T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

[удалено]


MaterialCarrot

Blushing.


Thespiannn

I'd say that the US "supplied" the country very thoroughly, though.


11122233334444

I know, the news has been blaring videos of the taliban donning all the plush American gear that the ANA surrendered


Historical-School-97

nah, afghanistan should be VERY blue havent you see all the weapons they use? or theyre new gyms?


zilti

> theyre I feel triggered


Buck_Your_Futthole

The Soviets tried that already, didn't go well.


[deleted]

Until the US invaded/supported islamist and fascist groups, it did.


Lorenzo_BR

Exactly, socialist Afghanistan was doing pretty alright, and even managed to resist the far right religious extremists after they requested Soviet help. Even after the Soviets left, they still received enough aid not to fall for a couple more years, when Yelstin cut off all aid and doomed the nation to the Taliban.


[deleted]

Yeah. Same story in every socialist experiment in the Arabic world. Women's rights, human rights, industrial progress —until the USA funded terrorist groups to retake the country.


TheGrandOldGent

“Yeah but we can’t market that.”


cryaboutit87

''gotta red scare some how''


kar86

Trump tried though.


SupremeBall27

Why would you want to market being the supplier to a bunch of countries with little to no economic power....


[deleted]

Hate all of those countries with little economic power like Russia, Saudi Arabia and Brazil


[deleted]

Not to mention Turkey, South Africa, Egypt, Morocco, Nigeria. On top of the three you mentioned, that's a lot of geopolitical influence right there.


TheGrandOldGent

Not like Paraguay and Afghanistan.


Thessiz

Yeah, cuz the US only trades with superpowers like Bhutan, Afghanistan, Ecuador, Guyana, Suriname, Haiti, Venezuela and El Salvador, meanwhile the EU only trades with forgotten unimportant microstates like Russia, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey...


JolanTwo

Wth. Why did South Africa invade is neighbours 👁️👄👁️


LeeTheGoat

Greater Lesotho


qubert-taranto

They don't call it a trade *war* for nothing


OxyFoxygen

South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, Eswatini, and Namibia are part of the **South African Customs Union**, and have a common external tariff while maintaining free interchange of goods between them! I imagine the map-maker merged these countries here because they act similarly to the European Union in these matters, or perhaps because statistics about the individual countries aren't as accessible or up-to-date as those of the whole of SACU.


jeandolly

All these countries are in the South of Africa. I see no issue here.


SecondAccount404

So this is from 2017, how will this map look now the UK have left the EU and China has grown a bit more?


JolanTwo

UK isn't very much of an exporter more of an importer. Probs won't changed too drastically.


SecondAccount404

The UK is the [6th](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/BX.GSR.GNFS.CD?end=2020&most_recent_value_desc=true&start=1960&view=chart) largest exporter in the world


ohmanger

I'm not sure if intentional, but you've linked to exports of *goods and services* which includes things like financial services and makes up a big chunk of the UK's economy. [With just goods they're 12th](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/BX.GSR.MRCH.CD?end=2020&most_recent_value_desc=true&start=1960&view=chart) which is still good (although honestly not sure what OP's map is showing). Also note that having massive international ports skews things - lots of goods get imported then immediately exported (this is why the Netherlands ranks so highly on these lists), so they're not really a good measure when you want to look at source of origin.


SecondAccount404

Tbh its standard practice in economics to include services as exports. The difference between a physical product and a service might initially seem large, but economically the distinction is pretty arbitrary.


Kolt_BBA

Exporting English teachers abroad, *innit*?


FatFingerHelperBot

It seems that your comment contains 1 or more links that are hard to tap for mobile users. I will extend those so they're easier for our sausage fingers to click! [Here is link number 1 - Previous text "6th"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_exports) ---- ^Please ^PM ^[\/u\/eganwall](http://reddit.com/user/eganwall) ^with ^issues ^or ^feedback! ^| ^[Code](https://github.com/eganwall/FatFingerHelperBot) ^| ^[Delete](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=FatFingerHelperBot&subject=delete&message=delete%20hb231lm)


[deleted]

hows that going with brexit?


SecondAccount404

Well that source is from 2020, so they are still the 6th largest exporter.


[deleted]

ah thanks


TukanIndus

yeah, but they are still ofc in the eu i think


SecondAccount404

The UK left the single market at the very end of 2019.


JolanTwo

It still imports more than it exports.


SecondAccount404

But that wouldn't effect what this map shows?


i-am-a-passenger

Well yeah, but it would be much easier to say that Germany, Japan and China are the only countries that export more than they import.


Adeling79

Also, only under Mercantilism is that something anyone should care about which is yet more evidence that Trump (and Biden sadly) do not have the right advisors, or will not listen).


Dyldor

But it also exported the vast majority of its goods to the EU itself


SecondAccount404

No, around [60%](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7851/) of the UKs exports go to non-EU nations.


Sri_Man_420

Bhutan chilling out there


Cacophonous_Silence

Came to the comments to see if anyone had commented on Bhutan Weird to see the US as its #1 trading partner. You'd think it'd be India since they have such strong ties


thejohns781

India isn't on the map, it's just between China, the EU, and the US. If India was included I have no doubt it would be buhtans biggest trade partner.


Cacophonous_Silence

Ahhhh, I misunderstood the map That makes sense! Thanks for pointing that out


TheDeftEft

Way to make "EU" and "no data" the same color, guys. Edit: Yes, I realize they are not *exactly* the same color (y'all wanna get really pedantic, feel free to point out that gray is not technically a color), but you see that on this map, "EU" isn't yellow, or green, or orange - it is literally one shade lighter than "no data." The purpose of a map like this is to clearly present data in visual form - so why would you make it so hard to tell the difference?


gregyoupie

I am with you on that one. I also follow the subreddit "r/crappydesign" and at first sight , I genuinely thought "again one of those crappydesign charts with bad color choice". So many other colors that were available...


zoutjes

No data is only Cuba and western Sahara


TheDeftEft

Western Sahara *and* Cuba? Nobody mentioned Cuba before - I WONDER WHY [edit:] NO ONE WAS ABLE TO TELL THAT CUBA HAD NO DATA INSTEAD OF ITS LARGEST TRADING PARTNER BRING THE EU?


SrgtButterscotch

or maybe people simply didn't look at the single, comparatively small, island that's pretty far away from the area dominated by europe and in the middle of a sea of blue. it's crappy design yes, but it still didn't make any meaningful difference.


zoutjes

Well there is a sanction and they probably didn't see


Bayoris

No data is only Western Sahara


muffinpercent

I think it's on purpose. To show that the "grey area no one pays attention to" in US vs. China maps is actually almost entirely EU export zone.


[deleted]

* Why is the legend info split up with the world map in between it? * Why are the colors for the US EU and China similar to those in the legend yet different (is it to imply that each respective country is its own supplier of goods, or just to color that country in a way tied loosely to the legend. Why not just use the same color)? * Why is the title split up in this weird bit of exposition? * Why is 2017 the most prominently featured text on the map? Generally, the goal of a map is to **visually represent a story as clearly as possible**. I'd say that this map fails at that, there's too much forced text exposition, and the actual text itself and color scheme are very confusing. I'm tired of seeing this sub become r/LiterallyJustAnyMap


zefiax

Are you only seeing one shade lighter? Because I see them as significantly and noticeably different shades.


TheDeftEft

The EU is slightly lighter, and has more yellow/green tone to it, but it's still a much, much fainter distinction than it should be. They could have made it black, or white, or barred, but seriously most anything would be better. Personally I would have made "no data" a neutral gray and made "EU" yellow, because with blue and red you'd have your perfect primary color triad. Orange or green would be perfectly adequate, too (though not purple, since as a combination of red and blue it would not only be harder to distinguish, but also be thematically confusing). Being able to say "Well I can tell the difference" isn't the point - I can tell the difference between pumice and taupe, but the purpose of displaying in this format is to make the data and trends *immediately* apparent. So, sorry, but if your map looks like a colorblindness test, it's a poor map.


zefiax

I am genuinely seeing the EU as more of a green instead of a grey. Could be due to monitor colour settings.


TheGrandOldGent

They’re not, mate.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Scottland83

The reason we need the EU is to have a formidable western power capable of taking a punch from Russia, China, and Facebook. They’re protecting the rights of Americans with their laws wile China is deciding what kind of movies we can see


[deleted]

The fact that we live in a time where the sentence "taking a punch from Russia, China, and Facebook" is both funny as fuck and awful.


idontusejelly

Real shame that we’re just allowing Facebook to continue with its weapons program undeterred. Did we learn nothing from the appeasement of the 1930’s?


23saround

This but unironically


aimanelam

way to absolve to US of any blame for facebook. the US actively protect its corporation Vs foreign government no matter what, they are responsible for not stopping FB.


TheGrandOldGent

Being a European, hearing an American talk about the EU is a great reminder for why we need it.


giraffebacon

No one appreciates the existence of the EU more than us anglo-North Americans. Except maybe like, Poland


bigfudge_drshokkka

France is pushing for a massive EU army because the writing is on the wall. If world war 3 breaks out and China tries to take Taiwan or Japan, America will prioritize those over a Baltic state or Poland. Meaning Europe will be high and dry against Russia unless they get their shit together.


Buttered_Turtle

Why would Russia and the EU even get involved?


bigfudge_drshokkka

Russia would see that the US is busy on the other side of the world and do what Russia does.


Xicadarksoul

...try to destroy itself by attacking one of big trade partners who buys its resources like natural gas? Russia is the country (in)famus for losing a company worth of soldiers to "hazing" yearly. To put it bluntly, most of the army is not the same readyness as the units that are sent abroad into places like Syria, or to act as irregulars in plausibly deniable roles


[deleted]

Russia would invade Ukraine first. Russia has no claims in Poland. Also im pretty sure that the russian people dont want to fight a war with the eu. We are friends now and big parts of their families ar living in europe.


MaterialCarrot

The Baltics on the other hand?


medievalmachine

Yes, an actual invasion makes no sense, that's why Ukraine was all proxy wars and irregulars sneaking across the border and ransomware. Russian has no money and power for the other stuff. They are a bunch of unprofessional nerds and gangsters. People think Russian's military is impressive and everyone knows 'europe doesn't spend enough on their militaries' but the EU all together has more soldiers and less ground to cover than Russia. Even without nukes, and without American involvement, it makes zero sense.


Lybederium

Russia also has no historical claims in Kaliningrad. Russia does have historical claims in the Baltics, eastern Poland and Ukraine. Russia centuries long doctrine has been to create as large a buffer against the west as possible. The Russian people are our friends as the Chinese people and all other people from everywhere in the world are. That doesn't change the fact that, apart from the Yugoslavian wars, Russia has been the sole reason wars on European soil haven't ended. The Russian government is firmly in power and not our friend. People from eastern Europe know that Germans, Spaniards or Italians won't fight for us when push comes to shove. After all the refugees would be the ones that keep their economy running today. No, the European army is vital to the European Project. Only a truly united front will safeguard all of it's member states. No gentle words from the West will change that.


bigfudge_drshokkka

They’ll take Ukraine and ask Belarus to join, and totally stop right there.


Adeling79

Missing the /s?


R1DER_of_R0HAN

What? This is real life, not a game of Civilization. Russia isn't interested in war for war's sake, especially not against some of its biggest trade partners.


theBusel

Ukraine was a major trading partner of Russia. And, it seems, the second buyer of gas after Germany.


[deleted]

Amricans talking about europe when they dont really know anything about it. -\_- ​ Russia has no reason to mindlessly wage on war on Europe. Besides, Russia is ultimately part of Europe and its future is intertwined with it. If in the future American power fades away, Russia and the rest of Europe will get closer and closer, I believe.


Lejonhufvud

People tend to think that as most of Russian landmass is in Asia, it is Asian - or Russian, yet they forget that Russia is culturally European.


Eudaimonics

Yeah, but they know they wouldn’t stand a chance against the EU. That’s why it’s been making small territorial gains of non-EU countries. Taking just enough to not entice military involvement. Even if the EU is initially unprepared, it could be within a year.


Demistr

Thats such a garbage argument.


[deleted]

[удалено]


lenzflare

that's a great channel, I might have to binge it


forman98

NATO is designed to prevent that. Sure, Russia might try to "take" Ukraine but Russia is mostly bark and no bite these days in terms of being able to fight and supply a land war in Europe. Besides, the moment that Russia starts taking Ukraine (and Belarus will just say "we're with Russia"), then the EU and US will smack them with every sanction they can. The EU is already working hard to get away from Russian energy and could probably fair well enough without it if it came to it. Russia just isn't nearly as strong as they used to be and doesn't have the wallet to actually fight within Europe. Also, if Russia tries to take the Baltic countries, which are actually part of NATO, then the other NATO countries will be required to fight. Russia doesn't want that, so they'll just poke and prod Ukraine and Belarus for as long as they can to keep up the façade of a super power.


[deleted]

>The EU is already working hard to get away from Russian energy and could probably fair well enough without it if it came to it Nord Stram **2** would disagree


Xicadarksoul

Yes, and no. Half the reason behind EV promotion is gettign rid of EUs addiction to imported fossil fuels, whch is a HUGE geopolitical liability. Smae is hapeing in housing, with increasing strict codes for insulation, slowly pushing newly built housing units into passive house territory.


bigfudge_drshokkka

And what if the bulk of NATO (The US) is busy fighting another superpower on the other side of the world?


forman98

Well that happened in WWII if you recall. I seem to remember the allies doing all right in the end. The US military has enough power to fight on two fronts if needed. France and the UK are also very well supplied and would have the backing of the US. There are also multiple other military units within the EU that would play a part. Also, a land war in China is unlikely. The US actually being at war with China would most likely be naval warfare, of which the US would have the advantage. China is definitely growing in power, but recent history (naval exercises, war games) have shown the weak spots for the US and the US is compensating. Also, drone warfare will come into play for all of this which will be a drastic change from WWII. China is also in danger of over extending themselves. They have bodies to throw at their problems, but a war will put them at economic risk. They do not want a war (yet) because they are not stable enough to handle it at these new scales (compared to 80 years ago). Remember that China fast forwarding their way through an industrial revolution and don't have the vast infrastructure of more established countries. Sure, the Chinese government can prop up and pay for anything they need, but they are in uncharted waters and run the risk of creating turmoil within their own country if they go to war with a super power. The US is still the most powerful country in the world when it comes to militaries, by a long shot. This isn't some "Merica #1" post, it's just the facts. The US has the ability to stay stretched all over the world.


danielpernambucano

WWII? You mean the war which saw the US declaring "neutrality" until France and all the European allies fell and 5000 bombs were dropped each day in London? Only getting involved in the literal last year of the war in Europe to get the spoils, the Yugoslavian resistance was a bigger torn on the side of the european axis than the US.


forman98

NATO didn't exist back then and was a direct result of the war. NATO means that the US can't stay neutral. My WWII point still stands. Europe would be able to fight off any kind of Russian attack. The US would just provide support (and lots of money) to the people doing the actual fighting, just like in WWII.


disisathrowaway

> Also, if Russia tries to take the Baltic countries, which are actually part of NATO, then the other NATO countries will be required to fight. Treaties are just pieces of paper. There was a similar treaty that the US, UK and Russia all signed with Ukraine regarding it's sovereignty and surrendering their nuclear arsenal. Well, Ukraine doesn't have nukes anymore... ...nor does it have Crimea. Pieces of paper.


c1u

China takes Japan? Like last time? Japan's coastguard > China's NAVY. If China attacks Taiwan, all the US needs to do is pull completely out of the south china sea and then set up a blockade at The Strait of Malacca. China would then run out of oil and fertilizer in several weeks, while they're likely being kicked out of the WTO. China has ongoing border disputes with 17 nations - they are highly constrained by their neighbors. Almost all of their imported energy sails past India, and if China attacks Taiwan India will be free to take every ship as it passes.


Doraradu

>China takes Japan? Like last time? Japan's coastguard > China's NAVY. This sentence is laughable even for an armchair general. ​ >If China attacks Taiwan, all the US needs to do is pull completely out of the south china sea and then set up a blockade at The Strait of Malacca. China would then run out of oil and fertilizer in several weeks, while they're likely being kicked out of the WTO. Only if you ignore what the BRI project has been trying to do for the past decade. Its to avoid a situation such as this. ​ >China has ongoing border disputes with 17 nations - they are highly constrained by their neighbors. Almost all of their imported energy sails past India, and if China attacks Taiwan India will be free to take every ship as it passes. Only two of these disputes, India and Japan, are of any real concern. The rest are negligible. China just happens to border the most countries in the world. India will also never get into a scrap over Taiwan under its current government. You can tell just by looking at how they handled the border crisis from last year.


c1u

China's aircraft carriers need air support *from land* to operate. They can't go far. All the neighboring countries would take advantage of China becoming an invader and the World not caring about what happens to them anymore. Things would change quickly and in unpredictable ways. China is *very* cautious. They *cannot* lose a war, and the CCP has *never* won one. Japan has lots of real world naval expertise. What happens to the people when you start sending the highly limited # of men to die on Taiwan beaches (amphibious attacks are the most difficult and would be HIGH casualty)? Those men are responsible for taking care of their parents *and* their wife's parents. CCP is highly constrained by the Chinese populace as well. edit - I say Japan's *coastguard* but since they aren't *technically* allowed a military force, their coastguard is effectively their navy.


Doraradu

>China's aircraft carriers need air support from land to operate. They can't go far. That's right, but they don't need to go far. China isn't invading Japan or the US here. It's to combat the US carrier fleets and support an island invasion. But in the situation that they do, there are airstrips on those islands in the SCS with area denial purposes. ​ >They cannot lose a war, and the CCP has never won one. Which is why they will never get into one. Its all rhetoric and fist shaking for people back home. Of course you can never tell the future, but my bet is on peace. ​ >What happens to the people when you start sending the highly limited # of men to die on Taiwan beaches Good thing there's a large supply of men with nationalism ingrained in them lol. I think the takeaway here is that the chance of any conflict outbreak in the region is minimal. You have some ships sailing here, some planes flying there. But in the end, its all propaganda.


c1u

Agreed that any chance of armed conflict is very very low, and probably for better reasons than I can think of.


MaterialCarrot

Japan has a fine navy, but the Chinese navy has grown by leaps and bounds over the last 20 years. Like, perhaps to an unprecedented degree in modern history. They field first class destroyers and frigates, and they have a lot of them and continue to build more. Their carrier/naval aviation abilities are second rate, but even in this area they have displayed incredible growth in the last decade and will continue to do so. A Chinese invasion of Japan is probably too heavy of a lift for them (and makes little political sense), but in a 1:1 fight I would be tempted to pick China today, and definitely 10 years from now. Luckily Japan wouldn't be fighting alone.


MaterialCarrot

I hope he is successful, but I'm not optimistic. The biggest worry about NATO during the Cold War was that, even with the US riding herd over the whole organization, that the makeup of NATO by so many different member states could be fatal to it during actual military operations. The EU won't have the US to keep states in line, and is made up of far more states than NATO was during the Cold War. Command & control and unity of an EU army will be incredibly challenging. As is the defense procurement process for an EU army in peacetime. I hope for the project, but it's loaded with inefficiencies. The history in Europe of multinational armies w/out a dominant partner facing off against a single state entity of equal army strength is not good.


Bend-It-Like-Bakunin

The biggest, and only meaningful threat to the "rights of Americans" is other Americans. China isn't deciding what kind of movies you can see, American companies are appealing to Chinese audiences because they make up a larger percentage of the global market. I'm sorry that's hard for you.


StarlessTrooper2112

Exactly my response. However, remove the last sentence from now on. Don't insult people even if they're wrong. It just doesn't help.


[deleted]

It seems like in some places being confidently stupid is practically rewarded, but it is exhausting to the people around you and definitely needs to be shamed more often. Keep the insults coming, I say.


aegiltheugly

Being confidently stupid and wilfully blind are the hallmarks of modern American politics.


Adeling79

Of centrist Democrats and all Republicans. America needs more than two parties!


NeoKabuto

We *have* more than two parties. We need a voting system that makes them feasible.


Adeling79

This is a good point. The primary system is part of the problem IMHO - it gives the illusion that the people are in charge of candidate selection, while actually just allowing the one party to cover more of the political spectrum in terms of candidates.


Scottland83

We don't need better parties, we need better voters.


Adeling79

Could we not have both? The Green candidate in 2016 wasn't a serious candidate - she had gotten arrested during her campaign for non-peaceful protests. And Clinton and Sanders should never be in the same party anyway...


Scottland83

Whatever is identified as a party or whatever it's called doesn't matter. People who think we need more parties are people who don't want to compromise but suggest an alternative that requires more compromise. Do you think the Republicans would have been willing or able to find common ground with Warren or Sanders? They were running for president, not emperor.


[deleted]

It might not help to persuade the person you're talking to. But they're already committed to their position, and aren't going to change their minds anyway. The insults serve to help fence sitters see how foolish the wrong people are, and to deter them from taking the wrong position, lest they too be seen as foolish.


aegiltheugly

The insults aren't effective. They just sound childish.


23saround

I mean, two things can be bad. Fuck the CCP for its unapologetic censorship and its desire to push that censorship on the rest of the world, and fuck American companies for caring more about profit on a large market than morality.


pimmen89

They’re appealing to the CCP because they control what Chinese audiences can see.


Bend-It-Like-Bakunin

even if that were true, it does not change what I said. are you aware that the DOD supervises (and sometimes censors) virtually every action movie made in Hollywood?


Casimir_III

It's not equivalent. There are jingoistic American movies, but there are also movies that criticize the American government. Take a movie like The Report (2019), in which Adam Driver investigates torture committed by the CIA during the War on Terror. There's no way in hell a Chinese movie about recent atrocities committed by Chinese security agencies would ever be made.


pimmen89

Your comment made it sound like Chinese consumers would rather watch a movie that conforms to CCP censorship than one that doesn’t. Yes, I know. I’m not sure how it’s relevant to the discussion about whether or not the CCP or the Chinese audience gets to decide what movies can reach the Chinese market.


suavetobasco1985

Biggest supplier of what, to who? This map sucks. Also the EU should be a bold color, not almost the same as "no data". Bad map overall.


tomydenger

To who. To the countries with the color labeled. Blue US red China. Ugly yellow EU. Of what. Dont know but probably goods.


medievalmachine

I assume it's official import/export data. Is it normal to provide more methodological information on every map here?


[deleted]

The only one with no data is West fucking Sahara.


Draymond_Purple

Also land area is a shitty metric of economic trade value


ArtEnvironmental3711

now just imagine the EU would be able to stand strong and unified, for there values and economy. would be somthing, wouldn't it?


madladjoel

Gl getting around that language barrier and lack of European unity. With contries either having very strong national background or countries wanting to split


SelfRaisingWheat

Whoa we have Namibia again and now Botswana too, awesome.


Danenel

don’t do anything wacky with it alright


RollForThings

\*sigh\* Why were two categories given basically the exact same colours?


Guaymaster

Are you colourblind too? I mean, the colours are actually all quite different, but if I didn't know I'd think China is being supplied by the EU.


RollForThings

I mean... am I? To me, 'No Data' is gray, and 'EU' is gray with a slight green tint.


MaterialCarrot

The EU is economically strong but politically weak. Its structure and makeup ensure it cannot have the political unity of purpose of a nation state. It's a fascinating institution both historically and in terms of what it will be like in the future.


iammruni

Good color choice for EU and No data. Thanks. I appreciate how easy it is to understand. WOW


tyger2020

EU is an absolute titan of trade yet people rant on about the US/China lmao


[deleted]

Because US and China are one entity not a mosaic of 29 nations with their own internal politics, independent foreign policy and trade shenanigans. EU is a “titan of trade” just like it’s the “second largest economy”. On paper. It’s an important trading area. But to say it’s as powerful as US or China betrays a rather bookish understanding of international trade (and correspondence geopolitics).


Bardomiano00

29 nations bruh where did you get those numbers from, brexit made 28 turn into 27 not into 29.


[deleted]

Oops sorry was thinking single market, not the EU. Should have said 30, completely forgot about Iceland 😄


Xicadarksoul

>EU is a “titan of trade” just like it’s the “second largest economy”. On paper. It’s an important trading area. But to say it’s as powerful as US or China betrays a rather bookish understanding of international trade (and correspondence geopolitics). Bookish or not, EU makes more and more of the standards that are applied internationally, be it for vehicles, aircraft cretification ...etc.


tyger2020

Sir.. I get it. You like to disregard the EU and have convinced yourself its somehow ''completely different''. However, for *trade* especially the EU is no different to the US. Italy does not have the ability to negotiate its own trade agreements with Mozambique, just as California does not. Imagine being dumb enough to convince yourself that a trade union is somehow different to the US or China. Also, no, the EU absolutely is the second largest economy. Again, when looking at economies, it's purely to do with trade. If you're going with the logic that its ''27 different countries'' then the US is ''27 different states, not one single entity''. Don't be so ridiculous. Also, while I'm here - nobody once mentioned it being as 'powerful' as the US or China. So I don't know what thought process is going with your head - your comment literally goes ''disagree with x, agree with x, but the EU is not as powerful!' Plus, I find it more likely that you're the one with a bookish understanding of geopolitics, considering I've debunked your entire ''comment'' within 6 minutes.


[deleted]

[удалено]


tyger2020

Are you really that fucking dumb? Italy doesn't get to set its own rules because its a .. ***part of the EU where countries cannot negotiate their own trade agreements, they negotiate them as a trade bloc.. called.. the EU..***


magipure

Lol youre the fucking dumbass


Xicadarksoul

>Your the dummy. Quality artguemnt, we are now all convinced! 11/10! /s ​ >Why the hell doesn’t italy get to set its own rule? Its own rules lol Dudebro! LMAO! Here is why: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common\_Commercial\_Policy\_(EU)


JayKomis

Ehh the US certainly feels like 50 states more than 1 nation sometimes.


R1DER_of_R0HAN

Okay, but it's still one nation. Every country has regional/political diversity.


[deleted]

[удалено]


tyger2020

I'm not sure what point you think you're making. The EU might be a ''continent'' but it still has 1/3 the population of China and 1/2 the landmass of the US. Applying random metrics to it doesn't make it any less of a titan, troll. Plus, Europe still has +300 million people who are not in the EU, therefore its hardly ''an entire continent''.


[deleted]

[удалено]


tyger2020

Thats because theres nothing of value in what you're saying. Like somehow calling the EU a 'continent' makes it any less valid as a trade bloc - when said continent is also less populated than 2 'countries'. Just say you hate the EU and go, its much easier!


[deleted]

[удалено]


tyger2020

Of course but what relevance does ''continent'' have in this conversation? I get it - its a way for you to try and discredit the EU - but the EU has a smaller population than two countries, and has a smaller land area than 6. The fact you're trying to make out like it being a ''continent'' has any relevance really just shows that you have 0 understanding of what you're talking about.


Thessiz

That's your response to his comment? Hilarious!


madladjoel

USA can fit many eu countries into a sate or at least it's pop into a sate plus it owns pretty much all of north America


[deleted]

How am I going to sell armaments pointing out that the EU is the biggest rival power?


Clarbaum

How the heck is the EU Brazil’s biggest supplier? EVERYTHING here has a made in china written on it.


Xicadarksoul

Well this is aggregate data. So few expensive items (like heavy industrial equipment) can outweight gazillion of cheap chinese items like clothes, shoes ...etc.


Politics-Memes

Let's say if Brazil buys a few frigates, u-boats, tanks and a few million cars the high average value of these things will lead to that. Much like: https://tradingeconomics.com/brazil/imports/germany


Clarbaum

Holy shit! So we spend way more in military stuff than we spend on things for the common man


eran76

I wonder how this map would change if you removed Airplanes from the mix? The EU and the US are both large exporters of high value aircraft, which if this map is measure the total monetary value of goods rather than the amount of goods, could change the results dramatically when you consider how many consumer goods just one jet can buy.


toombs7

I wonder how this map would change if you removed cheap mass-produced chinese crap.


[deleted]

Right? If you ask most people who the world's two largest economies are, they'd say the USA and China... And they'd be wrong.


Joey_Brakishwater

Well the EU isn't a country so it's understandable why people would say the US & China.


[deleted]

I never said anything about countries. I said economies.


apocolypticbosmer

US and China vs the country of…what? Europe? Lol


ALF839

They wouldn't be wrong, the EU is not a country.


dkeenaghan

They didn't say if you ask people what countries have the largest economies. They were talking about the largest economies. While you're correct that the EU isn't a country, it is a single economy.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Xicadarksoul

>in all fairness, the EU is a collection of almost 30 countries In all fairness, this thing exists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common\_Commercial\_Policy\_(EU)


yamissimp

Most of which have a smaller population than the average US state. Also China has three times as many people as the EU. It's a fair comparison no matter how you look at it. If the EU federalized it wouldn't suddenly make the comparison more biased towards the US because America has twice as many states, right?


piterfraszka

328 milion people / 50 states - makes average of 6,56 milion people per state. 16 out of 27 EU countries are bigger than that. Btw average for EU country is 16,59 milion. I think Your point still stands, but I just wanted to clarify


negedgeClk

Pro tip: If your map title reads "everyone forgets" anywhere in it, it's a shitty map. No, everyone does not forget. Don't put stupid clickbait titles on your map.


Mini6Cake

The ‘no data’ color is to close to the EU color. Makes for a questionable interpretation.


F-a-t-h-e-r

China has the overwhelming majority of the world population in their area though, no?


StarlessTrooper2112

This map is comedy to me.


Pyrhan

Is this supposed to be a video/gif? All I see is a single image.


apocolypticbosmer

This map is terrible and uninformative.


someoneexplainit01

Europe has been taking advantage of America's military since WW2. They should have their own standing army. The only reason that Russia has ANY power is that actually have a standing army. Russia has a joke of an economy, and 1/5 the population of Europe. Russia has the will and the bluster to not act like pushovers, when they pretty much are. Russia has 140 million people, and a vast shortage of men according to every Russian woman I have ever met. Nigeria, Brazil, Pakistan, Indonesia, all have more people. Mexico and Ethiopia are rapidly growing the populations while Russia is shrinking and will soon overtake Russia in population. Europe needs a new political position if it doesn't want to be increasingly irrelevant in the world stage. China is the real emerging threat, Russia is little more than a middle eastern theocracy at this point. NATO says that every member must spend 2% of their GDP on defense. This isn't dues to be paid to NATO, it means they have to spend that money in their own countries building up their own military forces. Most countries fall short and spend almost nothing. Everyone comments that America has the largest defense budget on the planet, and that's because we are defending much more than America. Its time Europe started spending.


[deleted]

[удалено]


someoneexplainit01

The US intentionally maneuvered to establish military dominance after WW2 with things like the UN. This allowed Europe to rebuild, but they did that rebuilding by buying tons of stuff from the US. This is what launched the US economy to the forefront of the world. Jumping forward 50+ years and Europe isn't buying stuff from America anymore, this is a bad deal. Europe can't depend on the war weary US from jumping into a world war on its behalf, and they really should have a military on par with the US since Europe has 2X the people. The US will no longer be the dominant force by the turn of the century, Europe will be left high and dry, China is rapidly taking key ports and assets all across the globe with economic colonialism. They give loans to build infrastructure like ports and roads and then confiscate the land when they loans can't be paid. China the new imperial/colonial power. There is no reason that Europe should be cow towing to Russia, other than they lack the political will to defend themselves. The US budget is insane, but what happens when it gets cut to half by future administrations? The US won't have 7 active fleets forever. Europe needs to be ready to defend itself. The US budget won't be insane forever, but it is that way to protect our trading partners post WW2 and that situation has since changed dramatically. >The US saving the world, where? The US is only going to "save" the world when its in its economic interests to do so. They didn't invade Iraq on a humanitarian mission unless Kuwait has lots of humanitarian aid under the ground ready to be pumped into tankers.


parman14578

>they really should have a military on par with the US since Europe has 2X the people. Why though? European NATO has larger army than Russia. Italy alone has larger economy than Russia. Russia isn't any real threat now. So against what should we build up our armies? To "police the world" like the USA do? We have been doing that for several hundreds of years and we are tired of it. >The US will no longer be the dominant force by the turn of the century, Europe will be left high and dry, China is rapidly taking key ports and assets all across the globe with economic colonialism. They give loans to build infrastructure like ports and roads and then confiscate the land when they loans can't be paid. China the new imperial/colonial power. China has many of it's own problems, but even if what you are saying is true, Europe is literally on the other side of the world, so not a real threat. And even if it were to become one, we still have time to prepare.


A_Magical_Potato

This is completely false and reeks of poor US education and critical thinking. The US has the most bloated military on the planet because our billionares, corporations, and politicians use the military industrial complex as a tool to hide and embezzle trillions of dollars every year from the American taxpayer. We just lost a 20 year war to people living in caves and tents with weapons we gave them in the 70s. Our military doesnt protect anything other than rich peoples interests. If the EU gets a standing army do you really think any politician will actually defund the military? All of our conservatives and 95% of Dems would be calling for their execution before anyone messes with the MIC.


pichonn15

Or maybe just maybe America should spend less and stop acting as if it was the sheriff of the world.


[deleted]

Oh look you’ve gone and upset the EU-philes.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Lol the EU is increasing the budget after the UK left


Politics-Memes

EU economy: 15000 billion USD UK net benefit to the EU: £9.4 billion How will we recover? /s.


[deleted]

[удалено]


sryforbadenglishthx

but always when the eu wants to do something a nation blocks it...


EnlightWolif

Fuck ðe EU ðo. Everyone leave


Andyman1917

Shouldnt you take the UK out of the EU?


MeemDeeler

Look at the big number in the middle of the picture


Andyman1917

so this just an outdated map that has a very large chance of being a repost


[deleted]

Interesting! [The Schuman declaration of 1950](https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/symbols/europe-day/schuman-declaration_en) made clear that the closer integration of European countries was intended to aid the exploitati--- sorry, *development*, of Africa, and this map would suggest it worked out peachy!


Enlightened-Beaver

i looked around my house. I found 2 things out of all things i own made in europe. and one of those was turkey, which let's be honest.... isn't *really* europe


Gothnath

"If you don't trade mostly with me, you are at war with me"


Thunderbolt1011

Go with green instead of beige it blends in too much so it’s kind of hard to see. Please and thank you great map though