We often hear about how the US is such a consumption oriented country. We’ve got the fattest people, we pollute the most, we’re spoiled… yeah, yeah, whatever.
But here is an interesting way to look at the economic impact the US plays on the global economy. You see, comparing the Gross Domestic Product of another nation, say… Canada, to the US is just silly. In fact, the entire output of Canada is roughly equal to just the state of Texas.
The graphic was produced about 3 years ago, so it’s a little dated, but still accurate enough to illustrate the concept.
What you are looking at is a comparison of each US State to an entire other country with roughly the same GDP. The numbers represented are the population of the foreign country (in millions of people) as compared to the US State. The data is represented in the following tables. I’ve provided them sorted by US State on the left and by Country on the right so they can be cross referenced quickly either way:
| US State | Pop. (M) | Country | Pop. (M) | Country | Pop. (M) | US State | Pop. (M) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 4.5 | Iran | 65.8 | Algeria | 31.8 | West Virginia | 1.9 | |
| Arizona | 5.2 | Thailand | 61.8 | Argentina | 37.4 | Michigan | 10 | |
| Arkansas | 2.7 | Pakistan | 141.4 | Australia | 19.4 | Ohio | 11.3 | |
| California | 34 | France | 60 | Austria | 8.2 | Virginia | 7.1 | |
| Colorado | 4.3 | Finland | 5.2 | Bangledesh | 129.2 | New Hampshire |
1.2 | |
| Connecticut | 3.4 | Greece | 10.6 | Belgium | 10.3 | Massachusetts | 6.3 | |
| D.C. | 0.58 | New Zeland | 3.8 | Brazil | 174.5 | New York | 19.1 | |
| Florida | 15.9 | Republic of Korea | 47.9 | Canada | 31.6 | Texas | 20.8 | |
| Georgia | 8.2 | Switzerland | 7.3 | Chile | 15.1 | Mississippi | 3 | |
| Idaho | 1.3 | Ukraine | 48.4 | Croatia | 4.3 | South Dakota |
0.75 | |
| Illinois | 12.5 | Mexico | 101.8 | Czech Republic | 10.2 | Nebraska | 1.7 | |
| Indiana | 6.1 | Denmark | 5.4 | Denmark | 5.4 | Indiana | 6.1 | |
| Iowa | 3 | Venezuala | 24 | Dom. Republic | 8.3 | Vermont | 0.61 | |
| Kansas | 2.7 | Malaysia | 22.2 | Equador | 12.8 | North Dakota |
0.6 | |
| Kentucky | 4.1 | Portugal | 10.1 | Finland | 5.2 | Colorado | 4.3 | |
| Louisiana | 4.5 | Indonesia | 219.2 | France | 60 | California | 34 | |
| Maine | 1.8 | Morocco | 30.6 | Greece | 10.6 | Connecticut | 3.4 | |
| Maryland | 5.3 | Hong Kong | 7.2 | Hong Kong | 7.2 | Maryland | 5.3 | |
| Massachusetts | 6.3 | Belgium | 10.3 | Hungary | 10.1 | New Mexico | 1.8 | |
| Michigan | 10 | Argentina | 37.4 | Indonesia | 219.2 | Louisiana | 4.5 | |
| Minnesota | 4.9 | Norway | 4.5 | Iran | 65.8 | Alabama | 4.5 | |
| Mississippi | 3 | Chile | 15.1 | Ireland | 4 | Nevada | 2 | |
| Missouri | 5.5 | Poland | 39 | Israel | 6 | Oregon | 3.4 | |
| Montana | 0.9 | Tunisa | 9.7 | Malaysia | 22.2 | Kansas | 2.7 | |
| Nebraska | 1.7 | Czech Republic | 10.2 | Mexico | 101.8 | Illinois | 12.5 | |
| Nevada | 2 | Ireland | 4 | Morocco | 30.6 | Maine | 1.8 | |
| New Hampshire | 1.2 | Bangledesh | 129.2 | Netherlands | 16 | Pennsylvania | 12.2 | |
| New Jersey | 8.4 | Russia | 145 | New Zeland | 3.8 | D.C. | 0.58 | |
| New Mexico | 1.8 | Hungary | 10.1 | Norway | 4.5 | Minnesota | 4.9 | |
| New York | 19.1 | Brazil | 174.5 | Pakistan | 141.4 | Arkansas | 2.7 | |
| North Carolina | 8.1 | Sweden | 8.9 | Peru | 27.1 | Utah | 2.3 | |
| North Dakota | 0.6 | Equador | 12.8 | Phillipines | 82.8 | Oklahoma | 3.5 | |
| Ohio | 11.3 | Australia | 19.4 | Poland | 39 | Missouri | 5.5 | |
| Oklahoma | 3.5 | Phillipines | 82.8 | Portugal | 10.1 | Kentucky | 4.1 | |
| Oregon | 3.4 | Israel | 6 | Republic of Korea | 47.9 | Florida | 15.9 | |
| Pennsylvania | 12.2 | Netherlands | 16 | Russia | 145 | New Jersey | 8.4 | |
| Rhode Island | 11 | Vietnam | 80 | Saudi Arabia | 22.8 | Tennessee | 5.7 | |
| South Carolina | 4.1 | Singapore | 4.3 | Singapore | 4.3 | South Carolina | 4.1 | |
| South Dakota | 0.75 | Croatia | 4.3 | South Africa | 43.6 | Wisconsin | 5.3 | |
| Tennessee | 5.7 | Saudi Arabia | 22.8 | Sweden | 8.9 | North Carolina | 8.1 | |
| Texas | 20.8 | Canada | 31.6 | Switzerland | 7.3 | Georgia | 8.2 | |
| Utah | 2.3 | Peru | 27.1 | Thailand | 61.8 | Arizona | 5.2 | |
| Vermont | 0.61 | Dom. Republic | 8.3 | Tunisa | 9.7 | Montana | 0.9 | |
| Virginia | 7.1 | Austria | 8.2 | Turkey | 66.5 | Washington | 5.9 | |
| Washington | 5.9 | Turkey | 66.5 | Ukraine | 48.4 | Idaho | 1.3 | |
| West Virginia | 1.9 | Algeria | 31.8 | Uzbekistan | 24.4 | Wyoming | 0.5 | |
| Wisconsin | 5.3 | South Africa | 43.6 | Venezuala | 24 | Iowa | 3 | |
| Wyoming | 0.5 | Uzbekistan | 24.4 | Vietnam | 80 | Rhode Island | 11 |
There is also a complete list of countries on Wikipedia here.
These comparisons actually cause me to think quite a bit about the relative disparity between life in the US and life in other countries. For example, the very first state on the list, Alabama, is not considered a very wealthy state at all. Yet the citizens of Alabama are 14.6 times better off than the 66 million Iranians. Frankly, the disparity is so great I don’t think most Americans can even imagine what it would be like to live in most other countries.
I’m curious if anyone else might make other observations.
Lance,
Taking what you said into account, there is already a measure of this. There are two types of GDP, nominal and PPP. Nominal measures GDP with a strait exchange rate. PPP measures it by looking at purchasing power. Both types of GDP are available on wikipedia. I’m not sure which type this guy used however. You are probably right though, there would be much less descrepancy if PPP was used. For example, chinese people are ~4 times more productive with PPP.
Interesting chart!
It’s interesting that the GDP/population ration is most equivalent between first-world nations. eg – Canada vs Texas, pop within about 30% having roughly equal GDPs – says that these compared areas generate similar monetary values with a similar population base.
And then looking at 3rd world nations vs states, eg Pakistan(141.4) vs Arkansas (2.7) shows an immense discrepancy of efficiency. but perhaps it’s not efficiency, but relative monetary values – 1 Pakistan rupee = 0.016495 U.S. dollars (60 rupees = 1 USD). If you compare this to the populations: 141.4 / 2.7 = 52.3, I can see that perhaps it’s the monetary difference that’s so extreme.
I suppose to have validity, we’d have to compare living costs in pakistan with Arkansas – ie – if someone from Arkansas can purchase a loaf of bread for 1 dollar, can someone from Pakistan purchase the equivalent for 1 rupee? And if the average cost to rent a house in Arkansas is $500 /pcm, is a similar domicle in Pakistan 500 rupee per month? And if the avg Arkansas wage is $20,000, is the avg Pakistan wage 20,000 rupees?
I haven’t gone to all the effort to compare each of these examples, but I have done some world travelling and have noticed that people all over the world sometimes seem to live relatively using similar currency levels. eg, I currently live in the UK, and notice that compared to America, the prices of most items are similar – if you don’t take the exchange rate into consideration (and of course regional taxation rates will wildly skew certain items like gasoline) – eg A loaf of bread in the US can be purchased for a dollar, whilst in the UK a similar loaf wil be 1 GBP, renting a house will be about $1000, while in the UK it’s about 1000 GBP. A job that pays $30,000 in the US will probably be pay about 30,000 GBP, etc
And of course, since the data was about 3 years out of date, the Canadian comparison will be slightly different – 3 years ago the exchange rate was about 0.70 CDN per 1 USD, and now the currencies are roughly equivalent.
Anyhow it’s my pet theory, and thanks for all the fish. ;)
Lance
Yeah you’re right, I don’t know what I was thinking. I should probably think twice before I post comments like that. :P
I live in a country with the population equal to a small city in USA, aprox 4,5 million people live here. Most of the GDP is based on debt towards World Bank (80%) and yet I feel that I live better than many americans do :)
S.
I figure I rank somewhere just over a McDonalds burger flipper and somewhere underneath a trash collector :) Still, as far as the WHOLE world is concerned that really isn’t all that bad.
We appreciate the effort — this is really a great illustration of American productivity — more GDP from less people! Actually the U.S. is the #1 product (efficient) country in the world when it comes to our workforce!
MG,
Yes you remember correctly. I’ve actually posted a few times about this:
I think it’s the first link you were referring to.
John
Rhoody,
Yes you are correct. The labels and corresponding numbers refer to the population.
I guess I could have appended the GDP numbers as well… but just compiling this data took me hours and I was sick of it by the time I was done. :-) Hey, at least I linked to every single state and country in Wikipedia!
John
Derek i think, the labels are right, the chart shows the with the around the same GDP, compared to the population.
so a population of 4.5 Million in Alabama has the same GDP as 65 Million Iranians.
John, pls correct me if I am wrong.
But indeed some numbers about the value in $ would be great.
cheers
Rhoody
There was a link I saw recently, perhaps one you even posted on your blog (it escapes me at the moment), that allows you to compare your wealth to the rest of the world.
It was eye opening if nothing else to see how little others made and how a $30,000 millionaire as they say around here, really could be a millionaire in another country somewhere..
That’s a pretty interesting find. I think, though that the chart labels are wrong on your chart (it seems like it should be labeled: GDP (M) instead of Pop (M). That threw me off a little bit when I was looking around.
In any case, still fairly interesting to think about, especially because the U.S. is always a target for blame and contention.
Nice chart – Would be interesting with the $ numbers on it as well.
Norway was the only one I saw that didnt fit in…
Kim:)
Very refreshing to see an American looking outside the borders for a change. My American wife loves living here in Australia because of the laid-back lifestyle.