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.
Economic stats can be endlessly manipulated, but even so you have been reading rubbish. Mexico City's GDP is around 400 billion U.S.$, making it the eighth richest city in the world, DFW's GDP is around 300 billion U.S $. Mexico's GDP is around 1.09 trillion U.S $. When I last checked 400 is bigger than 300, and 1.09 trillion is considerably more than 300 billion, but I suspect facts are irrelevant to your racist diatribe. Depending on currency exchange rates inter alia these numbers change all the time, but never so much that claim can plausibly be made that the economy of DFW is bigger than the economy of Mexico City or the howler of an error that the size of the economy of DFW is remotely close to the size of the economy of the country of Mexico.
Wow! So, according to what you claim, then the state of Texas is very comparable to the nation of Mexico then. Isn't the metropolitan area of Mexico City about four times that of DFW in population?
Still, the number of billionaries and millionaires in Texas far out paces the number in Mexico. I just read that Texas has 383,000 millionaires. Yet, according to what I read, DFW has more billionaires and about as many millionaires as the whole nation of Mexico. So, how can Mexico City be the eighth richest city in the world? Hello?
Now, I can believe Mexico is worth 1.09 trillion dollars because that just isn't a lot of money any more.
Shoot, Obama has spent about a hundred times that amount, hasn't he?
But you are right. I just assumed that DFW is about as wealthy as the nation of Mexico because of the numbers of billionaires and millionaires in each.
Can you please explain this oddity? See, being a racist, my brain isn't all that large because of an extremely sloping forehead from eating a lot of corn.
So Nif, just curious, where did you stay and what did you do last time you were in Mexico City?
I have never been south of Monterrey. But, here is my point. See, these fellows are calling me crazy. Yet, I'm the one using logic. If Santiago, Chile and Buenos Aires, Argentina are all that, then they should factor somewhere into the statistics. But they don't. In other words, the richest nations in Latin America are Brazil and Mexico, respectively. Brazil isn't a Hispanic nation though as the people there speak Portuguese.
From what I read, Mexico has nine billionaires.
Now, how can the nations of Chile and Argentina be richer nations than Mexico when the latter nation has the second greatest numer of billionaires? I do think that could be possible. Still, I think these fellows are playing with figures. I don't want to call them Santa Anna boot lickers, but these fellows do seem to like to liquor themselves up in old tyrannies.
Me? I'm a true American and Texan as I'd much rather vacation under my aunt Sue's house in Tyler, Texas than visit these places.
I have never been south of Monterrey. But, here is my point. See, these fellows are calling me crazy. Yet, I'm the one using logic. If Santiago, Chile and Buenos Aires, Argentina are all that, then they should factor somewhere into the statistics. But they don't. In other words, the richest nations in Latin America are Brazil and Mexico, respectively. Brazil isn't a Hispanic nation though as the people there speak Portuguese.
From what I read, Mexico has nine billionaires.
Now, how can the nations of Chile and Argentina be richer nations than Mexico when the latter nation has the second greatest numer of billionaires? I do think that could be possible. Still, I think these fellows are playing with figures. I don't want to call them Santa Anna boot lickers, but these fellows do seem to like to liquor themselves up in old tyrannies.
Me? I'm a true American and Texan as I'd much rather vacation under my aunt Sue's house in Tyler, Texas than visit these places.
So since you admit you have never been to either Mexico City, nor any other Latin American country that you admit that you don't know what the hell you are talking about.
FYI: Argentina and Chile are South America's richest countries not Brazil.
I have never been south of Monterrey. But, here is my point. See, these fellows are calling me crazy. Yet, I'm the one using logic. If Santiago, Chile and Buenos Aires, Argentina are all that, then they should factor somewhere into the statistics. But they don't. In other words, the richest nations in Latin America are Brazil and Mexico, respectively. Brazil isn't a Hispanic nation though as the people there speak Portuguese.
From what I read, Mexico has nine billionaires.
Now, how can the nations of Chile and Argentina be richer nations than Mexico when the latter nation has the second greatest numer of billionaires? I do think that could be possible. Still, I think these fellows are playing with figures. I don't want to call them Santa Anna boot lickers, but these fellows do seem to like to liquor themselves up in old tyrannies.
Me? I'm a true American and Texan as I'd much rather vacation under my aunt Sue's house in Tyler, Texas than visit these places.
You really dont know what the hell youre talking about. You have to visit a place to really know what its about. I have had the fortune of traveling the world (including extensively to Mexico, Central, and South America). I can tell you that most countries in Latin America are very different.
The only people I ever met that would rather spend time in Tyler than visit a city like Buenos Aires or Santiago are rednecks.
If you think cities like Santiago have anything in common with Mexico City other than the fact that they speak spanish and are surrounded by mountains, you have no clue what you are talking about. You may be using logic, but its your own brand of it (and extremely flawed at that).
You really dont know what the hell youre talking about. You have to visit a place to really know what its about. I have had the fortune of traveling the world (including extensively to Mexico, Central, and South America). I can tell you that most countries in Latin America are very different.
The only people I ever met that would rather spend time in Tyler than visit a city like Buenos Aires or Santiago are rednecks.
If you think cities like Santiago have anything in common with Mexico City other than the fact that they speak spanish and are surrounded by mountains, you have no clue what you are talking about. You may be using logic, but its your own brand of it (and extremely flawed at that).
Just because you can afford to travel the world doesn't make you a sophisticate. As an accomplished key boardist, I can sit down at a piano and go places.
Put me in the middle of the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders and you won't find me talking about how ugly they are compared to women in Buenos Aires or Santiago. You probably don't even think that the city of Dallas has the most beautiful women in the world. Me? I know this to be a fact and I'm not just saying this. Put all the NFL cheerleaders together dressed alike and I could pick out all the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders just by the way they smile and glow.
As a true American and a Texan, I would rather spend time with rednecks in the United States than lesser heathen in foreign tyrannies. Likewise, just a dozen Cowboy cheerlearders are better than a thousand women down there in that pit of humanity.
Therefore, like the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders, the metropolitan area of Dallas - Fort Worth is beautiful.
Last edited by Mister Nifty; 10-03-2010 at 11:33 AM..
Reason: tweaking
So since you admit you have never been to either Mexico City, nor any other Latin American country that you admit that you don't know what the hell you are talking about.
FYI: Argentina and Chile are South America's richest countries not Brazil.
FYI: You are wrong. Brazil is the world's 8th largest economy and projected to be the 5th largest within 7 years. It is the largest Latin American economy by far.
BRAZIL GDP: $1.58 Trillion
ARGENTINA GDP: 328.4 Billion
Chile GDP: 169.4 Billion
For good measure, MEXICO GDP: $ 1.09 Trillion
Some people, probably such as yourself make the mistake in thinking Argentina and Chile are more rich because you foucs on Buenos Aires and Santiago respectively.
The fallacy in doing so is that you fail to realize that in both countries 90% of the nation's economy is focuses on just one city..Buenos Aires in Argentina and Santiago in Chile. Brazil, on the other hand is much like the United States in that there is not just one center of commerce and culture but rather dozens.
Just off the top of my head Brazil had no less than 14 cities with populations over 1 million, and among the top 5 richest cities in Latin America 3 are Brazilian.
For reference, the economy of Sao Paulo state in Brazil (one of 26 states) alone is larger than the economy of the entire nation of Argentina; $550 billion for Sao Paulo vs $328 billion for the entire country of Argentina.
Most discussions of Latin America exclude Brazil since they are a world apart from their Hispanic neighbors. They differ in language, culture, and their economy and political stability are a infinitly more advanced(within the past couple of decades anyway)
Just yesterday the President of Paraguay had a medical emergency and was rushed to Brazil. Not Uruguay, Argentina, or Chile who are just as close to Paraguay, but to Brazil. This is a common occurance in the region.
What most people in the United States don't realize is that the Hispanic South American nations view Brazil much in the same way as Mexico views the United States: whiter(with the exception of Argentina and Uruguay), richer, and more developed and therefore hold a combination of envy and resentment.
Mexico in particular has been suffering from what economists and political scientists refer to as "Brazil Envy" in that Mexico always believed they would be the ones to lead Latin American and become the region's economic and political star on the international stage.
Not only did Mexico fail do live up to those expectations, but Brazil has emerged as all that and more. This has caused a huge amount of resentment especially among the Mexican business class who still hope for Brazil to fail as much as they hope the United States collapes. Neither will happen, and Mexico will have to eventually move on or continue to envy their two larger, more economically developed neighbors in the Americas.
Last edited by Ambassador; 10-03-2010 at 02:43 PM..
FYI: You are wrong. Brazil is the world's 8th largest economy and projected to be the 5th largest within 7 years. It is the largest Latin American economy by far.
BRAZIL GDP: $1.58 Trillion
ARGENTINA GDP: 328.4 Billion
Chile GDP: 169.4 Billion
For good measure, MEXICO GDP: $ 1.09 Trillion
I'm talking about the Human Development Index which is much higher in Argentina and Chile than in Brazil. GDP is meaningless because you can have a large country such as Brazil and it will have a larger GDP than say Canada which is without question the more developed country. On another note Chile and Argentina have a 0.878 and a 0.866 respectively on the HDI index, while Mexico has a 0.854 on the HDI index respectively. Meanwhile the HDI index of Brazil is 0.807.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambassador
The fallacy in doing so is that you fail to realize that in both countries 90% of the nation's economy is focuses on just one city..Buenos Aires in Argentina and Santiago in Chile. Brazil, on the other hand is much like the United States in that there is not just one center of commerce and culture but rather dozens.
Just off the top of my head Brazil had no less than 14 cities with populations over 1 million, and among the top 5 richest cities in Latin America 3 are Brazilian.
For reference, the economy of Sao Paulo state in Brazil (one of 26 states) alone is larger than the economy of the entire nation of Argentina; $550 billion for Sao Paulo vs $328 billion for the entire country of Argentina.
Most of Brazil's wealth is concentrated in the Southern part of Brazil while the Northeast is still poor and underdeveloped. Thus while Sao Paulo may be comparable to say Romania, Alagoas which by the way is Brazil's poorest state is more comparable to South Africa.
What most people in the United States don't realize is that the Hispanic South American nations view Brazil much in the same way as Mexico views the United States: whiter(with the exception of Argentina and Uruguay), richer, and more developed and therefore hold a combination of envy and resentment.
Mexico in particular has been suffering from what economists and political scientists refer to as "Brazil Envy" in that Mexico always believed they would be the ones to lead Latin American and become the region's economic and political star on the international stage.
Not only did Mexico fail do live up to those expectations, but Brazil has emerged as all that and more. This has caused a huge amount of resentment especially among the Mexican business class who still hope for Brazil to fail as much as they hope the United States collapes. Neither will happen, and Mexico will have to eventually move on or continue to envy their two larger, more economically developed neighbors in the Americas.
I am half Argentinean so I already have a sense of what you are talking about.
Last edited by diablo234; 10-03-2010 at 07:39 PM..
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.
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.
