Live data from Hacker News

Why Didn’t Denmark Sell Greenland?

gwern.net

31–40 of 165 posts

Re: Why Didn’t Denmark Sell Greenland?

#31

I heard that some Danes are proud of having the largest country in Europe. Selling Greenland would certainly change that. But as I am not a Dane myself, take it with a grain of salt (and it might not be true either, depending on how you measure other countries e.g. Russia).

I’m sorry to be the classic HN “but wait” guy, but wait: technically isn’t Greenland in America?

The tectonic plate separating North America from Europe goes right through Iceland (the only place the Mid-Atlantic ridge is above water), making Iceland a “country on two continents”.

If a European country can count off-continent lands in its “biggest country” argument, don’t all overseas territories get that consideration? Are the Danes really the last large “empire” in Europe, if only by land area?

If Britain could count Commonwealth countries (they are technically all under the same sovereign), then Canada + Australia would keep GB in the top seat, I’d think.

Re: Why Didn’t Denmark Sell Greenland?

#32
post #11

National territory has a psychological and strategic value that cannot be bought and sold. Countries have gone to war over infinitesimally tiny pieces of land (Gaza, Falklands, Northern Ireland)... we do not need to look to a crystal ball to see why Denmark holds onto a gigantic landmass like Greenland.

Agreed. Greenland is 836,300 mi², while Denmark is 16,577 mi². Imagine the effects of climate change in 200+ years - Greenland could be VERY valuable and important then.

Why sell it?

Re: Why Didn’t Denmark Sell Greenland?

#33
post #30
post #11

National territory has a psychological and strategic value that cannot be bought and sold. Countries have gone to war over infinitesimally tiny pieces of land (Gaza, Falklands, Northern Ireland)... we do not need to look to a crystal ball to see why Denmark holds onto a gigantic landmass like Greenland.

Buying and selling of large territories between countries has been very common throughout history, so a blanket statement like this doesn't hold much weight. Much of the United States was bought rather than conquered, and China is doing the same today.

China is doing the same today? How so?

Re: Why Didn’t Denmark Sell Greenland?

#34
The author compares Greenland to Puerto Rico, seeming to make the assumption that if somebody made a good offer, America would happily sell Puerto Rico. Can any other Americans speak to the truth of this? It seems absurd to me that a country would happily sell off a territory and make a whole bunch of citizens non-citizens just for the financial benefit. Are Puerto Ricans not Americans? Do americans really view Puerto Rico as a budget line item that could be cut if necessary?

Re: Why Didn’t Denmark Sell Greenland?

#35
post #11

National territory has a psychological and strategic value that cannot be bought and sold. Countries have gone to war over infinitesimally tiny pieces of land (Gaza, Falklands, Northern Ireland)... we do not need to look to a crystal ball to see why Denmark holds onto a gigantic landmass like Greenland.

> Greenland is believed by some geologists to have some of the world’s largest remaining oil resources. [1]

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_exploration_in_the...

Re: Why Didn’t Denmark Sell Greenland?

#36

The author compares Greenland to Puerto Rico, seeming to make the assumption that if somebody made a good offer, America would happily sell Puerto Rico. Can any other Americans speak to the truth of this? It seems absurd to me that a country would happily sell off a territory and make a whole bunch of citizens non-citizens just for the financial benefit. Are Puerto Ricans not Americans? Do americans really view Puert…

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/26/upshot/nearly-half-of-ame...

Re: Why Didn’t Denmark Sell Greenland?

#37

The author compares Greenland to Puerto Rico, seeming to make the assumption that if somebody made a good offer, America would happily sell Puerto Rico. Can any other Americans speak to the truth of this? It seems absurd to me that a country would happily sell off a territory and make a whole bunch of citizens non-citizens just for the financial benefit. Are Puerto Ricans not Americans? Do americans really view Puert…

[deleted]

Re: Why Didn’t Denmark Sell Greenland?

#39
post #14
post #13

Wild idea: I think we should turn Greenland into an into a new frontier nation with completely open borders for refugees and people who are up for the challenge of settling a new place. Sure, there's nothing there, but if you want to build something and there's nowhere else for you, have at it. EDIT: Out of curiosity, I started looking at Greenland on Google Maps and found this sweet shadow of the buggy they used to…

That could be a solution for the asylum seekers in the US, too... settle them in the Alaskan wild. If you’re willing to go from Honduras to Nome that’s a clear cut sign that what you’re fleeing is a very real danger.

There’s free movement between Alaska and other states. No way to prevent them from moving to, say, New York.

Re: Why Didn’t Denmark Sell Greenland?

#40

I think, in hindsight, it will turn out to have been an exceptionally good call to retain Greenland. They have an interesting setup - there is no land ownership other than by the state, and you can only get permission to build by winning a lottery. There are minor exceptions for building small hunting cabins in the fjords, but this is negligible. The reason is to prevent private ownership from hindering possible oppo…

1. It’s cheaper to desalinate sea water than transport it in ships.

2. You don’t need land for agriculture. Plenty of crops can grow in water.

3. Greenland has lots of gold. That’s about it.

Post reply on HN