[eadmund]

Well, the per-capita GDP of the poorest U.S. state — Mississippi — is greater than that of the U.K., France, Italy, Greece, Spain, Poland and many others, and within 10% of Finland, Germany, Belgium and Austria. 34 of the 47 European states have lower per-capita GDPs than Mississippi.

The median per-capita U.S. state GDP is $78,649; the median per-capita European state GDP is $28,713.

Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_Eu...

[kzrdude]

We have to ask ourselves what we want. Because it's not GDP, you can't eat GDP or sleep under it, you can't even withdraw it from the bank. So more directly, how does it influence our life? (Of course GDP influences our life to some extent.)

[heresie-dabord]

It is generally understood that GDP is a poor measure of what matters to people. The OP should know this.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/quality-of-...

[pc86]

It may be generally understood to you, but not to me, and the link you provided says absolutely nothing about GDP.

[forgetfreeman]

Not a problem, let's educate you a little. When graphed together GDP growth and real wages in the US show a disparity that clearly indicates that increases in GDP go somewhere other than working Americans. This being the case GDP metrics don't communicate meaningful information about quality of life.

https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

[AlexandrB]

While increases in GDP don't all go to working class Americans, the two are not completely decoupled either. If you look at the small-scale variations in both they match each other pretty closely. I also suspect that it's the working class that would eat any dramatic GDP decrease.

[forgetfreeman]

We can at least agree that the working class would be on the receiving end of the worst of the consequences for any flavor of economic downsizing, just like they have been during every other recession, market crash, etc. to date. I would however like to suggest not letting yourself get distracted by the fact that the two lines kinda wiggle similarly. That massive and growing pie slice where the two decoupled is absolutely the larger issue.

[tguinot]

You also have to ask yourself why so many europeans try to move to the US for a better life (especially talented ones) and why almost no american does it the other way around. (The number is ridiculously low in comparison)

People move east to west across the pond, because they want the life offered by the US economy.

[hollerith]

>The number is ridiculously low in comparison

Where are you getting your confidence that that is so?

[tguinot]

Numbers of H1B applicants per country are available. The equivalent for the UK and France is also available.

If you believe there's nearly as many people trying to get out than there is trying to get in, you will be surprised.

The difference (per capita) is a factor of at least 10x

[sebazzz]

> You also have to ask yourself why so many europeans try to move to the US for a better life

I can guarantee you that number is now not growing so much.

[throwawayffffas]

I mean you can eat GDP and sleep under it. That's what it measures production.

[bognition]

Estimated GDP in 2024 28.9 T vs 2025 of 13.3 T

That’s a huge gain in 20 years. Where is the commensurate equivalent growth in housing, education, healthcare, cheap food, etc…

There is a huge disconnect between GDP increase and the economic pressure the majority of Americans feel.

[throwawayffffas]

The richest man in the world in 2008 was Warren Buffett with a net worth of 62 billion dollars. Now with 62 billion you are not even in the top 20. So the growth went into wealth inequality.

[pbhjpbhj]

You see the contradiction between this and your previous post?

Here you say we can't eat/shelter better with GDP increases because they aren't distributed; there you said that [spending on] ability to eat/shelter was what they measured.

[TheSpiceIsLife]

Looks like that should be 13 T 2005?

[bko]

Take pretty much any quality of life thing. Just as one example

Mississippi: The average home size 2,065 square feet

United Kingdom: The average home size is 818 square feet

No, you cannot "eat GDP", but its a useful proxy as it correlates very highly to a lot of things we do care about

[letier]

I wonder how it interacts with life expectancy.

There is a huge difference between Mississippi and the UK: 78.6 years for males and 82.6 years for females in the UK in 2020 to 2022. 68.6 years for males and 75.2 years for females in Mississippi in 2020 and 67.7 years for makes and 74.3 years for females in Mississippi in 2021. Might go up a bit if you have 2022 numbers, but the difference is huge.

[HideousKojima]

Life expectancy differences in Mississippi vs. the UK is largely due to race. Mississippi is about 36% black, and blacks in the US have a 5+ year shorter life expectancy than whites.

[pavel_lishin]

How do Black people fare in the UK?

Because if there's no discrepancy, or a smaller one, it seems to suggest that maybe GDP and square-footage-of-your-house is actually not all that important.

[dml2135]

And... why does that matter?

[HideousKojima]

Because the comment I was replying to was wondering if there was any relationship between the GDP per capita of each location and the life expectancy?

[ropejumper]

This requires a justification for why home size is a good indicator of quality of life, or for why it's more important than other indicators.

[bko]

I don't know anyone who doesn't want more space. And I couldn't imagine raising a family in 800 square feet.

Do we really need a "source" for everything? Would it be meaningful if you saw some survey asking: Would you prefer your primary residence to be smaller, larger or the same size?

I guess you can say all things being equal larger homes are more expensive so there must be some kind of preference for larger homes that indicates value

[jpalawaga]

Do those same people also care about quality of education, availability and utility of public transit, etc? Or is the size of your home the only factor in what makes somewhere livable?

[bko]

I don't think anyone really cares about "public transit". I think people care how convenient their life is. Why should I care if I take a bus to work or drive? I prefer whatever is best for me.

I would look at cost + time. For instance, if it costs me an extra $2k per year for a car but it saves me 30 minutes round trip, and my time is worth more than $20 an hour (assume work 200 days per year), then car is better. Add the convenience of not having to manage bus schedules and, you know, owning a car, its a no-brainer. I think there's some weird cultish behavior around "public transit" as though it is a good by itself is disconnected to how most people think about this.

So in this case not being able to afford a car or have anywhere to park it is not the win you think it is.

In terms of education, not sure its quantifiable but if you look at money, Mississippi spends considerably more:

In England, secondary school spending per pupil in 2024-25 is projected to be about £7,400 ($9.4k), while primary school spending per pupil is about £6,700 ($8.5k)

In Mississippi its around $12k

Do you have any other data or are you just going entirely off of vibes?

https://ifs.org.uk/publications/annual-report-education-spen...

https://www.datapandas.org/ranking/per-pupil-spending-by-sta...

[AmVess]

Small homes just plain suck. No room to do anything, stuffy, cramped. GF and I moved, rented a house for a month. 1400 square feet. 700 up, 700 down. Tiny and cramped, and it only had one very small bathroom.

We had to sleep on different floors. Master bedroom was barely larger than the queen bed, and no way 2 people could sleep in there because it would get blazing hot in minutes.

Garage was similarly minuscule. GF had a tiny suv and still couldn't open both doors.

I figure 1000 square feet per adult is just about right.

[tjridesbikes]

What are you on about? My wife and I live in a total of 1000 square feet in a Boston triple-decker and get along totally fine. We have a basement for storage and a parking space for our car. Somehow, we're both able to work from home without getting in each other's way, have space to do our own things, and temperature regulation is a non-issue with mini-splits. We even have a shared yard!

Maybe the space wasn't laid out well. I would imagine, with only 700 sq ft per floor, a good portion of that is taken up by the stairs. My condo is a flat in a 100-year-old building, built before the "open concept" plans came into vogue. It means out rooms are separated and lets my wife and I do different things in different parts of the house.

People used to raise families in these old buildings with 1000 square feet. Their third-spaces weren't taken over by profit-seeking companies and their interests took them outside the home. 2000 square feet for 2 people seems utterly ridiculous!

[meindnoch]

Lol. 1400sqft is cramped in the US? I have a 120m2 house, which would be about 1300sqft, and we have two kids rooms, one master bedroom with its own wardrobe and a bathroom, one shared bathroom, and na american kitchen and living room.

What are you guys even doing? Or maybe the 1400sqft included the garage?

[Marsymars]

> Lol. 1400sqft is cramped in the US?

If they hadn't done the math I'd have suspected a typo.

I'm in a place not all that much larger (1800 sqft) and it feels pretty luxuriously large for just me and my partner. Big open kitchen, two living rooms, 2.5 bathrooms, three bedrooms (one used as an office for myself) and a dedicated office for my wife.

[footy]

sounds like a bad space distribution. I live in a 700 sqft apartment and my bedroom is large enough for a bed (where my girlfriend and I absolutely can both sleep) a small desk, a weight bench, a rowing machine, and some normal bedroom stuff (dressers etc)

[xandrius]

Population density

Mississipi: 24.5/km2

UK: 279/km2

Maybe, only maybe, that has an effect on house sizes?

[HideousKojima]

New Jersey population density: 488/km2

New Jersey median home square footage: 1,740

Doesn't look like it?

[xandrius]

Then if houses are larger and density is higher then one can conclude that the UK has more green spaces, non-developed areas whole NJ is fairly built up? Which also conversely has an impact on quality of living.

[analog31]

It means that GDP doesn't buy prosperity.

We've been told for decades that letting our economy turn out like Europe's was something to fear, while they outpaced us in virtually all quality of life measures.

We can no longer claim being the richest country in the world as a source of uniqueness or justification -- handed to us by the gods. I think this is part of the reason for the present descent into authoritarianism.

[AlexandrB]

> I think this is part of the reason for the present descent into authoritarianism.

Which? The American descent into authoritarianism or the European descent into authoritarianism?

[nielsbot]

the descent into authoritarianism is a result of the failure of neo-liberals to represent the working class.

unfortunately the wealthy are going to concede more wealth and power or it will continue.

[h2zizzle]

To finish the story here, a look back:

https://bsalert.com/news/2596/Who_Are_You_Better_Than.html

People in this country perennially choose wanting to be "better than" over wanting to be happy.

[nielsbot]

Working class solidarity is the only solution.

I recently realized that people should understand they have more in common with (and must have solidarity with) the next people down on the socio-economic rung instead of trying to climb the ladder in hopes of joining those on the next rung up.

[h2zizzle]

It will never happen, especially with the racialized nature of that socioeconomic ladder. The country that generates downvotes on a post recognizing the similarities between BLM/Floyd Protests and the Euromaidan (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43389979) could never.

[nielsbot]

I think awareness is growing

[redserk]

Strictly looking at GDP is a terrible way to compare economic conditions between US states and countries.

GDP of Mississippi looks great only because of a strong dollar. It doesn’t really account for living conditions.

[nerdponx]

It's great if you are a wealthy business owner or investor, and you want to push deregulation propaganda, because deregulation would allow you to get even richer.

[h2zizzle]

Mississippi is perhaps a poor example to use, as its wealth is highly concentrated, as well as segregated along racial lines. It houses some very affluent communities and also some with open sewers or no public utilities at all, and a state house entirely unconcerned about reconciling the two because it's been gerrymandered to hell in order to prevent the ethnic group that makes up nearly 40% of its population from having anywhere near commensurate representation.

[pavel_lishin]

And is the average Mississippian better off than the average citizen of UK, France, Italy, etc..?

[rvnx]

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jackson+Mississ...

Interesting, there seem to be a consensus about it.

[thinkingtoilet]

Ok. Now compare Mississippi to those places on wealth inequality, life expectancy, education, health care, social mobility, etc...

[myrmidon]

A significantly better metric to compare would be median hourly wage (ideally, purchasing power adjusted, but that's hard).

The US average is actually behind wealthier European nations there (Ireland, Scandinavia, Benelux, Switzerland, Germany): 20$/h compared to ~20€/h. Purchasing power adjustments would also probably favor Europe I guess.

So the much stronger US GDP/capita output apparently does very little for the average citizen...

This was honestly surprising to me, I actually expected the US to be comfortably ahead in this (specifically significantly ahead of Germany). France is also much weaker than I expected in this (~17€/h) not including it was cherry-picking on my part, Eastern Europe is super poor (Bulgaria under 5€/hour!), and the top contenders were unsurprising, except maybe how well Denmark did (~30€/h).

Sources: eurostat + statista (because couldn't find what I wanted on bls.gov)

[AlexandrB]

> Purchasing power adjustments would also probably favor Europe I guess.

I doubt it. Germany and especially Switzerland have a quite hight cost of living. Coming from Canada, I get sticker shock every time I go to the US because of how cheap everything is. I had the opposite reaction going to Europe (except for Italy).

It would also be interesting to compare take-home (after tax) pay.

[myrmidon]

You are 100% right about Switzerland (but its so far ahead that adjustments would not matter too much), for the others its probably barely double digit percentage adjustments.

My personal experience is that German supermarkets are priced extremely competitive (Lidl/Aldi specifically), and Italy felt more expensive by comparison to me (except maybe for local produce and cheese).

Comparing after-tax pay instead would help the US pull ahead for sure, but I feel a bit mixed about that because those taxes pay for stuff like child- and healthcare, which in the US is probably significantly more expensive out-of-pocket than the median EU citizens pays in taxes for the same.

[oa335]

I’d wager that the median European is happier and healthier than the median Mississippian.

[rezonant]

I'm sure the GDP evenly distributes amongst the population right? It's not like the US has massive wealth disparity or anything that could massively affect the implications of a simple per capita GDP comparison.

[999900000999]

Maternal death rate in Mississippi, 36 per 100k

https://mississippitoday.org/2023/01/26/maternal-mortality-r...

In Greece , 8 per 100k https://genderdata.worldbank.org/en/economies/greece

That's just a random health stat, but it's clear the Greek have a far healthier population.

But Mississippi has more millionaires so I guess it's fine.

[pc86]

I have to imagine you cherry-picked maternal death rate (which is anomalously high in the US for reasons that even experts in maternal death cannot explain) in bad faith because the all-cause mortality rate in the US is 1,044 per 100k compared to 1,412 per 100k in Greece - 35% higher[0].

I guess it's not so clear.

[0] https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/death-rat...

[999900000999]

Life expectancy in Mississippi is 10 years shorter than in Greece

>Mississippi ranked dead last in a CDC ranking of all 50 states and the District of Columbia when looking at 2021 data. The magnolia state had a 70.9-year life expectancy rate, slightly lower than West Virginia's 71.

https://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2024/12/29/cdc-data...

>The current life expectancy for Greece in 2025 is 83.10 years, a 0.18% increase from 2024. The life expectancy for Greece in 2024 was 82.95 years, a 0.18% increase from 2023. The life expectancy for Greece in 2023 was 82.80 years, a 0.2% increase from 2022. The life expectancy for Greece in 2022 was 82.64 years, a 0.2% increase from 2021.

https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/grc/gre...

Greece has a older population. Plus we're talking about Mississippi not the entire US.

[pc86]

Yes but you didn't mention life expectancy, you chose maternal mortality then generalized that to "because Greece's maternal mortality is lower than Mississippi, Greeks are healthier." That was my point.

[999900000999]

In no universe does a few ultra wealthy people in Mississippi make it a better place to live than half of Europe, which is what I was originally responding to.

That's all per capita GDP means.

Not like maternal mortality is only slightly higher in MS, it's drastically worse to the point where you can argue the healthcare standards are closer to that of a developing country.

Can you find a single health metric which would point to people in Mississippi doing better than those in Greece ?

[latexr]

> which is anomalously high in the US for reasons that even experts in maternal death cannot explain

Doesn’t seem like a mystery that a country who is so “pro-life” they’d rather let women die than properly treat miscarriages has a high maternal death rate.

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/11/27/texas-abortion-death...

[pc86]

Abortion has nothing to do with it. Abortion laws vary state to state from very restrictive to very permissive, and even states with much more permissive abortion laws than the majority of Europe, maternal mortality remains higher.

Wisconsin's abortion law is from before the Civil War and its maternal mortality is lower than Massachusetts.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/maternal-mortality/mmr-2018-2022-st...

Personally I think it has more to do with access to healthcare and the general physical fitness of your average American compared to your average European but I have no data to back that up.

[latexr]

A miscarriage is not a voluntary abortion. The point is not to criticise these cases specifically, but to point out there is a cultural underpinning to the problem. To treat someone appropriately, you have to respect them and not be constantly afraid that what you’re doing will get you in trouble.

[pc86]

If a doctor is afraid to treat a miscarriage it's because they're worried about abortion laws in their jurisdiction. You can't pretend they're not linked; we should talk about both when we talk about either one.

My point about Wisconsin, Massachusetts, and US maternal mortality vs. Europe stands.

[bko]

Great, it's 8.3 in Albania. Doesn't really help you if you're a typical person making less than 10k a year

[jandrese]

Beyond what everybody else has said, I wonder how much of that difference is due to the healthcare in Mississippi being counted as part of GDP instead of as a state service? Ever ballooning healthcare costs are the cancer that is eating the developed world alive.

[chillingeffect]

Mississippi is the chronic showcase of american wealth inequality.

Mississippi has the lowest life expectancy in the U.S. (about 73 years), significantly lower than the national average (77).

Mississippi has the lowest median household income in the U.S. (about $52,000 in 2022), compared to a U.S. median of around $75,000.

Mississippi has high rates of obesity, diabetes, and preventable diseases, partly due to poor healthcare access.

France and Italy have top-tier universal healthcare, while the UK's NHS, despite challenges, still provides free-at-point-of-use care.

In Mississippi, many rely on Medicaid or have limited healthcare options.

Mississippi’s school system ranks among the worst in the U.S. European countries have stronger public education systems and more government support for higher education.

[Hikikomori]

Thanks for being a great example of what this person wrote https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43385268#43387809

[cool_dude85]

How do US state GDP per-capitas compare to the GDP per-capita of Ireland? And if this comparison is not meaningful or relevant, what does that say about the choice of metric you made?

[_Algernon_]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law

[barbazoo]

And who cares about that? GDP is not a good indicator about people’s quality of life. Maybe of the top 0.1%.

[arwhatever]

Notwithstanding the other comments about the effect GDP per capita might or might not have on individuals, how much of this GDP difference is driven by the strength or weakness of consumer protections within a given economy?

Is higher GDP per capita truly a strong argument against consumer protections?

[Aeolun]

Per capita GDP is a bad measure when so much of it is captured by the 1%

[Loughla]

GDP is a trash measure of what life is actually like. It should go away.

[xnickb]

If they at least cited PPP I'd maybe buy their argument..

[xnickb]

How is GDP per-capita related to the customers having any rights?

[michaelt]

Some people think deregulation equals productivity equals prosperity.

Sure, America has the most school shootings and medical bankruptcies. But they also have the biggest houses, the biggest cars and the most private swimming pools per capita.

[grafmax]

Mississippi has much higher rates of infant mortality, poverty, preventable deaths, and lower overall education levels than most of the EU. Economic output fails to capture the degree to which the economy serves its people.

While average GDP sounds like it’s something that everyone participates in, in reality, under capitalism wealth and income follow a Pareto distribution. As a result, GDP per capita tells us more about total output than about how it is actually distributed among the population, who is benefiting, and thus the well being of the society as a whole.

[TheSpiceIsLife]

> under capitalism wealth and income follow a Pareto distribution.

And under the other forms of government thus far tried?

Anyway, Capitalism doesn't explain wealth inequality. The ability to accumulate capital and apply it to industry with limited liability doesn't inherently cause wealth inequality. That's the fault of Greedism, Over-inflated-sense-of-selfism, and Giving Money to Politicians is like giving Whiskey and Car Keys to Teenage Boys-ism.

We're over taxed and over regulated, that's nothing to do with Capitalism.

[chabes]

Capitalism isn’t a form of government. It’s an economic system. Politicized, sure.

[immibis]

Politics and economics are the same word.

[chabes]

They literally are not

[grafmax]

Wealth inequality isn’t simply a side effect of capitalism—it’s structurally necessary thanks to the division of society into two classes, capitalists and workers.

I do agree that a capitalist economic system isn’t alone in manifesting inequality. I would further acknowledge that under capitalism the amount of wealth inequality differs from one capitalist society to the other. Yet the present levels of inequality we see around us are nearly unprecedented.

You blame greed. But capitalism enshrines the profit motive. It incentivizes capitalists to maximize profit regardless of the effect on the working class even if that means bribing politicians or whatever. Greed is a central feature of capitalism, not some personal failing to be explained at the individual level.

Meanwhile, neoliberal deregulation has been enacted for the last 45 years. What are the effects of this? Real working-class wages have remained stagnant while the wealth gap has drastically increased. Should we believe the answer is more deregulation?

Under a deregulation ideology, the wealthy push for deregulation when it suits them on the one hand while benefiting from and expanding government influence on the other (subsidies, bailouts, regulatory capture, etc.). That’s why after 45 years of a deregulatory ideology operating at the highest levels of our governments, subsidies and regulatory capture still exist.

Consider the present moment. Elon Musk slashes government spending while receiving millions from the federal government. This is not a bug. It’s a central feature of this ideology.

We may have different members of the upper class at the wheel now, but they are still using the same siren’s call of deregulation to justify their policies, ostentatiously reducing government influence in some areas while tactically expanding it in others - not just handouts to Trump’s cronies but also expansion of executive powers and erosion of civil liberties.

[hammock]

GDP per capita of Ireland is double that of the UK? Is that because of the tax dodge thing? When did that happen?

[padjo]

We get touchy if you call it a tax dodge but yes it’s generally not considered an accurate measure of wealth in Ireland. Modified GNI is the term used for the adjusted number.

[s_dev]

The fact that Mississipi and Bavaria Germany have the same GDP per capita tells you a lot about GDP.

[nathan_compton]

Yeah, but have you been to Mississippi?

[micromacrofoot]

you would not be making this comparison if you've spent time in mississippi

[InDubioProRubio]

And that GDP is one guy.. if you take him out of the state though, it gets dark pretty fast.. people dont vote for a return of monarchy if things are going well.

[IsTom]

> Poland

I don't know much about others, but perhaps you should be comparing ratio of GDP in the last 20 years, not absolute values. With Poland coming very poor out of communism and all.

[TheSpiceIsLife]

Communism ended in Poland 35 years ago (1989). That's one or two generations ago.

That's long enough for everyone aged about 50 in 1989 to have aged out of the system.

How many decades should pass before we stop blaming present circumstances on the past?

[IsTom]

It takes time to create an economy. Even with consistent 5% yoy growth that's a few decades to catch up when you're starting with a few times less GDP per capita.