US States Renamed For Countries With Similar GDPs


Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is a convenient way of measuring and comparing the size of national economies. Annual GDP represents the market value of all goods and services produced within a country in a year. Put differently:

GDP = consumption + investment + government spending + (exports – imports)

Although the economies of countries like China and India are growing at an incredible rate, the US remains the nation with the highest GDP in the world – and by far: US GDP is projected to be $13,22 trillion (or $13.220 billion) in 2007, according to this source. That’s almost as much as the economies of the next four (Japan, Germany, China, UK) combined.

The creator of this map has had the interesting idea to break down that gigantic US GDP into the GDPs of individual states, and compare those to other countries’ GDP. What follows, is this slightly misleading map – misleading, because the economies both of the US states and of the countries they are compared with are not weighted for their respective populations.

Pakistan, for example, has a GDP that’s slightly higher than Israel’s – but Pakistan has a population of about 170 million, while Israel is only 7 million people strong. The US states those economies are compared with (Arkansas and Oregon, respectively) are much closer to each other in population: 2,7 million and 3,4 million.

And yet, wile a per capita GDP might give a good indication of the average wealth of citizens, a ranking of the economies on this map does serve two interesting purposes: it shows the size of US states’ economies relative to each other (California is the biggest, Wyoming the smallest), and it links those sizes with foreign economies (which are therefore also ranked: Mexico’s and Russia’s economies are about equal size, Ireland’s is twice as big as New Zealand’s). Here’s a run-down of the 50 states, plus DC:

  1. California, it is often said, would be the world’s sixth- or seventh-largest economy if it was a separate country. Actually, that would be the eighth, according to this map, as France (with a GDP of $2,15 trillion) is #8 on the aforementioned list.
  2. Texas’ economy is significantly smaller, exactly half of California’s, as its GDP compares to that of Canada (#10, $1,08 trillion).
  3. Florida also does well, with its GDP comparable to Asian tiger South Korea’s (#13 at $786 billion).
  4. Illinois – Mexico (GDP #14 at $741 billion)
  5. New Jersey – Russia (GDP #15 at $733 billion)
  6. Ohio – Australia (GDP #16 at $645 billion)
  7. New York – Brazil (GDP #17 at $621 billion)
  8. Pennsylvania – Netherlands (GDP #18 at $613 billion)
  9. Georgia – Switzerland (GDP #19 at $387 billion)
  10. North Carolina – Sweden (GDP #20 at $371 billion)
  11. Massachusetts – Belgium (GDP #21 at $368 billion)
  12. Washington – Turkey (GDP #22 at $358 billion)
  13. Virginia – Austria (GDP #24 at $309 billion)
  14. Tennessee – Saudi Arabia (GDP #25 at $286 billion)
  15. Missouri – Poland (GDP #26 at $265 billion)
  16. Louisiana – Indonesia (GDP #27 at $264 billion)
  17. Minnesota – Norway (GDP #28 at $262 billion)
  18. Indiana – Denmark (GDP #29 at $256 billion)
  19. Connecticut – Greece (GDP #30 at $222 billion)
  20. Michigan – Argentina (GDP #31 at $210 billion)
  21. Nevada – Ireland (GDP #32 at $203 billion)
  22. Wisconsin – South Africa (GDP #33 at $200 billion)
  23. Arizona – Thailand (GDP #34 at $197 billion)
  24. Colorado – Finland (GDP #35 at $196 billion)
  25. Alabama – Iran (GDP #36 at $195 billion)
  26. Maryland – Hong Kong (#37 at $187 billion GDP)
  27. Kentucky – Portugal (GDP #38 at $177 billion)
  28. Iowa – Venezuela (GDP #39 at $148 billion)
  29. Kansas – Malaysia (GDP #40 at $132 billion)
  30. Arkansas – Pakistan (GDP #41 at $124 billion)
  31. Oregon – Israel (GDP #42 at $122 billion)
  32. South Carolina – Singapore (GDP #43 at $121 billion)
  33. Nebraska – Czech Republic (GDP #44 at $119 billion)
  34. New Mexico – Hungary (GDP #45 at $113 billion)
  35. Mississippi – Chile (GDP #48 at $100 billion)
  36. DC – New Zealand (#49 at $99 billion GDP)
  37. Oklahoma – Philippines (GDP #50 at $98 billion)
  38. West Virginia – Algeria (GDP #51 at $92 billion)
  39. Hawaii – Nigeria (GDP #53 at $83 billion)
  40. Idaho – Ukraine (GDP #54 at $81 billion)
  41. Delaware – Romania (#55 at $79 billion GDP)
  42. Utah – Peru (GDP #56 at $76 billion)
  43. New Hampshire – Bangladesh (GDP #57 at $69 billion)
  44. Maine – Morocco (GDP #59 at $57 billion)
  45. Rhode Island – Vietnam (GDP #61 at $48 billion)
  46. South Dakota – Croatia (GDP #66 at $37 billion)
  47. Montana – Tunisia (GDP #69 at $33 billion)
  48. North Dakota – Ecuador (GDP #70 at $32 billion)
  49. Alaska – Belarus (GDP #73 at $29 billion)
  50. Vermont – Dominican Republic (GDP #81 at $20 billion)
  51. Wyoming – Uzbekistan (GDP #101 at $11 billion)

This map was suggested by Morgan via strangemaps@gmail.com, and can be found here. Please note that the GDP data used for this comparison are not necessarily the same as those used in compiling the original map.

(this very cool post has come from this very cool blog)

Tentando entender a Inglaterra – Trying to understand England


English: Popular vote by party in UK in genera...

English: Popular vote by party in UK in general elections, 1832-2005. ‪Norsk (bokmål)‬: Stemmer gitt til partier i Storbritannia i parlamentsvalg, 1832-2005. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Conservative Party propaganda

Conservative Party propaganda (Photo credit: PabloBM)

Conservative helicopter

Conservative helicopter (Photo credit: Cardiff Central Watch Photos)

Tony Blair, Prime Minister of the United Kingd...

Tony Blair, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom 1997-2007. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: Margaret Thatcher, former UK PM. Fran...

English: Margaret Thatcher, former UK PM. Français : Margaret Thatcher 日本語: 「鉄の女」サッチャー英首相 Nederlands: Margaret Thatcher Svenska: Margaret Thatcher som oppositionsledare 1975 Русский: Маргарет Тэтчер, бывшая премьер-министр Великобритании (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Plaque recording the location of the formation...

Plaque recording the location of the formation of the British Labour Party in 1900. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Ramsay Macdonald

Ramsay Macdonald (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Labour logo.

Labour logo. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

  • first thing I’d like to ask if you know: is the name “Jennings” an Irish name? Or Scottish? Or Welsh? Or is it a fairly common name that could mean that person is from anywhere in the UK?

    Jennings…it’s an english name derived in Lancashire…northern england

  • second thing I’d like to ask: was there anything relevant happening in the UK in November 1932? I know it was the peak of the crisis…millions unemployed. But politically…was anyone being elected or something like that?

there was a coalition government imposed by Ramsay Macdonald because of the depression….he was a Labour party Guy but had to form a government with mostly conservatives……the equivalent of a democrat forming a government with republicans

  • macdonald was scottish, right? so, this means he was a guy who wanted reform but couldn’t do it because the conservatives didn’t want change, is that it?

3rd question is broader: are class distinctions still strong in England? If not, when did that change? Did it change mostly because of both world wars? Is it true you can tell what person came from where (geographically and socially) just through their accent?

as for the class question in Britain: in the movie I’m studying you can see the conflicts very clearly, but at the same time you see the upper servants, the seniors, pretty much holding on to traditions and an ideology that is EXACTLY the same as the one the upstairs people have…but why would that be? Why would people who are exploited that blatantly DEFEND interests that are opposed to theirs? is it because they identify themselves with the upstairs people, they aspire to it even if they know they can never be one of those? And want to dettach themselves from the “lowly” ones?

Well i can answer 3 very easily….class distinctions have been attacked from the top down..in that those in the upper classes chose to use class as aform of discrimmination against THEM! previously class had only been a lower class issue…those higher did not care because they were of course priveledged. This happened circa 2009 as the conservatives (mostly rich and like republicans) sought re election after a 13 year absence. Many people say the real erosin of class came circa 1979 when Margaret Thatcher…a conservative told people there was no such thing as society…this lead to the pursuit of wealth instead of class war and blurred the lines between ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’ because EVERYONE had the same aim…make more money not fight for better conditions or fairness in the work place…of course during the 1980’s there was a massive struggle between the working (lower) class and the upper/middle classes with the miners strikes etc…..but the seed was sown…it did not help that the person who told the working classes that they were not came froma background of a father who was a grocer…she said it proved that ANYONE could make it if thay tried so how could the class divide really exist…of course she had had a priveledged education and so could not count as strictly working class…I think this addresses your question about why they would defend this ideology..

  • wow!! that’s complex…so…let me try to understand something: there were two factions, the Conservatives and the Liberals. Then at some point came Labour. And ever since there has been these two parties, Conservatives X Labour, is that it?

  • hmmm, so Thatcher pretty much borrowed the american concept of the self-made man…that no matter what, you can make your way up with effort.

  • …or did the american concept of self-made man come from England?? 

  • that’s another thing I’m trying to understand…the US was colonized by Britain, and yet they set themselves apart…even if they have so much in common, including a bi-partisan political system…

    sort of there are three main parties…Conservatives…labour and the liberal democrats…the fabienne society was the first and they were socialists like The Labour Party but had little influence…more a focus group…then there was conservative…the liberals arose as a response to the hideous uncaring of the conservatives towards the poor and as the liberals helped establish better conditions for the working man this lead to a party…the labour party who would stand up for the guy providing labour

    yes thatcher was very close to Reagan and was keen to use the republican model of self advancement to erode the class action of the unions…so yes she stole the model from the US

    • but did the distinctions between the parties remain, or along the years they pretty much came to mean the same thing? When Labour is in power, do they really do things more socialist-like or not really anymore? 

    • yeah I hate Thatcher  lol I heard she tried privatizing things in the UK and started defending that model of “flexibilization” in the workplace…which pretty much meant longer hours, less pay, losing the benefits that had been conquered by welfare-state policies…

      the American civil war made sure that they set themselves apart… the US was determined to self govern and did not want to be a part of the british empire…I think the bi-partisan system is simply a reflection of accountability because of course the Uk used to have a tri-partite system with the monarch that the US despised

      • hmmm…ok, they would despise monarchy and a tri-partite system, but…why not a 4 or 5-party system? Why keep the binary opposition?

      • (sure, there are other parties in the US, such as the green party, the blablabla party, etc, but it’s always been pretty much democrats VS republicans)

        yes you are right the distinctions became very blurred because of the pursuit of wealth and the labour party began to suck up to those they used to protect the poor from….but there is a crucial distinction….the Labour party(wrongly i believe) sucked up in order to try and make gains for the working man…wealth creation =welfare provision etc…the conservatives believe a man should create his own wealth…in this way little has really changed…the labour party simply lost in the morality stakes because of course the conservatives had never claimed that

        well no its not really efficient to have more than a lower house or chamber and an upper…to be sure perhaps they got that from us but other systems like Iran also have this bi-partite system

        let me see if I understand then…not much changed until Thatcher came into power? There were the haves and the have-nots, and there were frequent struggles, unions striking, etc?

        yes…you are right……there were many strikes and a 3 day week in effect before thatcher came to power…rubbish piled up in the streets as the bin men went on strike…thatcher preyed on the common person who struggled woth the conditions of the country without understanding why the working man was going on strike to get better conditions and pay…the strikes continued after 1979 but she used the police in a militia type way which had never been done before and like i said told everyone there was no collective only individuals…trying to break the hold of the unions

        • ooohhhh, evil woman!!!!!!

        • and there was no uprising to go against that type of policy??

        • that’s another thing about England I never understood…it was the first country to suffer the industrial revolution, and therefore the horrid conditions in the factories…therefore it should have a strong working-class that rebelled fully! why did no revolution happen?

          the miners fought back very hard..Arthur Scargill was the main guy but ultimately as she made laws which outlawed many of the accepted practises of the unions…there was nothing to be done…the police behaved like security guards and instead of (as previously) standing by and protecting either side…moved in to attack the protesters…it has got MUCH worse since

          i think the class system made sure of no revolution…those who have give the illusion you can get it…even though you cant …why fight when u can aspire…!!!

          I see…that’s so sad!!! 

          its the same idea with barack obama…if he can anyone can…even though people know theres more to it than that they believe..

          have i helped at all ?

          • yes, you have!!  Thank you very much and soooo sorry about this annoyance of mine!! 

          • oh, one last thing…

          • if you had to recommend a book that helps someone understand england and its history better…which one would you recommend?

          • (well, one or two :P)

          • I mean, to understand England in the 20th century…

            A Radical History Of Britain: Visionaries, Rebels and Revolutionaries – the men and women who fought for our freedoms by Edward Vallance

Pôsteres soviéticos


Tudo sabemos fazer por nós mesmos. Ajudamos a nossa mãe!

O conhecimento romperá as correntes da escravidão

Ajuda aos famintos à americana

Se você não ler os livros esquecerá as letras

Nós exigimos paz!

(isso veio daqui)

Livros esculturais (ou: deus me livre, a missão!)


(poxa, dá pena de estragar livros assim, a não ser caso eles já estejam arruinados além de qualquer reparação…ou se forem “obras primas” estilo Paulo Coelho, aí sim, eu faria esse tipo de coisa com prazer! *rsrsrsrsrs* Essas fotos curiosas vieram daqui – exceto as do Brian Dettmer, que vieram daqui, óbvio! E a do polvo e da Alice não me lembro de onde peguei, sorry…). Já sabem: basta clicar nas fotos para vê-las no tamanho original (normalmente são bem maiores, mas algumas infelizmente não…). Ah, e se gostam de livros, lembrem-se de visitar o outro post a este respeito, com wallpapers e árvores de Natal feitas de livros *rs*

Guy Laramee já trabalhou como escritor, diretor, compositor, fabricantes de instrumentos musicais, cantor e escultor. Entre seus trabalhos esculturais há duas séries de livros escavados com paisagens: Biblios e The Great Wall, nas quais densas páginas de livros velhos são transformadas para revelar montanhas serenas, platôs e outros cenários idílicos.

The Great Wall

Having recently overthrown the American Empire in the 23rd century, the Chinese Empire set out to chronicle the history of the Great Panics during the 21st and 22nd centuries.

This Herculean undertaking resulted in a historiographical masterwork entitled, The Great Wall. Comprising 100 volumes, this encyclopaedia derives its name from The Great Wall of America, a monumental project to build an impregnable wall around the United States of America so as to protect this land from barbarian invasions. 150 years in the making, this wall ultimately isolated Americans from the rest of the world while sapping the country’s remaining cultural and natural resources. It also undermined the American people’s confidence in systematized hedonism, thus hastening the fall of the American Empire. As we now know this paved the way for China to invade American territory.

The Chinese Empire later ordered a group of scribes to write The Great Wall series. In the course of their duties they familiarized themselves with the libraries of the former USA. Through a strange twist of fate they thereby discovered the ancient sources of their own civilization which the new Middle Kingdom had long ago removed from its libraries. In the end this contact, primarily with Taoism and Chan (Zen) Buddhism, sowed the seeds of the Chinese Empire.

There’s nothing to fear but…(fear itself?)

detalhe da there’s nothing to fear, feita com livros de bolso:

E já que o assunto é livro, não pude deixar de incluir aí embaixo uma estante bem legal 😀

Niagara Falls & Chutes de Montmorency


Lindas essas fotos, né? Vieram daqui.  Só visitei esse lugar uma vez, e durante o verão (não, Niagara não é nem de perto tão monumental quanto as cataratas do Iguaçu, é diferente, cada pessoa prefere uma…a cor da água, porém, é lindíssima):

…essas fotos, apesar de lindas (claro! :P), são bem clichê. É raro ver foto, e ainda mais de boa qualidade, de quedas d’água no inverno, muito interessante…vi, ainda, uma foto impressionante das Chutes de Montmorency (Québec) no inverno também, muito legal – não a encontrei aqui na internet, mas aqui vão outras igualmente belas (clique nas fotos para vê-las em tamanho maior):

O pessoal inclusive faz uma caminhadinha básica e pratica esportes de inverno (como ski) por ali:

Ah, sim, o verão a aparência é outra, obviamente…;)

Até de noite é legal:

Essa foto me lembrou algo…no verão, existe uma competição internacional de fogos de artifício chamada Grand Feux Loto-Québec. É uma experiência que recomendo muito, pois não se trata de fogos de artifício normais, são dos mais elaborados/diferentes possíveis e sincronizados com música…sem contar que, ÓBVIO, eles iluminam a cachoeira e ainda por cima se refletem lá embaixo nas águas! Não me lembro quanto tempo exatamente durava o espetáculo, mas acho que era em torno de meia hora/40 min…ficava uma fumaceira só, claro!!! hahhaahah Mas vale muito a pena, você ali sentadinho assistindo (sim, o espetáculo é pago, lógico). Tinha gente que pegava seus próprios caiaques e ficava vendo ali de dentro da água mesmo (pena que essas duas fotos são pequenas):

AH-HÁAAA!!! Achei wallpapers no site oficial do evento, e mais algumas fotos grandes bem legais, sobretudo de um fotógrafo amador, Patrick Blouin (mas aí embaixo tem fotos de outras fontes também) – é só clicar para ver as fotos em tamanho grande: