• phutatorius@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    California is 2/3 the size of the UK.

    In population, that’s true.

    In terms of GDP, California’s is a bit over $4 trillion, while the UK’s is $3.6 trillion. And in land area, California is 1.6 times larger than the UK.

    • fonix232@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Well, politicians are supposed to represent their electorate, which happens to be people, not land, or profits.

      Though given the recent years’ heavily publicised American approach to elections, I’m surprised you guys haven’t made the change to “land votes” or “money votes”, given the former seems to be what most of Americans believe to be true (especially when looking at election maps), plus the latter seems to be true anyway…

    • porcoesphino@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah, my pedantic unnecessary retort was going to point out the GDP thing but then note that there’s some interesting commentary around saying “size” when five Canadian provinces are larger. But mostly that was me still being annoyed at the Davos soundbites