News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Are cities the new countries? by davidiach on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:06AM (#10923901)
When you think that the New York Metropolitan Area has a bigger GDP than Russia, what you are suggesting (real city states) starts to actually make sense.
Re:Are cities the new countries? by conistonwater on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:32AM (#10924009)
Where are you seeing this? I got California > Russia > New York State: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=new+york+gdp%2C+califor...
Re:Are cities the new countries? by davidiach on Monday January 18, 2016 @08:03AM (#10924120)
New York Metropolitan Area GDP (or GMP) in 2015: $1,573.8 billion http://www.statista.com/statistics/183808/gmp-of-the-20-bigg...

Russia GDP in 2015: $1,235.858 billion

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2015/02/weodata/weor...

Re:Are cities the new countries? by ceras on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:41AM (#10924049)
Depending on how you define it, the NY metro area extends into NJ, CT, and PA. I still don't think it surpasses Russia, but it does surpass the vast majority of countries, including Spain: http://www.usmayors.org/metroeconomies/2013/201311-report.pd...
Re:Are cities the new countries? by darpa_escapee on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:36AM (#10924030)
Metro area includes parts of NJ, PA and CT but not all of NY state.
Re:Are cities the new countries? by conistonwater on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:39AM (#10924039)
Re:Are cities the new countries? by mtrimpe on Monday January 18, 2016 @08:01AM (#10924113)
WolframAlpha is using data from 2014. Given that Russia's economy nearly halved in 2015 that makes the original statement probably true by now.
Re:Are cities the new countries? by sageikosa on Monday January 18, 2016 @10:01AM (#10924719)
Go cheap oil!
Re:Are cities the new countries? by afsina on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:11AM (#10923913)
Why so?
Re:Are cities the new countries? by davidiach on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:25AM (#10923969)
Don't you think that an economy greater than Russia deserves to govern itself, or at least have much greater autonomy?
Re:Are cities the new countries? by ethagknight on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:39AM (#10924040)
Or that perhaps the key to New York's success is dependent upon the existing government framework?
Re:Are cities the new countries? by afsina on Monday January 18, 2016 @08:34AM (#10924256)
I doubt that. Singapore, Monaco and Luxembourg are doing just fine without the blessing of a big state.
Re:Are cities the new countries? by smcl on Monday January 18, 2016 @09:29AM (#10924547)
I'm not so sure these are very good examples. Monaco is effectively a tiny gated community of France for the super rich that produces little-to-no goods or services. Luxembourg is heavily dependent on support and the existance of the EU (receiving approximately €3,000 per person, the highest in the entire EU). Singapore is probably the best example of a city-state succeeding outside the framework of a larger state, but the size of their public debt is a little frightening for such a small country - and would be slightly less so if it was within a larger body.
Re:Are cities the new countries? by afsina on Wednesday January 20, 2016 @01:42AM (#10936421)
There are also Andorra, Lichtenstein and probably Macao and Hong Kong (They could be just fine without England and China).
Re:Are cities the new countries? by pjc50 on Monday January 18, 2016 @09:33AM (#10924567)
Monaco and Luxembourg both are inside the EU and exist very much as a result of cooperation with France (and the Treaty of Utrecht). They both have ceremonial militaries only, and subsist by facilitating tax avoidance for the nearby elites.
Re:Are cities the new countries? by conistonwater on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:36AM (#10924028)
Wouldn't that argument work in reverse too? How much autonomy does Vermont (lowest gdp) need anyway?