3 ms·
I wouldn't be surprised if this was true for most countries/states on this planet, also in the USA. Especially when the countries are as centralized as England
by maxwellsdeamons 2y ago
I wouldn't be surprised if this was true for most countries/states on this planet, also in the USA. Especially when the countries are as centralized as England and France. England without London loses like 20% of its population and probably even a higher percentage of its jobs.
What is Mississippi if you remove 20% of it's population that lives in high-density urban areas?
- bryanlarsen 2y agoIt's not rural England that's poor, it's the non-London high-density urban areas.
- maxwellsdeamons 2y agoThis is not true for England https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_of_the_United_Kingdom_by_GRP_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_of_the_United_... And it's not true for Mississippi: https://mdes.ms.gov/media/8639/pci.pdf https://mdes.ms.gov/media/8639/pci.pdf http://www.usa.com/rank/mississippi-state--population-density--county-rank.htm http://www.usa.com/rank/mississippi-state--population-densit... Relatively easy to disprove. The misinformation just fits the narrative better.
- bryanlarsen 2y agoUrban areas like Manchester are showing up as poor on the list.