By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Comparing US State GDPs with countries.

rocketpig on 21 January 2011
disolitude said:
Kantor said:
disolitude said:

lol...that was pretty fun. USA is a GDP beast.

Its a shame that the national debt is now bigger than the GDP for a whole year. Basically USA and every citizen has to work for a whole year for free to pay it off...

Here is a fun fear mongering site - http://www.usdebtclock.org/

But USA is not as bad as some other countries, like Japan or Greece...

Your public spending is $3.5 trillion?!

That's $10,000 per capita.

Britain's public spending is about £8500, or $13,400.

You're nearly as high as us.

I'm beginning to understand the Tea Party's popularity. We have to charge 61% top-rate tax to make up for our spending...


This is all correct except when you say "your".

I'm Canadian...

Our national debt is only around 500 billion ish...pfft...small change compared to our mamoth 1.3 trillion GDP. :)

It helps Canada just a *bit* that they're the only major industrialized nation who draws a massive portion of their GDP from resources. Want to cut the deficit? It's easy; just chop a few more trees or grab more oil and sell them to the US.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Around the Network
disolitude on 21 January 2011
rocketpig said:
 

It helps Canada just a *bit* that they're the only major industrialized nation who draws a massive portion of their GDP from resources. Want to cut the deficit? It's easy; just chop a few more trees or grab more oil.

Youre right but Russia says hi as well... Largest oil producer in the world now.



FaRmLaNd on 21 January 2011
Lostplanet22 said:
FaRmLaNd said:

Very interesting. I think it just goes to show just how big the American economy is. With all the doom and gloom and the rise of China people often forget that the US economy is still by far the largest.

But the doom and gloom had nothing to do with being the largest economy...the doom was about the hit the economy got and how this would make the living standards of the average citizen worse....and that happened.. and the doom still exist;..  because nobody knows the future...

The economy may grow yearly 2-3% but will this also mean tha the living standard of the average citizen will increase? Joe does not care that the Economy is growing what Joe care about is that in the next five years he still has to stand or not in line at Old Sonoma Road for some food stamps because his full time job does not earn enough;.

 

If the economy will grow more jobs will eventually be created and "Joe" is more likely to get a job. Having economic growth doesn't neccesarily flow on to workers and economic disparity is of course a problem, but its certainly better to have a growing economy then one thats stagnant or shrinking.



rocketpig on 21 January 2011
disolitude said:
rocketpig said:
 

It helps Canada just a *bit* that they're the only major industrialized nation who draws a massive portion of their GDP from resources. Want to cut the deficit? It's easy; just chop a few more trees or grab more oil.

Youre right but Russia says hi as well... Largest oil producer in the world now.

True, but Russia is its own special mess and doesn't really apply to any of the western industrialized nations.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Kasz216 on 21 January 2011
rocketpig said:
Kasz216 said:
rocketpig said:

As long as California controls the tech industry, entertainment industry, and has copious amounts of farmland, their economy isn't going anywhere. Thinking that they're going to slide to a GDP comparable to second-rate nations is laughable.


Will two of those three still be around when the market crashes.  Tech and Hollywood are just there because they want to be... and because of prestige.  If the bills get too expensive... it wouldn't be too hard to move.

Industries don't move wholesale like that. There are too many benefits to being in a "culture" of like-minded companies. There is a trained talent pool from which to draw, vendors can quickly communicate and distribute one another's goods to each other, etc. etc. etc. The list goes on and on. It would take decades for a shift of that magnitude to occur and there are no signs of it happening.

Are you sure there isn't?  The global workplace is really starting... espiecally in Hollywood.  For example a LOT of voiceactors never leave their homes anymore.

You can do all your voicework for a Hollywood movie in your home in Alberta Canada. 



Around the Network
PizzaFaceGamer on 21 January 2011

Very interesting map!

People underestimate the power of the American economy. 

China will be almost euqal to to Americas economy in 30-40 years.

However, China's economy will never have the flexibility of Americas economy



rocketpig on 21 January 2011
Kasz216 said:
rocketpig said:
Kasz216 said:
rocketpig said:

As long as California controls the tech industry, entertainment industry, and has copious amounts of farmland, their economy isn't going anywhere. Thinking that they're going to slide to a GDP comparable to second-rate nations is laughable.


Will two of those three still be around when the market crashes.  Tech and Hollywood are just there because they want to be... and because of prestige.  If the bills get too expensive... it wouldn't be too hard to move.

Industries don't move wholesale like that. There are too many benefits to being in a "culture" of like-minded companies. There is a trained talent pool from which to draw, vendors can quickly communicate and distribute one another's goods to each other, etc. etc. etc. The list goes on and on. It would take decades for a shift of that magnitude to occur and there are no signs of it happening.

Are you sure there isn't?  The global workplace is really starting... espiecally in Hollywood.  For example a LOT of voiceactors never leave their homes anymore.

You can do all your voicework for a Hollywood movie in your home in Alberta Canada. 

Oh, the film/TV industries split from CA a long time ago. Some of TV remains, as do the studios themselves, but a huge portion of the filming and other work is farmed out across the world.

The thing is that those businesses will never move the corporate offices. There's too much linking them to the area (for the reasons I listed above). It's no different than the tech industry building plants in China. Just because Intel doesn't make the majority of its chips in Silicon Valley doesn't mean there isn't a huge economy there from their corporate offices and related suppliers.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Kasz216 on 21 January 2011
rocketpig said:
Kasz216 said:
rocketpig said:
Kasz216 said:
rocketpig said:

As long as California controls the tech industry, entertainment industry, and has copious amounts of farmland, their economy isn't going anywhere. Thinking that they're going to slide to a GDP comparable to second-rate nations is laughable.


Will two of those three still be around when the market crashes.  Tech and Hollywood are just there because they want to be... and because of prestige.  If the bills get too expensive... it wouldn't be too hard to move.

Industries don't move wholesale like that. There are too many benefits to being in a "culture" of like-minded companies. There is a trained talent pool from which to draw, vendors can quickly communicate and distribute one another's goods to each other, etc. etc. etc. The list goes on and on. It would take decades for a shift of that magnitude to occur and there are no signs of it happening.

Are you sure there isn't?  The global workplace is really starting... espiecally in Hollywood.  For example a LOT of voiceactors never leave their homes anymore.

You can do all your voicework for a Hollywood movie in your home in Alberta Canada. 

Oh, the film/TV industries split from CA a long time ago. Some of TV remains, as do the studios themselves, but a huge portion of the filming and other work is farmed out across the world.

The thing is that those businesses will never move the corporate offices. There's too much linking them to the area (for the reasons I listed above). It's no different than the tech industry building plants in China. Just because Intel doesn't make the majority of its chips in Silicon Valley doesn't mean there isn't a huge economy there from their corporate offices and related suppliers.

I don't think the reasons above are nessisairly viable anymore though, or won't be in the long term.  Geographical distance really isn't an issue anymore.

It's really the same with tech companies.  There is no real disadvantage to moving a lot of "idea" jobs to other states and countries.  Afterall Hollywood and Tech both benefit from Ideas.  Which often require multiple different ways of thinking.   At the moment, a bunch of people who think differently move to them, but with tech as it is, that's not really needed anymore and could change and change quickly.

See the effect of internet on Newspapers.



Kantor on 21 January 2011
disolitude said:
Kantor said:
 

Please come run our country. Our Conservatives are liberal socialists and you don't even want to know about the Labour Party.

I don't think anyone should model their government spending after Canadians. We were lucky that we decided not to get involved with Iraq and that the recession didn't hit the natural resource sector as hard (which is Canadas main export)...

Look at Russia though...debt to GDP ratio less than 6%. Bravo Putin...

Britain has very few natural resources. Really, our largest industry is probably banking, and the Laboue Party despises banks, because of their Eton-Oxford educations and insistence that they're working class really (in spirit, perhaps?)



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

Killiana1a on 22 January 2011
Kasz216 said:
Killiana1a said:

I am a resident of California, the world's 8th largest economy.Formerly a resident of Oregon and their fine higher education system, but California born and raised.

Source: http://econpost.com/californiaeconomy/california-economy-ranking-among-world-economies

I am not going to address this nonsense of California going the way of Greece. We have enough right leaning California haters writing for the Wall Street Journal, National Review, and the Weekly Standard. They gladly prop up welfare states like Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi because they are solid Republican states, but forget that Democratic states such as California and New York are subsidizing those God fearing, welfare Republican states via Federal tax dollars.

Source: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22685.html

Source: http://scatter.wordpress.com/2009/02/16/red-state-blue-state-welfare-state-subsidizing-state/

Regarding state bankruptcy, it is a political canard aimed to defund and disempower the 1st Amendment rights of citizens in each state to "peaceably assemble" in unions. Republicans and tea baggers want this state bankruptcy legislation to pass so that states would have to dissolve public employee unions in order to cut budgets, cut consitutionally (state) protected public employee pensions, and allow Republican interest groups to fill the power vacuum leftover from the dissolved. overwhelmingly Democratic public employee unions.

The problem is, Obama has the "shut the eff up" card AKA the presidential veto. In order to override a presidential veto, there needs to be a two-thirds vote of both chambers of the US Congress meaning Republicans need 292 House members (They currently have 242 vs. 193 Dem) and 67 of the 100 US Senators to vote yes in overturning a presidential veto.

In the end, this is shameless political theatre just like the repeal of Obama's healthcare bill. They know Obama has the "shut the eff up" card, they don't have any meaningful influence with enough Democrats to overturn a veto, and they hope they can drag it out on Fox News well until the 2012 election. Well baby, it ain't going to happen, plenty of news between now and then.

Source: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/pdf/con001.pdf

None of what you've said actually in anwyay defended your thesis that California won't go bankrupt.... and your "Bankruptcy is to stop the first ammendment" arguement just sounds insanely paranoid.

If you'll notice, your state is inacting very large deficit reducing factors... that don't even scrape the surface...

and it's being done by Democrats.

Democrats are stopping all funding to the public libraries and your really blind enough to say your state doesn't have a problem?

I am fine with California declaring state bankruptcy so long as in doing so it does not violate 1st Amendment rights to "peaceably assemble" in unions and it does not violate California State Consitution protections for public employee pensions.

You might be thinking, does this guy who works in mental health work in public mental health? No, the organization for which I work for is a 1000 employee private sector, for profit mental health company.

As for Democrats cutting funding, it is regrettable but understandable. Governor Brown's budget called for across the board budget cuts and the elimination of state redevelopment agencies.

Source: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/01/09/3310523/anatomy-of-browns-budget-plan.html

I am more in favor of cutting the budgets of California Highway Patrol and state prisons.

California state prison guards have an average salary of $57,000 (not to mention the cadillac benefits).

Source: http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060228/news_1n28guards.html

California Highway Patrol starting salary is $51,288/year (not including cadillac benefits).

http://www.chp.ca.gov/recruiting/osalary.html

I could understand these starting salaries if state prison guards and CHP required a 4 year degree, but they don't. Hell, if you are a friend or a friend of a friend, you don't even need an Associate's to get a job as a state prison guard or with CHP.

If we are talking about cutting state government spending, then everything needs to be on the table. Including "public safety" whom Republicans and conservatives hail as essential and should never be cut. Last time I checked, state prison guards, police, and sheriff were not private sector, for-profit organizations bringing in their own revenue via the sale of goods and/or services.

If the majority of your salary is paid for by tax dollars and/or government grants, then you are just as much a bureaucrat as the pencil pushers in the state capital regardless whether your bureaucratic duties require a gun and a badge.