I know where I want to live. (and do)
ngl I’d be happy in all 3
Cali ain’t so bad, mostly just silicon valley making things suck
Yes, but also Mercator projection.
Look how curved the US-Canadian borders are, and how Ellesmere island is compressed. This clearly isn’t Mercator.
tokyo firmly believes in stacking
The more you think about it, the more insane it is, like… wow
Tokyo demands the sharpest elbows of the three.
Canada population: 41.4 million
California population: 39.4 million
Greater Tokyo Area: 37.4 million
Almost similar GDP as well
Canada GDP (2026): $2.51 Trillion USD
California GDP (2025): $4.25 Trillion USD
Greater Tokyo Area (2022): $1.82 Trillion USD
Wide Spread but still all in the low Trillions
California is inflated by Silicon Valley stuff. Maybe left-over Hollywood prestige, as well.
Japan isn’t known for it’s awesome economy, but it’s surprising world city Tokyo is still doing worse than all of Canada including the backwaters.
I wonder how they’re determining what’s in Tokyo for the GDP calculation. For example, companies’ HQs there vs actual factories or whatever they own being elsewhere.
It’s not surprising because GDP does not reflect quality of life in any form whatsoever. GDP is not a measure of wealth it’s a measure of feverish, extractive, mindless and destructive activity.
Doing Worse is subjective.
Higher GDP ≠ Doing Better.
The US has some of the highest GDP per capita on earth but that doesn’t mean it (or its economy, if you don’t define economy just as stock market go brrr) is doing well.
As in, doing worse economically. In this context, where that’s clear, it seems like the wording holds up.
(or its economy, if you don’t define economy just as stock market go brrr)
GDP measures actual trade more than the stock market. That being said, yes, it’s a litmus test, albeit a decently well supported one. The main places it breaks down, in terms of predicting people’s lifestyles, is where there’s major banking hubs (Singapore, Seychelles, Ireland for a while).
GDP is absolute values, so there’s quite a bit of self reinforcement. Especially in service heavy areas, your massage cost 30$ for half an hour, elsewhere you can get a better one for 10$ an hour.
Although the second economy delivered twice the goods at a higher quality, the economic output was 1/3rd
California also offers an agricultural powerhouse of productivity, oceanfront tourism, and ongoing techbro circle jerks.
Oh right, a lot of produce that makes it up here is from California, although we’ve noticeably weaned off of it over the course of the trade war.
I did mention the techbros. If the AI bubble pops and geopolitics breaks the walled garden monopolies it might end up a lot closer to Canada.
I wonder if you take out fossil fuel and logging out of Canada’s GDP if it still would be higher than Tokyo’s. Not much logging and oil drilling going on in Tokyo I reckon.
Yes, it’s a resource-based economy. Agriculture and mining are also huge. They’re all kind of hard to get at resources, though, so it’s not like the Persian Gulf, where there’s no expenses and it’s a money printer. Basically, outside of certain parts of Ontario, people work in that instead of in factories. (And forestry in particular is being imploded by the US, right now)
Tokyo should, in theory, have all kinds of highly skilled professionals, who earn more than whatever logging grunt. But, the gap is still like 150%.
Add mining too. We export a lot of raw minerals
Biggest question.
Who wins in a street fight.
I wanna give it to the Canadians on sheer variety but I think California might win that one.
Considering California has Oakland and San Bernadino… I think California takes it
Berdoo redneck checking in, honestly the Canadians have a solid chance still. Mostly because they are walking war crimes, we are more crimes against humanity.
deleted by creator
Basically every town in the middle of the state.
Stockton, Fresno, Merced, Bakersfield,
ninjas?
Canadian ninjas or Californian ninjas?
Surf Ninjas!
1000% California. So Cal is mostly LA and NorCal is a bunch of granola outdoor survival types.
I mean, we have plenty of people living off the land in Canada too, and it’s hard land.
If they’re allowed bringing their guns, the Americans are going to win every time, of course.
That’s what I thought too but then I feel like California has more psychos. People don’t talk about it but California is the true Florida man of the US. Florida just posts it in their newspaper more but Cali has some fucking weirdos
And crazy beats tough any day of the weak.
Canadians tend to become creative when they are at war.
Check out gun ownership stats for Canada sometime. Might surprise you. Lotta unregistered long guns.
I live in a rural area; I’m aware. Although didn’t Trudeau bring back the long gun registry?
There’s some pretty severe restrictions, like max 5 rounds in an SKS (although plenty of people illegally use the full 10). Cali does too, but it’s not clear if it’s on the same level. IIRC you can still have handguns pretty much anywhere in the US, while they’re almost banned here.
You’re in luck! We don’t keep any of our guns in California.
Makes you wonder why housing prices in Canada are so ridiculously high then when they have so much free land space.
do you want to drive 3 hours to work every day?
You can do better than that. I’m not sure how far you have to get from Calgary or Edmonton before abandoned, falling apart farmhouses start, but it might be only 45 minutes.
And if you’re in a random part of the north, it’s more like weeks of offroading.
Edit: Obviously, that 45 minutes is still enough to discourage most buyers. You might still be 20 from the nearest stores of any kind. So, the point stands, most of the land isn’t acceptable for most people.
deleted by creator
Considering we have like 9% of the world’s entire forests, where would you like us yo build these houses?
The free land space: 🧊
I’ve known several people who would happily live in the Arctic so even that’s not a complete no go.
Yeah, but do they like having a job and services, or are they okay alone in a run-down dry cabin with a rifle for the polar bears, and expensive resupply trucks whenever the iceroads are passable?
Depends on the individual. At least one of the dudes lived in Svalbard for about a year but had to leave for family reasons so he would probably be chill with either.
Oh yeah, then sure.
I guess the point is that the climate isn’t actually the big issue, it’s what a typical person is going to do in the middle of the arctic. If you’re a digital nomad or a researcher, it makes sense. If you’re from a local Native group, with unlimited legal hunting and a community, it makes sense.
FWIW even within Canada, and with funding in place, it’s hard to move to the North. I know somebody who tried to retire to Whitehorse a bit ago, but couldn’t, because lots of people are interested in that and it’s nigh-impossible to get new housing approved.
Construction is the bottleneck.
On why construction is the bottleneck, you’ll hear several theories, but just physically having land isn’t the problem.
Guess noone wants to live near the polar circle
Actually, we have no trouble finding immigrants, and mostly let in ones that are doctors or something like that (who then end up working fast food anyway).
But yes, many of the people who were born here, and grew up somewhat acclimatised, still bitterly complain about the climate.
The developers sit on it and only develop the closest to [city] area they have until those sell at [high price] then they move to the next area they own until those sell.
They also feel like they can get more money building single family homes than building apartments.
You made Saddam too small.
80% of þe population of Canada lives South of Minneapolis, MN., USA.
This picture looks like Canada stabbed the USA in the neck and forgot to clean up after, jeez.
My wife’s family is from northern Minnesota. When we visit my in-laws we like to joke that they’re two states north of Canada.
I mean… yeah. Just about. But smoke from Canada often gets bad enough in MSP to obscure traffic. I can’t imagine how bad it is in N MN. Canada is always on fire.
Did we annex Alaska while I wasn’t looking? Haha.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That looks like it should be tagged NSFW
Can’t say I blame them. Minneapolis is cold AF.
þat’s nuts
People who use þorn are so þoroughly exhausting
Oh, right, I forgotten about you. The moron who doesn’t use “th”.
Why does a single character upset you so much?
Why is Sxan a moron for that? It’s not hurting anyone
It’s annoying to read. It’s probably more annoying to read for someone with dyslexia. It’s probably even worse for someone that has to use a screen reader. And all of that for 0 benefit to anyone.
Correct.
Its a “look at me” thing to do.
Damn, catching strays here
I just copied what Sxan posted
Oh, right, that moron. Think for yourself and don’t be “that guy”.
there are too many people in Tokyo. like come on guys. there are other cities.
The problem is, the best educational institutions, best-paying jobs, and most quantity of open positions are in that area. Without spreading that out, you won’t get the people who would rather live elsewhere out. We do have worker shortages here in the countryside, but they’re often manual labor which people are less keen on.
I doubt you’ve been or lived here if you think it’s very dense for a large city. Frankly its extremely spread out. Most buildings are quite short or single family homes. Compared to the skyscrapers of Chinese cities, its a lot closer to American suburbs.
The density makes life very convenient though
Yeah, OP pretty much applies to all cities. Sure, you could live in the middle of nowhere, but then what?
*there is other city. Singular.
Supposedly there is a third city, but it’s too boring to be worth checking.
Hey, now, you’re both right - the Japanese language doesn’t distinguish between singular and plural.
lol that’s not true at all dog
Please explain how that’s wrong?
Japanese nouns don’t have grammatical number. The closest you can get is adding an affix like -tachi, but even then it’s almost exclusively for people and means more like “and company” rather than a true plural.
The noun for “city” is 市 (“ichi”), and it can mean either one city, two cities, or many cities. You can specify how many by adding a number, but the word itself doesn’t change.
So Tokyo has 1 moose, California has 100 moose, and Canada is overrun by moose. Got it!
Only moose I ever saw in California palled around with a squirrel and constantly had beef with a Russian couple when visiting Universal Studios.
I also used to live in a gang neighborhood. Tough times. :(
Does that mean Canada is looking for immigrants? A lot of us can help bring that number up.
If you want to own a home, look at property prices and then reconsider. In the urban areas, the housing market can be nuts from what I’ve seen.
The big map is misleading. The vast majority of us live within 100 miles of the US border.
Ed, it’s a startling revelation.
Canada, getting ready to invade, has amassed 90% of its population along its border with the United States.
The longest unprotected border in the world, stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to that other one.
That depends on whom you ask. 🤷 And how eager are you to live in a remote community?
Going for a remote community doesn’t actually make the process easier.
If you happen to be a doctor willing to go somewhere that doesn’t have one, there might be special job offers, but that’s it.
Canada is in desperate need of immigrants but simultaneously suffering some growing pains from fumbled immigration programs and policy it’s the old you won’t make everyone happy shenanigans
More than pretty much anywhere else, yes. It still manages to be heavily selective, though, mostly for highly educated/skilled workers and their families.
But also, yes, the population is heavily in the south. If you showed just the non-remote part, it’d be horizontal Chile.
Canada is always looking for immigrants, weather it likes to or not, it needs them
I guess it likes the weather not
And people wonder why Japan’s population is shrinking. (Wait, is it shrinking or did it stop growing?) Disinterest in breeding may be an innate response to overpopulation. In any case, Tokyo’s population is fucking crazy and decreasing the number of people voluntarily and peacefully is a GOOD thing.
There are plenty of people living in Tokyo because it has the highest wages, best educational institutions, and most job opportunities but not because they want to. However, I’d honestly say that’s more of a minority.
Greater Tokyo also include places that look like (of course slightly more compact) US suburbs. Sure, the further toward central Tokyo itself you go (particularly inside the Yamanote line), the density increases a lot, but it’s also not some hellscape. I moved to the countryside to farm, but I otherwise mostly enjoyed my life in Tokyo. I could have found farmland closer to Tokyo itself, but I wanted to get north before it gets any hotter, so not a problem of Tokyo itself.
Don’t get me wrong; I wish there were investment to split things up some more and get the people who want to be out of Tokyo out of it. This would require having those job opportunities and educational institutions split up as well. This isn’t going to happen.
The hardest part about raising a family in Tokyo, from those I know who are doing it, is childcare. There are free and subsidized options, but they’re hard to qualify for and having waiting lists and lottery systems. That part sucks. It’s not impossible for most families, but it does sometimes end with one parent not working for a time. Better childcare leave policies have helped here, but not enough (and some shit companies still try to pressure women to quit instead, but that’s another issue).
Up here, we have more availability and my village actively pays people to move here (I was one of them, but those with families get even more benefits) and offers free or heavily-subsidized childcare. Still, while the incentives are nice, they’re not bringing those mountains of job opportunities or educational institutions with them on their own.
I doubt the fertility rate is much better in the scenic, middle-of-nowhere areas. People just don’t want kids, and now there’s the option to have sex without them.
COL in Japan in general is about as unhealthy as it is in California.
people are working themselves to death just to scrape by.
if governments want population growth, they have to siphon wealth away from their corporate overlords and nurture the working class.
Japan’s population decline isn’t really about cost of living so much as it is about poor quality of life/a stiflingly conservative culture. Terrible work/life balance, women still largely being expected to quit work when they have kids (and it being assumed that women will have kids, leading to discrimination in the workplace and limited career promotion opportunities), men still largely being expected to be salarymen who are forced to prioritize their company and social expectations at work above all else, etc.
So anime lied to me?!
Not really, but I guess it depends on which anime you’re watching.
aggretsuko is a documentary
Tokyo isn’t having population decline, its the countryside.
Ironically, Tokyo has one of the lowest fertility rates in Japan. It’s only still growing because it keeps drawing in basically all of the young people from the countryside.
Because Tokyo keeps getting immigrants from the countryside to cancel out its disastrously low birthrates.
They need to grow it a lot more, it’s not even close to The Mark of Gideon levels yet (aside from some trains during peak hours), so they have a lot of work to do! Correction, Worf doesn’t consider that work.
Tokyo has more people than LA? That’s surprising.
The Greater Tokyo area has a population of 38.1mil, California has a population of 39.3mil.
Why do we count the wider metro area? Is that not like counting the wider bay area for san francisco’s population? Looks like about 14 million in tokyo city proper. That’s like NYC (uh never mind I guess its 8.5 million)
How to define a city is a huge thing, and there’s actually a laundry list of different techniques geographers can use.
It’s a concentration of people, but settlement patterns vary, and the way they’re politically organised or locally referred to varies even more.
What does it matter where we draw arbitrary lines? If we take Tampa Bay by its city limits, it’s a little town of no importance. Does that make sense though?
You have clearly never seen Tokyo. It is excessively populated.
tokyo is not
excessivelypopulated. heavily populated, yes, but it handles its size very very well
But does California taste better than my cock and balls? Not really
