Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The US's population density really should only be counted to include the land mass where most people live. A large portion of the USA is essentially uninhabitable for a variety of reasons (law, water, terrain, etc.), and this uninhabitable land throws the calculation off. Include farm land, but don't include low most low desert land, mountain ranges, federal land, etc. Just my opinion.
Anyway, I think that it's due to a variety of factors to include:
high population
a lot of natural resources
a relatively high IQ population
a heritage of European cultures that were historically conducive to civilization building
a lot of land area for industry and farming
a strong university tradition
a developed banking infrastructure
relatively effective, relatively low corruption law and order
corruption that isn't the lowest in the world, but not the highest either
World dominance through imperialism (not pc, but true both in terms of it being factual and in terms of its productive effect)
No. Obviously, more population will almost always lead to economic growth and a larger economy. I have never argued otherwise. The case against continued mass immigration to America and other developed countries is about maintaining cultural cohesion and overall quality of life. Rapid economic growth is not necessary for that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.