If Britain were a U.S. state, it would be the second-poorest

[Benji 20,113]

Truthfully, this post wasn't supposed to be an attack thread on the UK or to say which country was better.

 

Of course honey, of course

 

 

 

It was just a comparison of the US economy my state to other countries, which I found shocking and very interesting.

 

Yet you singled out Britain? How shocking and interesting

 

 

 

Y'all are the one that turned it into a country vs. country debate lol...

 

Well what was the purpose of this thread then? This wasn't supposed to be a vs thread when the article pits Britain against the US in a biased way?

 

[MJHolland 12,725]

Of course honey, of course

 

 

 

 

Yet you singled out Britain? How shocking and interesting

 

 

 

 

Well what was the purpose of this thread then? This wasn't supposed to be a vs thread when the article pits Britain against the US in a biased way?

 

I copied the title of the article you crazy loon!!! And it was only in the title because it was the poorest European country when compared to the states! Please think before you post lol!!

 

If you have a problem with the thread you should take it up with the Washington Post. And if you bothered to read the article you would know that it has very little to do with just Britain/the UK (and neither did the OP after the title).

 

People that don't even read the OP/original articles piss me off so much...

 

So please, spread your negativity elsewhere on this forum. Thanks :)

[Diamond Heart 4,400]

Thats so weird and interesting but it doesnt really surprise me considering the massive size of the USA. 
I never knew California had a bigger GDP than most countries  :eek:

Edit - Whats with all the fighting in this thread lmao 

[MJHolland 12,725]

Thats so weird and interesting but it doesnt really surprise me considering the massive size of the USA. 

I never knew California had a bigger GDP than most countries  :eek:

Edit - Whats with all the fighting in this thread lmao 

This has nothing to do with the size of the US, this has to do with individual states which are quite small (most of them)

[Luc 4,776]

Oh no sweetie, you missed the point. I'm calling you arrogant   

 

Have a nice day 

[Diamond Heart 4,400]

This has nothing to do with the size of the US, this has to do with individual states which are quite small (most of them)

Hmm i wonder why that is, Is it because Britain puts more into welfare system or something ? I dont really know much about the economy :P

Or is it to do with cost of living maybe?

[MJHolland 12,725]

Hmm i wonder why that is, Is it because Britain puts more into welfare system or something ? I dont really know much about the economy :P

Or is it to do with cost of living maybe?

Haha no, the US couldn't spend more on its welfare system if it tried 

 

It has to do with average income/buying power. The biggest factor in GDP is always the consumer spending!

[Diamond Heart 4,400]

Haha no, the US couldn't spend more on its welfare system if it tried 

 

It has to do with average income/buying power. The biggest factor in GDP is always the consumer spending!

Ahh i see thanks ! :) 

[Benji 20,113]

I copied the title of the article you crazy loon!!!

 

Insults, keeping it classy I see #Freedom

 

 

 

And it was only in the title because it was the poorest European country when compared to the states!

 

That's just utter bull, have you read your article? No where does it suggest that nor does it imply that. Educate yourself with more that's going on outside the land of the "free"

 

 

 

If you have a problem with the thread you should take it up with the Washington Post. And if you bothered to read the article you would know that it has very little to do with just Britain/the UK (and neither did the OP after the title).

 

I decided to read your article, it doesn't really do much but measure up current statistics and it doesn't actually take much into account. They suggest hypothetically that if Britain left Europe (which is a huge money scrounger but let's not give you too much to process) and was to join the United States that it would be the second poorest state? First of all Britain would have to adapt to the US' system, that would mean huge cutbacks in benefits, remove the huge funding we put into supplying everyone with free health care and a number of many other ways Britain uses it's money. Did your article take any of that into account?... No.

 

 

 

People that don't even read the OP/original articles piss me off so much...

 

Just did and it's trash, I want my time back.

 

 

 

So please, spread your negativity elsewhere on this forum. Thanks :)

 

Standing up against a biased article against Britain which was written by an American who seems to lack the knowledge of basic outgoings of Britain and where it's money is tied up is negative? Damn, I'm one negative b---h.

 

[Economy 52,864]

If a thread is made by a biased American trying to shade a country far superior, in my opinion, to the USA then naturally, people who are from that country will defend it. If the point of the thread wasn't to cause a USA vs. UK argument, then pray tell, what was the point of it?

Simple fact of the matter is: the UK is better than the USA.

It's not about money.

im pretty sure thats what this thread was about

The UK is a better place to live in, according to the reputable HDI: The US is #29 best country to live in, while the UK is #16. The top 5 consists out of Norway, Australia, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Germany.

And that, also, makes the UK a better place to live.

thats a little different then best places to live in

 

That staands for "Human Development Index". But you can be more developed than another Country but not necessairily be better to live in

 

The rankings for HDI and rankings for highest standards of living vary quite a bit...

 

The US is much higher than #29 as far as best places to live.

[MJHolland 12,725]

Insults, keeping it classy I see #Freedom

 

 

 

 

That's just utter bull, have you read your article? No where does it suggest that nor does it imply that. Educate yourself with more that's going on outside the land of the "free"

 

 

 

 

I decided to read your article, it doesn't really do much but measure up current statistics and it doesn't actually take much into account. They suggest hypothetically that if Britain left Europe (which is a huge money scrounger but let's not give you too much to process) and was to join the United States that it would be the second poorest state? First of all Britain would have to adapt to the US' system, that would mean huge cutbacks in benefits, remove the huge funding we put into supplying everyone with free health care and a number of many other ways Britain uses it's money. Did your article take any of that into account?... No.

 

 

 

 

Just did and it's trash, I want my time back.

 

 

 

 

Standing up against a biased article against Britain which was written by an American who seems to lack the knowledge of basic outgoings of Britain and where it's money is tied up is negative? Damn, I'm one negative b---h.

 

The article wasn't geared toward Britain at all, stop being so self absorbed.

 

Oh, and like "crazy loon" is such a bad insult. Someone called the wambulance for this guy!

 

 

All this article does is compared GDP per capita of individual states to that of European countries. It does not try to make a grand sweeping statement that all those other countries suck. GDP is the best way to determine the economic status of a country, and the US still has the largest GDP as of this instant. So it is just fun to play around with those numbers and break them down and bit and use them comparatively. I think you need to calm down and stop taking this so personally. 

If a thread is made by a biased American trying to shade a country far superior, in my opinion, to the USA then naturally, people who are from that country will defend it. If the point of the thread wasn't to cause a USA vs. UK argument, then pray tell, what was the point of it?

Simple fact of the matter is: the UK is better than the USA.

 

The point of the thread was to compare the GDP of individual states to other countries. But never mind, you're obviously too arrogant to see the point 

[Economy 52,864]

This article and all the calculations were done in GDP per capita, so please don't talk about proportions.

 

And btw, the US has the 4th best median income of any country. So keep talking about income gaps, please *eye roll* 

 

The article was also not just about Britain btw. It just happened to be the poorest so it was made into the headline. 

ummmm, GDP Per Capita is EXACTLY what i was referring to when i said proportions, i even mentioned it in there. And when i said proportions i was speaking in favor of the US did u not see that? :roll:

 

Also i said income gaps in the US are greater than in most Developed Nations so i "WASNT SURE" if they were necessairily better off. I was explaining my doubt because i wasnt sure about the stats on stuff like the median income. I didnt say that the median income was bad

 

Chill ur tits ur over-reacting :roll:

[Benji 20,113]

The article wasn't geared toward Britain at all, stop being so self absorbed.

 

Oh, and like "crazy loon" is such a bad insult. Someone called the wambulance for this guy!

 

 

All this article does is compared GDP per capita of individual states to that of European countries. It does not try to make a grand sweeping statement that all those other countries suck. GDP is the best way to determine the economic status of a country, and the US still has the largest GDP as of this instant. So it is just fun to play around with those numbers and break them down and bit and use them comparatively. I think you need to calm down and stop taking this so personally. 

 

Your maturity when handling a discussion is incredible, one second it's there then suddenly you begin questioning me, not my argument.

 

You're not overreacting at all and slowly putting nails in the coffin of your already lifeless argument.

 

[Bear 7,515]

More interesting than the article is how easily everyone is prepared to war with each other over a couple of numbers  Fine, discuss  and debate the GDP of each nation and the credibility of the article, but do so without making unnecessary jabs at each other's country. Don't take these things so personally. This isn't a 'which country is better' discussion.

[MJHolland 12,725]

ummmm, GDP Per Capita is EXACTLY what i was referring to when i said proportions, i even mentioned it in there. And when i said proportions i was speaking in favor of the US did u not see that? :roll:

 

Also i said income gaps in the US are greater than in most Developed Nations so i "WASNT SURE" if they were necessairily better off. I was explaining my doubt because i wasnt sure about the stats on stuff like the median income. I didnt say that the median income was bad

 

Chill ur tits ur over-reacting :roll:

Why would proportions be thrown off if it is per capita?

 

And median income is a representation of income gap.

 

Sorry for overreacting though!

 

Your maturity when handling a discussion is incredible, one second it's there then suddenly you begin questioning me, not my argument.

 

You're not overreacting at all and slowly putting nails in the coffin of your already lifeless argument.

 

I. Do. Not. Have. An. Argument.

 

Nor do I have an agenda with this post.

 

I was simply bringing attention to something that I found very interesting and shocking, so please leave me alone now :)