4 ms·

Huh? How can metropolitan France be larger than the entirety of Germany?

DanBC 4y ago
"Metropolitan France" is the area of France that's in Europe, and that's 543,940 km².
samatman 4y ago
Because Metropolitan France (note the capitalization) is how the European portion of France is referred to: compare with Overseas France, which includes territories in South America and Oceania, to be non-exhaustive.
- corrral 4y ago
  This is a difference in attitude between Americans and French when describing their countries: the French tend to regard overseas territories as more vitally part of their country than Americans do. Not sure why, possibly it was a deliberately-cultivated attitude by the government at some point, or maybe the difference arose organically. Meanwhile I think a lot of Americans kinda-unconsiously barely even consider Hawaii and Alaska really parts of America, let alone the numerous non-state territories. Actually, now that I think about it, the sense of "Metropolitan France" is very similar to the term "the continental United States"
  - ryukafalz 4y ago
    American here, I’d disagree about Hawaii and Alaska but agree about the non-state territories. The non-state territories being unable to vote and not having representation in the legislature means that they don’t get as much attention in national politics, so they’re less top of mind. (Yes, both of those situations suck and I wish we would change them.)
    - hunterb123 4y ago
      They don't have representation (in the US) and are unable to vote (in US elections) because they aren't US citizens and don't pay (US) taxes. But if you're a US citizen living over there and you made money from sources other than from that territory, you would have to pay US taxes.
      - mrgriscom 4y ago
        Residents of the US territories are US citizens with the exception of American Samoa
        hunterb123 4y ago
        Technically yes by the Jones Act, in a very limited sense... there are restrictions as well as tax exemptions. So I wouldn't really consider citizens of US territories full US citizens. So maybe it's more appropriate to say they aren't Americans, but they are US citizens. But that is all semantics. My main point was the reason they don't have US representation is they don't have US taxation.
        thaumasiotes 4y ago
        > My main point was the reason they don't have US representation is they don't have US taxation. The District of Columbia has to pay US taxes without being allowed any US representation.
        SllX 4y ago
        A situation that could be happily resolved by returning the remaining DC territory to Maryland. I would be all for it.
        SllX 4y ago
        The restrictions are tied to geography not persons. A Puerto Rican in California is entitled to all the benefits of US Citizenship whereas a Californian in Puerto Rico is not. Mostly these are related to welfare and elections. This would be the case for the Californian or Puerto Rican living anywhere in the world outside the US.
  - thaumasiotes 4y ago
    > This is a difference in attitude between Americans and French when describing their countries I'm not sure that's true - it appears to involve a legal distinction. I see many references to Algeria having been an "integral part of France" where other French territory wasn't. But I don't actually know what the terminology means. Anyway, I'd begin by looking to the legal status France tended to give to overseas territories, rather than the attitudes of the French, to explain this. > Meanwhile I think a lot of Americans kinda-unconsiously barely even consider Hawaii and Alaska really parts of America, let alone the numerous non-state territories. And this is a perfect case in point; Americans do consider Hawaii and Alaska to be really parts of America, because they have the legal status.
  - samatman 4y ago
    I've lived in Hawaii, and this just ain't so. What there is, is a blindspot about territories. Just look at the flag: that there are parts of the United States which aren't States kinda doesn't compute.
cataflam 4y ago
https://www.thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTU1OTU3NTE.MTE5NDgyMzE*MjI2OTExNjc(MTUzOTYyNDU~!FR*NzU2Nzc3.MjM2Mjg2MDE)NQ~!DE*MA.MTgwMDAwMDA)Ng https://www.thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTU1OTU3NTE.MTE5NDg... or https://www.thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTU1OTU3NTE.MTE5NDgyMzE*MjI2OTExNjc(MTUzOTYyNDU~!FR*MA.MTgwMDAwMDA)Mw~!DE*NzY3NDA5.NTE5MDU2NQ)NA https://www.thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTU1OTU3NTE.MTE5NDg... helps with convincing yourself.

"Metropolitan France" is the area of France that's in Europe, and that's 543,940 km².

Because Metropolitan France (note the capitalization) is how the European portion of France is referred to: compare with Overseas France, which includes territories in South America and Oceania, to be non-exhaustive.

corrral 4y ago
This is a difference in attitude between Americans and French when describing their countries: the French tend to regard overseas territories as more vitally part of their country than Americans do. Not sure why, possibly it was a deliberately-cultivated attitude by the government at some point, or maybe the difference arose organically. Meanwhile I think a lot of Americans kinda-unconsiously barely even consider Hawaii and Alaska really parts of America, let alone the numerous non-state territories. Actually, now that I think about it, the sense of "Metropolitan France" is very similar to the term "the continental United States"
- ryukafalz 4y ago
  American here, I’d disagree about Hawaii and Alaska but agree about the non-state territories. The non-state territories being unable to vote and not having representation in the legislature means that they don’t get as much attention in national politics, so they’re less top of mind. (Yes, both of those situations suck and I wish we would change them.)
  - hunterb123 4y ago
    They don't have representation (in the US) and are unable to vote (in US elections) because they aren't US citizens and don't pay (US) taxes. But if you're a US citizen living over there and you made money from sources other than from that territory, you would have to pay US taxes.
    - mrgriscom 4y ago
      Residents of the US territories are US citizens with the exception of American Samoa
      - hunterb123 4y ago
        Technically yes by the Jones Act, in a very limited sense... there are restrictions as well as tax exemptions. So I wouldn't really consider citizens of US territories full US citizens. So maybe it's more appropriate to say they aren't Americans, but they are US citizens. But that is all semantics. My main point was the reason they don't have US representation is they don't have US taxation.
        thaumasiotes 4y ago
        > My main point was the reason they don't have US representation is they don't have US taxation. The District of Columbia has to pay US taxes without being allowed any US representation.
        SllX 4y ago
        A situation that could be happily resolved by returning the remaining DC territory to Maryland. I would be all for it.
        SllX 4y ago
        The restrictions are tied to geography not persons. A Puerto Rican in California is entitled to all the benefits of US Citizenship whereas a Californian in Puerto Rico is not. Mostly these are related to welfare and elections. This would be the case for the Californian or Puerto Rican living anywhere in the world outside the US.
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  > This is a difference in attitude between Americans and French when describing their countries I'm not sure that's true - it appears to involve a legal distinction. I see many references to Algeria having been an "integral part of France" where other French territory wasn't. But I don't actually know what the terminology means. Anyway, I'd begin by looking to the legal status France tended to give to overseas territories, rather than the attitudes of the French, to explain this. > Meanwhile I think a lot of Americans kinda-unconsiously barely even consider Hawaii and Alaska really parts of America, let alone the numerous non-state territories. And this is a perfect case in point; Americans do consider Hawaii and Alaska to be really parts of America, because they have the legal status.
- samatman 4y ago
  I've lived in Hawaii, and this just ain't so. What there is, is a blindspot about territories. Just look at the flag: that there are parts of the United States which aren't States kinda doesn't compute.

cataflam 4y ago

https://www.thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTU1OTU3NTE.MTE5NDgyMzE*MjI2OTExNjc(MTUzOTYyNDU~!FR*NzU2Nzc3.MjM2Mjg2MDE)NQ~!DE*MA.MTgwMDAwMDA)Ng https://www.thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTU1OTU3NTE.MTE5NDg... or https://www.thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTU1OTU3NTE.MTE5NDgyMzE*MjI2OTExNjc(MTUzOTYyNDU~!FR*MA.MTgwMDAwMDA)Mw~!DE*NzY3NDA5.NTE5MDU2NQ)NA https://www.thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTU1OTU3NTE.MTE5NDg... helps with convincing yourself.