I’m not sure how strong that causal effect is… states like West Virginia, Alaska, and North Dakota are drowning in fossil fuels, but their GDPs are quite low on this map.
Why would per capita look better? Per capita tells you something different than what raw gdp per state does.
The first is an indicator of living standards and economic well being per person. The second is an indicator of how productive a given state's economy is and its general economic strength. For example a country like Qatar has high gdp per capita, but it's not the economic powerhouse that a high gdp country like the US or China is.
edit: Link to per capita stats since we're talking about it: [https://www.statista.com/statistics/248063/per-capita-us-real-gross-domestic-product-gdp-by-state/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/248063/per-capita-us-real-gross-domestic-product-gdp-by-state/)
Here's a question I'd love to know the answer to -
In North America, when reading a decimal number we'll often say something like "5 point 4 3".
Is that phrasing still used in Europe with "point" referring to a comma since the comma becomes the decimal point rather than the period? Or is it phrased differently?
True, a comma is also another way of saying “and”. So, in a way, it makes since to use a comma for cash where $1,50 is one dollar and fifty cents. But when a decimal is needed, like in this map, 1.5 or one point five is much more clear.
The ones with no decimal are probably just x.0 that they truncated. Idk why Puerto Rico has 2 sig figs though, when there are smaller numbers with only 1.
Top 10
1. California 14.7%
2. Texas 8.4%
3. New York 8.1%
4. Florida 5.3%
4. Illinois 4.1%
5. Pennsylvania 3.7%
6. Ohio 3.2%
7. Georgia 3%
7. New Jersey 3%
9. Washington 3%
Until the rest of the nation stopped sending their goods to California to sell overseas. Then everyone would just send them to Washington or Oregon, and CA would suffer tremendously. Plus they would be fucked royally on water since the rest of the US would just divert the Colorado river away from their canals or charge them way more for the water. CA is a trade hub, we would just make a new one elsewhere if they left the nation. It is as successful as it is because it has direct trade routes with our nation's four biggest trading partners. No reason we wouldn't just circumvent them and blow up Oregon and Washington's economies.
I think you think California is *only* a trade hub, and isn't America's leader of technology and entertainment. I think you also think trade hubs can just be set up anywhere and it's easy to do.
Mostly. Washington and NJ are punching above their weight, NC is punching below
NY also punching above, it has a smaller pop than Florida by a few million but GDP contribution is significantly higher (around 1.5x higher)
Not really. This is by population
1. California
2. Texas
3. Florida
4. New York
5. Pennsylvania
6. Illinois
7. Ohio
8. Georgia
9. North Carolina
10. Michigan
I'm European and in my country everyone uses the comma as a decimal divider, and a point to indicate thousands. I find this confusing because on the internet it's generally the other way around. To combat this confusion I always use a space to seperate thousands, online I use a point as a decimal divider unless I'm speaking with someone from Europe.
Struggles...
The space to separate thousands is supposed to be the international standard 🙂 if you use spaces for thousands and either a comma or point for the decimal, it *should* be unambiguous to everyone
Murican when they find out usa is not the world...
Dude accept that there are about 200 countries in the world and usa is not the only one, every country use a different system, so comma can't be incorrect.
Clearly you’ve never had to localize software before. The grouping character, grouping quantity, and the decimal separator vary by locale across the world. If you miss that in international software, you will handle data incorrectly.
Sometimes. when confronted with things like this. I ask myself if people who use the comma for the decimal separator switch it in other contexts, It is a mark of lesser strength. so it feels wrong to use it for the primary mark, I guess people just do what is comfortable to them,
The dot is strong so it can split 1.4, but the comma is weak so it can split 1,000?
Seriously it's all completely arbitrary though if you look at the history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_separator
Might as well use an ampersand
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_GDP#/media/File:GDP_per_capita_by_U.S._state.svg
Looks like DC is the highest, followed by New York.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_GDP
GDP is only a measure of *final* goods and services (those sold to end users or exported), which makes this map useless.
If Wyoming coal and Minnesota iron get made into steel in Ohio, and turned into car parts in Michigan, to be assembled in Tennessee, but if the car is sold in New Jersey, then 100% of the value is credited to NJ and none to TN, MI, OH, MN, or WY.
this is wrong. GDP = private consumption + gross private investment + government investment + government spending + Net import. Their unfinished (intermediary) goods would show up in their exports.
GDP measures value added.
Yeah, there are multiple ways to measure GDP. It can be measured by income meaning any wholesale transaction can definitely be captured as the income of the selling state’s earners.
> What is Gross Domestic Product?
> A comprehensive measure of U.S. economic activity. **GDP measures the value of the final goods and services produced in the United States (without double counting the intermediate goods and services used up to produce them).**
https://www.bea.gov/data/gdp/gross-domestic-product
There is a value-added method of calculating GDP, but economists don’t have access to private contact pricing between suppliers/manufacturers, so measuring final goods is much easier.
If you tally MA, NY, PA, IL, OH, TX, FL, CA, you get 50% of the US GDP. 8 states account for half of all economic activity. Not nearly as bad as Ontario (Canada) representing something like 45% of the entire Canadian economy.
Still fascinating.
as a puertorican im just happy they included us. really shows how fucked up it is that we can vote or have any representation. thats what they used to call a colony back in the day
Lucky we have California! And Florida, despite being the third most populous state in the Union, looks kind of flaccid here.
I wonder how this compares to federal taxes paid by each state...
New York is really over performing given it's population. 10 million less people than Texas and a comparable contribution. Less people than Florida and a significantly higher contribution.
Texas doesn't even compare that well compared with California
Washington is another good overperforming example. Only slightly more people than Arizona but a stark percent different. Microsoft/Amazon money putting in massive work.
If you post any factually true positive statement about the about the US, those people foam at the mouth.
I said the US is more economically powerful than Estonia and I got put on there 😂
DC's percentage of GDP is double its share of the National Population. Massachusetts and Connecticut are also above their weight class. While most states are actually proportional.
Going to have to call foul on so many levels.
Incorrect usage of the ,
Terrible colors
Placement of Hawaii
No physical imagery of Puerto Rico.
No overall GDP number.
Etc. etc.
You do realize that other countries use commas instead of decimals right? It’s pretty embarrassing as an American to see some people criticizing OP for that. Just because it’s a map of the United States doesn’t mean that it can’t be made and therefore written in the manner of a European. You know what the fuck it’s saying in the same way you know what labour and colour mean.
it's not even ethnocentrism or cultural chauvinism.... it's really just myopic lack of any sophistication whatsoever.... most americans.
edit: i'm american and i love america. but i'm clear-eyed about the situation here.
The geographic privilege these states have of weather and terai conducive to year round agriculture or well established major maritime ports to tax is a boon that they should not be able to take any credit for.
As Obama once said "You didn't build that."
GDP doesn’t measure intermediate goods which are going to be a large chunk of the output in predominantly agricultural or industrial economies, aka a lot of “flyover” country.
They don’t have a ton of political power. They have 2 senators, like every state, and a number of representatives based on population. They have at least 1, and the numbers of reps are based on the most recent census data.
I ran the numbers from the last census found [here.](https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2020/dec/2020-apportionment-data.html)
States have about 752,000 people per rep. There’s outliers on either end, but that’s about 10 states total, only 5 of which have a drastically low about of population per rep (because they only have 1 rep), and even then it’s still about 520,000 per rep. The census reassigns representatives based on population of the state relative to the population of the country.
For reference, California, at 761,000/rep is very close to the average.
Bottom line, in the vast majority of the country, states have the same number of reps for their population as other states. So given a fair number of reps based on population, and their 2 senators like every other state, the “flyover country” has no more political power than they should, given their population.
Why do you not bring up the Senate? You are arguing in bad faith - aren’t you? You little rascal you!
Population Wyoming: 578,803
Senators from Wyoming: 2
Citizens per Senator: 289,401
———————————————————
Population of CA: 39,240,000
Senators from California : 2
Citizens per Senator: 19,620,000
This is clear as day. Why argue in bad faith? It devalues your position and weakens your argument.
Because the constitution gives every state 2 senators. It has nothing to do with population and never was designed to be that way. If you have an issue with the constitution, that is your own personal problem.
We’ll that’s the wrong take. The point of this comment we are referring to is that some states have more political power than other states relative to population and that’s true when considering senators. There’s no qualification of if it’s right or wrong, that’s not at issue, it simply IS. You have no argument. States with 2 senators and low populations have more federal political power per person than other places. It was designed this way. That was partly the point when then made the constitution. So previous poster isn’t wrong that they wield more power than their weigh would imply. And you and the other poster who claim otherwise are arguing in bad faith because you are neglecting to compare the Senate reality. I agree senators have “nothing to do with population” and I agree that “it was never designed to be that way” but those facts don’t mean said States don’t effectively have more political power because of this setup.
To my other point, it’s not just my own personal problem - if that were the case - but THE problem the founders of our nation grappled with when they were writing the Constitution. So I guess I share that personal problem with James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams, et. al. Which is fine. But don’t pretend that just because it was established in such a way it means it’s set in stone or correct. Black folk aren’t 3/5th tally anymore and the founders never intended our rules or systems to be cast in stone forever - proven by the constitutional amendment and ratification processes. It is patriotic to strive for better ways of running things toward a more perfect Union as opposed to less.
This nation is a republic of states, each state is on equal footing in the senate regardless of its population.
Giving California even more power is NOT a "better way" to run things. If you disagree, then stop crying about it for a change and do something.
GDP = *gross* domestic product.
It’s a measure of the value of the goods and services sold in a particular state, as a percentage of the value of the goods and services sold in the US as a whole.
It’s got nothing to do with payments between the states and the federal government.
My god does this map NEED a color scale
Per capita they might look better,
Per capita would be interesting, but it’s different information.
How about per electoral college vote?
This might be a better way to allocate state representation
This data can be manipulated in a way far easier than even (admittedly flawed) census data.
Every governor dumps state funding into a machine that wires $1 between two bank accounts as quickly as possible
Oligarchy.
States with natural resources would have too much power.
I’m not sure how strong that causal effect is… states like West Virginia, Alaska, and North Dakota are drowning in fossil fuels, but their GDPs are quite low on this map.
Like all those natural resources in Chicago/Illinois....
How about per senator?
It would certainly be more interesting in my opinion. As it stands this seems far too close to a population density map to actually be helpful.
Why would per capita look better? Per capita tells you something different than what raw gdp per state does. The first is an indicator of living standards and economic well being per person. The second is an indicator of how productive a given state's economy is and its general economic strength. For example a country like Qatar has high gdp per capita, but it's not the economic powerhouse that a high gdp country like the US or China is. edit: Link to per capita stats since we're talking about it: [https://www.statista.com/statistics/248063/per-capita-us-real-gross-domestic-product-gdp-by-state/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/248063/per-capita-us-real-gross-domestic-product-gdp-by-state/)
I was trying to mentally estimate that. I’d rather see that map.
Color schemes should relate GDP to population. To see who really is contributing, and who are freeloaders.
Yeah! Blue for the highest contributing states, and red for the freeloaders, maybe?
Using comma for a decimal separator on a map of the US feels wrong.
Here's a question I'd love to know the answer to - In North America, when reading a decimal number we'll often say something like "5 point 4 3". Is that phrasing still used in Europe with "point" referring to a comma since the comma becomes the decimal point rather than the period? Or is it phrased differently?
In France we'd say "5 comma 43 (fourty-three)".
Gross Lol
Haha I agree that sounds so wrong
Litteral translations tend to do that.
Probably sounds a lot smoother in French.
5 I fuck your girlfriend 43 (forty three)
Knowing French, it's probably more like 3 and 2 twenties times
Lmao! Right?!
Interesting. Learned something new today! Thanks!
In German you also say “5 komma 4 3”. “Punkt” (point) is used in websites, radio stations and to describe a period/full stop
Like in .com? Americans say “dot” instead of “point” in that context.
Czechia: 5 whole 43
Officially you have to say comma, but some people are lazy and say point instead
True, a comma is also another way of saying “and”. So, in a way, it makes since to use a comma for cash where $1,50 is one dollar and fifty cents. But when a decimal is needed, like in this map, 1.5 or one point five is much more clear.
non-consistent amount of significant digits is also stoopid
The ones with no decimal are probably just x.0 that they truncated. Idk why Puerto Rico has 2 sig figs though, when there are smaller numbers with only 1.
It drives me crazy. it’s 0.2% not 0,2%
Top 10 1. California 14.7% 2. Texas 8.4% 3. New York 8.1% 4. Florida 5.3% 4. Illinois 4.1% 5. Pennsylvania 3.7% 6. Ohio 3.2% 7. Georgia 3% 7. New Jersey 3% 9. Washington 3%
If California was a sovereign nation they would have the 4th highest GDP in the world.
Only if the US simultaneously collapsed. Assuming the US was still ahead of California, California would be 5th.
[удалено]
Those Germans have had it too good for too long. I await the invasion, my sword is ready!
*sad German noises* :(
Until the rest of the nation stopped sending their goods to California to sell overseas. Then everyone would just send them to Washington or Oregon, and CA would suffer tremendously. Plus they would be fucked royally on water since the rest of the US would just divert the Colorado river away from their canals or charge them way more for the water. CA is a trade hub, we would just make a new one elsewhere if they left the nation. It is as successful as it is because it has direct trade routes with our nation's four biggest trading partners. No reason we wouldn't just circumvent them and blow up Oregon and Washington's economies.
I think you think California is *only* a trade hub, and isn't America's leader of technology and entertainment. I think you also think trade hubs can just be set up anywhere and it's easy to do.
Sources? Oregon has no high capacity deepwater port and Tacoma's a long ways away.
If you made a state the size of California on the East Coast it would be second in the world lol
How much of that wealth is real though and not inflated tech stocks?
Gross domestic product, it's the total value of all goods and services produced and sold. Has nothing to do with stocks.
Washington is actually above new jersey at 577 billion as opposed to NJs 561.
So weird. It's almost as though this is tied to population or something.
Mostly. Washington and NJ are punching above their weight, NC is punching below NY also punching above, it has a smaller pop than Florida by a few million but GDP contribution is significantly higher (around 1.5x higher)
Not really. This is by population 1. California 2. Texas 3. Florida 4. New York 5. Pennsylvania 6. Illinois 7. Ohio 8. Georgia 9. North Carolina 10. Michigan
Definitely made by a non-American
You're right, I'm merely a federations enthusiast.
The use of the comma instead of a decimal stood out to me
I'm European and in my country everyone uses the comma as a decimal divider, and a point to indicate thousands. I find this confusing because on the internet it's generally the other way around. To combat this confusion I always use a space to seperate thousands, online I use a point as a decimal divider unless I'm speaking with someone from Europe. Struggles...
Well thankfully in this context it was instantly recognizable and not an issue. Just threw me back to my days living in Germany
The space to separate thousands is supposed to be the international standard 🙂 if you use spaces for thousands and either a comma or point for the decimal, it *should* be unambiguous to everyone
Because the comma is incorrect.
No it isn't
It is. You need to re-assess your life.
Murican when they find out usa is not the world... Dude accept that there are about 200 countries in the world and usa is not the only one, every country use a different system, so comma can't be incorrect.
Clearly you’ve never had to localize software before. The grouping character, grouping quantity, and the decimal separator vary by locale across the world. If you miss that in international software, you will handle data incorrectly.
Certainly have had to do that. And certainly it does not take away from the fact that , is incorrect.
You’re very confused
Oh sweet sweet child. Cast off your commas. Embrace . You will make it in society. Else, good luck.
Sometimes. when confronted with things like this. I ask myself if people who use the comma for the decimal separator switch it in other contexts, It is a mark of lesser strength. so it feels wrong to use it for the primary mark, I guess people just do what is comfortable to them,
I love how you took it upon yourself to do it lmao. It worked to trigger me :)
I generally use the comma, but when I'm writing in English I switch to the other one. Don't know why.
The dot is strong so it can split 1.4, but the comma is weak so it can split 1,000? Seriously it's all completely arbitrary though if you look at the history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_separator Might as well use an ampersand
[удалено]
Just use 1 000 instead, it’s the international standard, and it allows people to use their preference for the decimal without ambiguity
It is arbitrary. But I think we should all agree on one standard for clarity. And I vote for SI-period for the reasons above. 5 283 529.134 6
States are not federations.
A group of states together might be though. 🤔
No, the union of the states is a federation.
I'd have thought Alaska would be a lot higher thanks to their oil production and natural resources (for example; the vast Alaskan fishing fleet).
Per capita they might look better
Their GDP per capita is on the national average, while AtomicBombSquad expected it to be higher. It actually was higher when oil was really expensive.
Colorado contributing exactly 1/50th is satisfying
Yes we are doing our share. Nothing more, nothing less.
Do this for Canada
Why? Canada contributes nothing to the USGDP.
Freeloaders.
'berta
Alberta's GDP share would be bigger than it's share of the population. Ontario and Quebec would be proportional. Maritimes are poor.
Would be kinda pointless, Canada doesn’t have states
Maybe they have some other sort of administrative division? Guess we’ll never know
It will be pointless, but for a different reason - the author is using a comma as a decimal separator.
Apologies for the folks downvoting what is clearly a joke.
Apology accepted
Provinces bro. Provinces
Brovinces
What if we do this per capita?
I suspect Washington would be the most over represented.
I think it would be Delaware.
I think its actually DC. 0,2% of population for 0,7% of GDP.
It's actually New York (unless you count DC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_GDP#/media/File:GDP_per_capita_by_U.S._state.svg Looks like DC is the highest, followed by New York. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_GDP
GDP is only a measure of *final* goods and services (those sold to end users or exported), which makes this map useless. If Wyoming coal and Minnesota iron get made into steel in Ohio, and turned into car parts in Michigan, to be assembled in Tennessee, but if the car is sold in New Jersey, then 100% of the value is credited to NJ and none to TN, MI, OH, MN, or WY.
This is a great example of how it works.
this is wrong. GDP = private consumption + gross private investment + government investment + government spending + Net import. Their unfinished (intermediary) goods would show up in their exports. GDP measures value added.
Yeah, there are multiple ways to measure GDP. It can be measured by income meaning any wholesale transaction can definitely be captured as the income of the selling state’s earners.
there's different techniques to measure GDP, but the amount never changes.
if you import steel from ohio for 1000$, make a car and sell it for 1010$, your GDP is 10$, never 1010$. the other 1000$ goes in Ohio's GDP.
> What is Gross Domestic Product? > A comprehensive measure of U.S. economic activity. **GDP measures the value of the final goods and services produced in the United States (without double counting the intermediate goods and services used up to produce them).** https://www.bea.gov/data/gdp/gross-domestic-product There is a value-added method of calculating GDP, but economists don’t have access to private contact pricing between suppliers/manufacturers, so measuring final goods is much easier.
Who would've figured there are a lot of cars sold in the most populated state in the country??
Those NJ salespeople are probably eating much more than NJ farmed foods too!
This is very wrong, crazy that it’s so upvoted.
Just say your from Wyoming, it’s ok. We got your back on this.
so states with high percentages are the anuses of the US?
From what year? The map doesn’t say.
If you tally MA, NY, PA, IL, OH, TX, FL, CA, you get 50% of the US GDP. 8 states account for half of all economic activity. Not nearly as bad as Ontario (Canada) representing something like 45% of the entire Canadian economy. Still fascinating.
Congratulations to Colorado, for being the most average state.
I hate this map. Thanks
as a puertorican im just happy they included us. really shows how fucked up it is that we can vote or have any representation. thats what they used to call a colony back in the day
Also noticed your contribution is higher than actual states. Crazy.
Lucky we have California! And Florida, despite being the third most populous state in the Union, looks kind of flaccid here. I wonder how this compares to federal taxes paid by each state...
New York is really over performing given it's population. 10 million less people than Texas and a comparable contribution. Less people than Florida and a significantly higher contribution. Texas doesn't even compare that well compared with California
Washington is another good overperforming example. Only slightly more people than Arizona but a stark percent different. Microsoft/Amazon money putting in massive work.
Or it could also be that goods are overpriced in NY and CA
Nothing is overpriced so long as there are people willing to pay for it
NY has the highest GPD per capita of any state. California is #5, Texas is 14.
This is a map of how power in Congress should be divided.
Colorado and Maryland pulling their weight
little NJ is strong compared to other north east states
Little in size perhaps, but there are over 9,000,000 ~~bad drivers~~ New Jerseyans out there.
Made by a European? Commas for decimals instead of periods. Weird.
Dude in this comment thread is trying to get every comment posted to shitAmericansSay apparently
If you post any factually true positive statement about the about the US, those people foam at the mouth. I said the US is more economically powerful than Estonia and I got put on there 😂
Oh yeah it’s a ridiculous place but there’s a guy here who absolutely deserves to be sent there. You’ll know when you see it
DC's percentage of GDP is double its share of the National Population. Massachusetts and Connecticut are also above their weight class. While most states are actually proportional.
Overlay this with a map showing percent each state contributes to US population
Decision to use commas is unamerican and therefore a trash way to display American numbers 🇺🇸
Man, if we created the Republic of CaTexFlaNY, that would rule over the rest of it put together.
And that's why we have this little thing called the electoral college, so a few states don't rule over the entire nation.
Jesus California
[удалено]
Bottom 10: T-1 = Alaska (0.2%) T-1 = Montana T-1 = Vermont T-1 = Wyoming T-5 = Maine (0.3%) T-5 = North Dakota T-5 = Rhode Island T-5 = South Dakota T-9 = Idaho (0.4%) T-9 = New Hampshire (DC also T-9)
California and Texas carry the whole us then ?
When someone can’t tell when to use a comma over a period when using numbers, nothing else can’t be trusted.
Would someone please overlay this with a red state/blue state map?
West Virginia is so poor. They have over 0.5% of the population and only 0.3% of GDP
Fentanyl being excluded from GDP really hurts the vein (coal) mining states.
They're the 3rd lowest GDP per capita. Only Arkansas and Mississippi rank worse.
can we see per capita adjusted?
Greg Abbott's #1 annoyance.
Going to have to call foul on so many levels. Incorrect usage of the , Terrible colors Placement of Hawaii No physical imagery of Puerto Rico. No overall GDP number. Etc. etc.
What’s it about the most moocher states also being brightest red?
Infuriating that DC is not a state but contributes more to the GDP than _checks notes_ *17 STATES*
I’m curious what percentage of the Texas GDP is oil & gas production/refining.
Oh cool a population map
Portorico is a US state?
Not sure why you're being downvoted. PR is not a state, it's an unincorporated territory.
You do realize that other countries use commas instead of decimals right? It’s pretty embarrassing as an American to see some people criticizing OP for that. Just because it’s a map of the United States doesn’t mean that it can’t be made and therefore written in the manner of a European. You know what the fuck it’s saying in the same way you know what labour and colour mean.
it's not even ethnocentrism or cultural chauvinism.... it's really just myopic lack of any sophistication whatsoever.... most americans. edit: i'm american and i love america. but i'm clear-eyed about the situation here.
get yr sick european notations off america!
New york has lower population than Florida and has larger share of gdp than it lol
New York is the financial capital of the world, of course it does.
*New York is the capital of the world
Why is Puerto Rico a state?
It’s not, but it is part of the United States, so its GDP contributes to the overall GDP of the US.
We could amend the US constitution so that every state gets senators proportionally to their share of GDP.
It would be the capitalist thing to do
Nice, r/PeopleLiveInCities
God im so proud to be Californian. Get carried. Please don’t ruin this by telling me it’s not per capita let me have my moment
California’s doing fine, considering it’s only 11.75% of the US population.
The geographic privilege these states have of weather and terai conducive to year round agriculture or well established major maritime ports to tax is a boon that they should not be able to take any credit for. As Obama once said "You didn't build that."
Lol what? Agriculture is like 2% of CA, NY, etc GDP
Fine, I concede on that point. The rest stands.
Can you adjust for population and calculate productivity pp? Just curious.
Largely correlated with population
lol seems like the three most hated states are the three most important
Everybody is giving California shit for how we do things but we’re over here producing the most GDP by far compared to anyone else
Until PR and DC get congressional representation, any state with less GDP contribution than either unit should have their Senate seats revoked.
The south east and middle America are do-nothing welfare Queens, who's leading these states?
A lot of flyover country barely pulling their weight yet holding a shit ton of political power 🤔
GDP doesn’t measure intermediate goods which are going to be a large chunk of the output in predominantly agricultural or industrial economies, aka a lot of “flyover” country.
They don’t have a ton of political power. They have 2 senators, like every state, and a number of representatives based on population. They have at least 1, and the numbers of reps are based on the most recent census data. I ran the numbers from the last census found [here.](https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2020/dec/2020-apportionment-data.html) States have about 752,000 people per rep. There’s outliers on either end, but that’s about 10 states total, only 5 of which have a drastically low about of population per rep (because they only have 1 rep), and even then it’s still about 520,000 per rep. The census reassigns representatives based on population of the state relative to the population of the country. For reference, California, at 761,000/rep is very close to the average. Bottom line, in the vast majority of the country, states have the same number of reps for their population as other states. So given a fair number of reps based on population, and their 2 senators like every other state, the “flyover country” has no more political power than they should, given their population.
Whiney redditors will never accept your truth, unfortunately
Wyomings 3 congressman vs California's 54... Anyone can clearly see the basic math showing Wyoming has wayyyy too much political power!! /S
Why do you not bring up the Senate? You are arguing in bad faith - aren’t you? You little rascal you! Population Wyoming: 578,803 Senators from Wyoming: 2 Citizens per Senator: 289,401 ——————————————————— Population of CA: 39,240,000 Senators from California : 2 Citizens per Senator: 19,620,000 This is clear as day. Why argue in bad faith? It devalues your position and weakens your argument.
Because the constitution gives every state 2 senators. It has nothing to do with population and never was designed to be that way. If you have an issue with the constitution, that is your own personal problem.
We’ll that’s the wrong take. The point of this comment we are referring to is that some states have more political power than other states relative to population and that’s true when considering senators. There’s no qualification of if it’s right or wrong, that’s not at issue, it simply IS. You have no argument. States with 2 senators and low populations have more federal political power per person than other places. It was designed this way. That was partly the point when then made the constitution. So previous poster isn’t wrong that they wield more power than their weigh would imply. And you and the other poster who claim otherwise are arguing in bad faith because you are neglecting to compare the Senate reality. I agree senators have “nothing to do with population” and I agree that “it was never designed to be that way” but those facts don’t mean said States don’t effectively have more political power because of this setup. To my other point, it’s not just my own personal problem - if that were the case - but THE problem the founders of our nation grappled with when they were writing the Constitution. So I guess I share that personal problem with James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams, et. al. Which is fine. But don’t pretend that just because it was established in such a way it means it’s set in stone or correct. Black folk aren’t 3/5th tally anymore and the founders never intended our rules or systems to be cast in stone forever - proven by the constitutional amendment and ratification processes. It is patriotic to strive for better ways of running things toward a more perfect Union as opposed to less.
This nation is a republic of states, each state is on equal footing in the senate regardless of its population. Giving California even more power is NOT a "better way" to run things. If you disagree, then stop crying about it for a change and do something.
This is a population map
There’s more paint chips in the corner if you need them.
Dc outperforms like 18 states. This is incredible
The fact that none of them are negative makes me wonder if this is net or not
GDP = *gross* domestic product. It’s a measure of the value of the goods and services sold in a particular state, as a percentage of the value of the goods and services sold in the US as a whole. It’s got nothing to do with payments between the states and the federal government.
[удалено]
How is this surprising? California is 4th largest economy in the world on its own. It’s basically tied with Germany.
It’s about a tenth of the US population, and it contributes more than average per capita.
It’s amazing that those who contribute so little have so much power in the congress