you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

That's a good point about excluding Alaska in the area calculation; Alaska is almost 18% of the land area of the US, so pulling it is significant.

From the perspective of population, I honestly don't know why I didn't consider that when thinking through this originally. It seems so obvious in hindsight, lol.

GDP is a little bit more complicated. By pure GDP, it looks like Brazil and Canada kind of flip back and forth depending on the year (right now Brazil is just barely above Canada); though if you look at per-capita GDP, Canada is way higher up the list.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 child)

    But I don't think they are flipping back and forward anymore. Canada is facing a trade crisis now that the new NAFTA is over, and Brazil, if the current political environment settles as it should, is facing a brilliant future in BRICS, also being a power in Rare Earths. In any case, you can consider both 2nd in GDP. Finally, sure, GDP per capita is a different beast, that's the whole struggle of our lives in the "global south".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment