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.
English counties and Scottish council areas are still way smaller than American states.
Exactly, which is why a lot more of them should have wealth A LOT higher like Luxembourg.
How is it that a huge region like Minnesota or New York with all the worst places for kilometers is so much richer than these tiny little areas in a European country? There should be plenty of these European regions that are super rich and some that are below, but instead almost all of these much larger U.S. states like Wyoming and Washington are richer than them. Look how many of these areas of Germany, Austria, France, Netherlands and the UK are poorer than Mississippi. A LOT.
GDP per capita is not a measurement of the standard of living in an economy: link. Nice try though. And even according to that flawed measure Europe is the richest.
Exactly, which is why a lot more of them should have wealth A LOT higher like Luxembourg.
How is it that a huge region like Minnesota or New York with all the worst places for kilometers is so much richer than these tiny little areas in a European country? There should be plenty of these European regions that are super rich and some that are below, but instead almost all of these much larger U.S. states like Wyoming and Washington are richer than them. Look how many of these areas of Germany, Austria, France, Netherlands and the UK are poorer than Mississippi. A LOT.
European sub entities seem much much smaller though who knows if sub entities of US States and Cities were used instead. Probably poorer as the USA does have more inequality.
European sub entities seem much much smaller though who knows if sub entities of US States and Cities were used instead. Probably poorer as the USA does have more inequality.
American cities with the exception of downtown are usually poor to the point of completely ghetto so that would not be a measurement in their favor. What they should do is something like take the average income of the far out suburbs with the McMansions and compare that to the average income of European cities or even whole countries. That would be the only way they could say they are 'richer'.
Exactly, which is why a lot more of them should have wealth A LOT higher like Luxembourg.
How is it that a huge region like Minnesota or New York with all the worst places for kilometers is so much richer than these tiny little areas in a European country? There should be plenty of these European regions that are super rich and some that are below, but instead almost all of these much larger U.S. states like Wyoming and Washington are richer than them. Look how many of these areas of Germany, Austria, France, Netherlands and the UK are poorer than Mississippi. A LOT.
I guess but i was saying that in defense of all the UK regions in the yellow and red areas... if they used counties from US states there would probably be plenty of counties in the red area... but as you mentioned there would also be a lot more in the green region.
Basically euro-boosters point to anywhere in the US with a large black population like Mississippi or Detroit and say "look how much better off we are than those people", yet if we compare them to white Americans the average Finn, Englishman, German, etc. is significantly poorer.
French Guyana is a south American territory, it belongs to France thru colonization (time will come when South American countries, especially Brazil will press the issue though)
Also in South America we have the Falklands belong to the UK (why is a country over 5 thousand kilometers away from those islands there?) I am sure eventually they'll have to let it go. (the US already told them they are 100 neutral on the matter and will not get involved as it would against its McCarthyist doctrine)
Several islands in the Caribbean (Martinique, Guadeloupe) are French, so is an island right off the coast of Canada.... why?
UK virgin islands, cayman islands = UK..... why?
Greenland, an enormous island sitting on the extreme north of the North American plate belongs to denmark.... why?
shouldn't the americas make an effort to kick Europe out? why are they allowed to have land on a continent that is clearly not theirs?
I hope you do realize, this places are no longer colonies, but integral parts of both the UK and France.
yeah it shouldn't be argentine, but I am sure you'll lose that island and all those territories.... as the century progresses.
I forgot netherlands with aruba
Greenland should be part of this reconquista thread as well.
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.
