and is graduating from that status, built up by foreign developed nation capital. Just as South Korea, Australia, New Zea…

Wow, what a wonderful idea. Let me just roll my sleeves and create a successful nation. Germans, Czech, etc. were obviously so much smarter and hard-working than us - that's exactly the reason why they created a successful nation. I have no words.

They were (probably are) and they did. One becomes smarter and more effective through learning and application, not whining and recrimination. S. Korea was demonstrably worse off than Ethiopia as well as many other sub-Saharan countries in the 1950s and look at them now. Did they achieve this through colonization, exploitation, and slavery?

Re: Map: US States Renamed as Countries with Similar GDPs

#144

Post by tomatotomato37 »

Diederich wrote: post #135
jaytaylor wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard to say about the UK for sure without further research. During college in Utah I was sad each winter to regularly read stories in the newspaper about homeless people found frozen to death in parks. After President Jimmy Carter closed the mental institutions in the 70s, the mentally ill people were just let out of the asylums without any plan or further support from the state. Since then, homelessness has grown in…

I'm on board with everything you said except about Jimmy Carter closing mental institutions; that's quite the opposite of what happened. It was his successor, Ronald Reagan, who was instrumental in closing many mental health services. As far as California, specifically the bay area: it's a hell of a mess. Beyond people living on the streets, there is a growing group of people living in RVs. I took these pics near my…

RV's are essentially mobile homes with the driving unit built in, so I wouldn't really call that homeless.

Illegally parked, but not homeless

Re: Map: US States Renamed as Countries with Similar GDPs

#145

Post by ReturnUD »

classicsnoot wrote: post #143
ReturnUD wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, what a wonderful idea. Let me just roll my sleeves and create a successful nation. Germans, Czech, etc. were obviously so much smarter and hard-working than us - that's exactly the reason why they created a successful nation. I have no words.

They were (probably are) and they did. One becomes smarter and more effective through learning and application, not whining and recrimination. S. Korea was demonstrably worse off than Ethiopia as well as many other sub-Saharan countries in the 1950s and look at them now. Did they achieve this through colonization, exploitation, and slavery?

Well, maybe you should stop supporting our dictatorial regime for your own interests and give us the same freedom afforded to the 50s S.Korea before you point your uneducated fingers at me.

Re: Map: US States Renamed as Countries with Similar GDPs

#146

Post by Diederich »

tomatotomato37 wrote: post #144
Diederich wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm on board with everything you said except about Jimmy Carter closing mental institutions; that's quite the opposite of what happened. It was his successor, Ronald Reagan, who was instrumental in closing many mental health services. As far as California, specifically the bay area: it's a hell of a mess. Beyond people living on the streets, there is a growing group of people living in RVs. I took these pics near my…

RV's are essentially mobile homes with the driving unit built in, so I wouldn't really call that homeless. Illegally parked, but not homeless

Right. I don't think of them as homeless per se. They're certainly in an unenviable position.

Also: at least in Mountain View and Palo Alto, these are not all necessarily illegally parked. They need to be moved every couple of days, but at the moment, the cities aren't pressing the issue.

Re: Map: US States Renamed as Countries with Similar GDPs

#147

Post by gandhium »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #40

The article lists Russia as the US's "nemesis". "Competitor" or even "enemy" would have been an appropriate designation, but "nemesis" means retribution, justice, or vengeance. Exactly whom is seeking retribution against whom, and for what? Since the birth of the nation, Russia supported the US. It supported its revolution and supported the Union during the civil war. It even sold Alaska to the US. We brokered the en…

> We allied with the Soviets during WWII, but then we quickly started the cold war

So, about starting the cold war.

USSR meddled in Poland's elections

USSR basically invaded Persia and tried to annex a part there.

USSR tried to force Turkey to gave up control over Bosphor Straits

USSR blockaded Berlin effectively putting people on verge of dying from hunger

... but somebody else started the cold war, absolutely out of the blue?

Re: Map: US States Renamed as Countries with Similar GDPs

#148

Post by mikeash »

coldtea wrote: post #120
mikeash wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How comparable, exactly? If QoL in California is better in proportion to the workforce disparity then the UK isn’t any more efficient. If it goes the other way then the UK is even more efficient. Assuming they’re the same doesn’t make any sense.

If they're more or less the same, then assuming they're the same makes perfect sense.

That depends on how close “more or less the same” actually is. Within 10%? Sure. Within an order of magnitude? That would swamp the other difference.

I have no idea which way it is, but spinning lower GDP per worker as more efficient doesn’t make any sense to me.

Re: Map: US States Renamed as Countries with Similar GDPs

#149

Post by danharaj »

pluto9 wrote: post #97
posterboy wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the average Iraqi doesn't have a standard of living adequate to afford [such a standard of living] Impecable logic, technically not even wrong, but ... you are saying the wars didn't cause colataral damage to a significant degree because ... you cannot live without air conditioning?

Your remark about air conditioning makes no sense at all, but I'll reply to the rest of your comment by clarifying what I mean. GP was implying that Iraq would be nice if it weren't for American interventions. You appear to be making the same point, given your reference to collateral damage. I'm saying that's highly unlikely considering that Iraq has always been quite poor compared to the U.S., even before any of the…

I mean, whatever you need to tell yourself to rationalize away what the United States did. Does that boot taste good, though?

Re: Map: US States Renamed as Countries with Similar GDPs

#150

Post by pluto9 »

danharaj wrote: post #149
pluto9 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your remark about air conditioning makes no sense at all, but I'll reply to the rest of your comment by clarifying what I mean. GP was implying that Iraq would be nice if it weren't for American interventions. You appear to be making the same point, given your reference to collateral damage. I'm saying that's highly unlikely considering that Iraq has always been quite poor compared to the U.S., even before any of the…

I mean, whatever you need to tell yourself to rationalize away what the United States did. Does that boot taste good, though?

I'm not rationalizing anything. Did I say I was in favor of American policies regarding Iraq? No, I didn't. I'm merely saying that invasion or not, Iraq would be underdeveloped, just as it has been for a very long time. You cannot blame every national failure and misfortune in Iraqi history on America.

Are you capable of staying on topic? Do you actually have an argument? Or are you just going to fling childish insults in lieu of one?

Post reply on HN