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

151–160 of 175 posts

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

#151

Post by adventured »

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.

Inventing fake argumentation points doesn't actually work. I said nothing about such and such nation being smarter or harder working. You said that.

I said, directly and indirectly, that developing nations benefit immensely more from developed nations than vice versa. It was similarly true for the US as well when it was a developing nation. It's factually true and very easily demonstrated: it's why the global median standard of living is at the highest it has ever been, famines are almost non-existent globally, the median life expectancy globally continues to expand, there is less extreme poverty today than at any other time in recorded history, global equality is at an all-time high and has continued to improve, food security is at an all-time high, infant mortality is at an all-time low, etc.

If you were right, none of that could be true, because all the wealthy & powerful nations would be busy oppressing all the poor nations, such that they could never climb the standard of living tiers.

Over five decades Vietnam suffered repeated occupation, genocide, famine, civil war, a brutal form of Communism, and overall had a large percentage of its population killed. Today they're on a booming express train toward a middle income economy. What excuse could you possibly present next to that? Countries like Vietnam (and China before it), or Czech, or Estonia, demonstrate very clearly what's possible and they deserve credit for their accomplishments.

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

#152

Post by danharaj »

pluto9 wrote: post #150
danharaj wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 insul…

Economic development during the 1970's and in the run up to the iran-iraq war was promising by the numbers and by considering the nascent industrial centers in places like Baghdad. If you look at those numbers and say "nah, doesn't matter" when considering how American policy destroyed that picture then it's not worth arguing about. Especially the embargo which killed hundreds of thousands (or will you say 'nuh-uh'?). Your dismissive, aggressive tone doesn't exactly invite conversation, does it? Frankly, I don't think you know shit enough about economics to act as authoritatively as you do.

What-if historical arguments are always fluffy, but we have examples of similar sorts of states experiencing similar initial growth that weren't crushed by an empire's geopolitical interests. Where are they today?

Edit: In any case, the point I was going to make is that the reason why it is the way you observed is because the economies in Oklahoma and Iraq serve different purposes within the context of global capital, Iraq being a client state to the United States and primarily serving as a vehicle of resource extraction and exploitation, while in Oklahoma at least some of that economic activity is going towards the well-being of the people there.

Now, the upshot is that the relative wealth of normal schmoes in the United States and other nations of similar economic development shows the discrepancy that it does because of the same sort of forces in a less extreme way. Americans are more exploited per capita by the capitalist class than they are in, say, the EU. Other people in these threads have described how, e.g. deregulated healthcare is a manifestation of that exploitation.

But to be honest, after your reply I wanted to yank your chain :^)

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

#153

Post by pluto9 »

danharaj wrote: post #152
pluto9 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 insul…

Economic development during the 1970's and in the run up to the iran-iraq war was promising by the numbers and by considering the nascent industrial centers in places like Baghdad. If you look at those numbers and say "nah, doesn't matter" when considering how American policy destroyed that picture then it's not worth arguing about. Especially the embargo which killed hundreds of thousands (or will you say 'nuh-uh'?)…

Because calling people "bootlicker" invites conversation, right?

Ah, the 1970's--the decade that ended with Iraq opportunistically invading Iran and promptly getting its ass kicked. If you want to make the case that America's imperialism is the reason for Iraq's troubles, that's probably not the example you want to go with.

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

#154

Post by wooter »

rukittenme wrote: post #76
jessaustin wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gosh, what would the world be like if our troops and munitions weren't murdering civilians and prolonging conflicts in a monotonically-increasing set of nations around the world? It's not "unknowable"; we just have to start voting... ...haha what was I thinking never mind. Also what does net present value have to do with any of this?

> Gosh, what would the world be like if our troops and munitions weren't murdering civilians and prolonging conflicts in a monotonically-increasing set of nations around the world? It's not "unknowable"; we just have to start voting... Hah! I didn't say you couldn't have an opinion on it. Only that you can't know the world that "could have been". > Also what does net present value have to do with any of this? Squande…

> If a government project has a net economic (or public health) benefit then by definition the money was not squandered.

Just want to point out that this statement doesn't account for opportunity cost. if it could go to something of greater net benefit, the difference between the two could be considered squandered.

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

#155

Post by usrusr »

pluto9 wrote: post #127
usrusr wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP post is open to a benevolent interpretation wherein a cooperative reader fills in the missing "per capita" from the context of talking about quality of life. Calling Iraq and Oklahoma similar closes that door, because those two are not similar at all per capita.

It cannot reasonably be interpreted that way. GP made a blanket statement about how in spite of our GDP being higher than many other countries, our quality of life is not. That is obviously false. I choose to interpret GP's comment to mean what it actually says. You may choose to put words in GP's mouth so that their argument says what you wish it to say, but for me that's a waste of time. If they wish to clarify and…

> It cannot reasonably be interpreted that way.

Well, I do, and I hope this answers your question of why I replied to your post and not the the one above (which did not add much to the discussion to begin with).

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

#156

Post by tptacek »

rayiner wrote: post #79
mhandley wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While your data are no doubt correct, this doesn't stop it being true for California. Just because a state is now suffering from out-migration doesn't indicate it didn't become wealthy from migration in the past, nor does it indicate it is getting poorer now due to that out-migration. To know that, you'd have to measure the economic contribution of the people moving in and of the people leaving. It is possible for th…

OP made the assertion, they've got the burden of providing data in support of it. I'm just explaining that the data he did offer doesn't support his conclusion. Wealth in Colorado, Minnesota, etc., comes from the same place as anywhere else. The U.S. is a rich country with lots of productive industries. Tech is actually a pretty small portion of that (5-6% of GDP, 3% of employment). E.g. Target is based in Minnesota,…

Because I can't resist: Facebook has 6x better net margin; comparing the revenues of a global retailer to those of Facebook is a bit of an odd choice.

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

#157

Post by TheCoelacanth »

pluto9 wrote: post #72
maxerickson wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well no, pointing out that the US strata are unusually and unnecessarily capricious isn't specious. The US is a rich country and the lack of resources for people at the bottom is more likely to be arbitrary than it is to be contributing to that wealth.

It is when you conveniently fail to mention the vast list of countries, many of which are on this map, whose stratification is far worse than that of the U.S.

Which countries are you referring to? Of the 11 countries with GDP per capita no more than 10% below the US's, I see only 1 (Qatar) with social stratification worse than the US. Of the 26 countries with GDP per capita no more than 50% below the US's, I see only ~three (Qatar, UAE, arguably Singapore) with worse social stratification than the US.

So, your argument is basically, "Yay, we're better than two theocratic monarchies whose prosperity is based solely on oil wealth and importing a bunch of virtual slaves from poor countries, maybe better than one technocratic dictatorship, better than a bunch of undeveloped third world countries, but worse than every other single Western democracy. Go us!"

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

#158

Post by jessaustin »

lolsal wrote: post #82
jessaustin wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gosh, what would the world be like if our troops and munitions weren't murdering civilians and prolonging conflicts in a monotonically-increasing set of nations around the world? It's not "unknowable"; we just have to start voting... ...haha what was I thinking never mind. Also what does net present value have to do with any of this?

>Gosh, what would the world be like if our troops and munitions weren't murdering civilians and prolonging conflicts in a monotonically-increasing set of nations around the world? I imagine it'd be a lot more like the conflicts in the rest of Africa. > It's not "unknowable"; Yes it is, unless you have a time machine. > we just have to start voting... Ah see, but we already do that. The US votes to keep a massive, mig…

In the latest election, the dude who won president had tweeted things like, "stay out of Syria" and "WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS?ZERO" Lots of people knew he was lying, but lots of other people voted based on those statements. Two elections before that, the dude who won president had promised to close the Guantanamo torture site, to get out of Iraq and not to start new stupid wars. Lots of people knew he was lying, but lots of other people voted based on those statements. Two elections before that, the dude who won president talked about a "humble" USA that would not be "the world police" nor take part in "nation-building". Lots of people knew he was lying, but lots of other people voted based on those statements.

Voting just isn't all it's cracked up to be!

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

#159

Post by pluto9 »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #157
pluto9 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is when you conveniently fail to mention the vast list of countries, many of which are on this map, whose stratification is far worse than that of the U.S.

Which countries are you referring to? Of the 11 countries with GDP per capita no more than 10% below the US's, I see only 1 (Qatar) with social stratification worse than the US. Of the 26 countries with GDP per capita no more than 50% below the US's, I see only ~three (Qatar, UAE, arguably Singapore) with worse social stratification than the US. So, your argument is basically, "Yay, we're better than two theocratic m…

> Of the 11 countries with GDP per capita no more than 10% below the US's

I like how you casually discard the vast swath of data that doesn't agree with you.

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

#160

Post by TheCoelacanth »

pluto9 wrote: post #159
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which countries are you referring to? Of the 11 countries with GDP per capita no more than 10% below the US's, I see only 1 (Qatar) with social stratification worse than the US. Of the 26 countries with GDP per capita no more than 50% below the US's, I see only ~three (Qatar, UAE, arguably Singapore) with worse social stratification than the US. So, your argument is basically, "Yay, we're better than two theocratic m…

> Of the 11 countries with GDP per capita no more than 10% below the US's I like how you casually discard the vast swath of data that doesn't agree with you.

I like how you casually discard the vast majority of the comment. I addressed more or less every country in the world at some point in the comment.

It is not an accomplishment for the US to be doing better than a bunch of third world countries that are poor as shit because they were on the losing end of colonialism. It needs to be compared to the other comparably developed countries.

Post reply on HN