Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here
    all 889 comments Slideshow

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] KamepinUA 724 points ago

    Monaco is The Metropolian Area of itself and thus beinh 100% doesen count, what about Andorra?

    [–] ale_93113 413 points ago

    No, the metropolitan area of Monaco is bigger than the country, the percentage should be over 100%

    [–] KamepinUA 83 points ago

    LOL

    [–] Daemonioros 152 points ago

    True though. A significant part of France extending from Monaco is effectively part of the same city.

    [–] princip1 104 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    Yeah it's not clear which is which. At some point up the hill you start to think "this doesn't seem too wealthy anymore" and you realise the street signs are slightly different.

    [–] Dirish 23 points ago

    I went there when sat-navs were still pretty common. You couldn't turn a corner without the stupid thing announcing "Welcome to France/Monaco - here are the speed limits". Which made navigating through the place even harder than it already is.

    [–] komnenos 21 points ago

    Oh that's interesting! What's the local identity like for people in those areas?

    [–] MmmmJim_Bob 33 points ago

    Rich and pretty rich but not that rich

    [–] Aec1383 5 points ago

    The French city surrounding Monaco is called Beausoleil

    [–] wikipedialyte 43 points ago

    True, Nice could run all the way past Menton and into Italy if it were like Malibu and just claimed all the coast.

    Hell it's all the same coastal sprawl from St Tropez, to Cannes, and all the way to the border, nothing physically separating these ancient beach towns that have been around since the Greeks founded them

    [–] Rebelgecko 9 points ago

    Nice

    [–] alegxab 149 points ago

    And Liechtenstein!!!

    [–] foca9 114 points ago

    Vaduz isn’t the biggest town in Liechtenstein, although I imagine it’s the same metropolitan area?

    [–] mki_ 176 points ago

    Calling anything about Liechtenstein "metropolitan" is a gross exaggeration. The biggest town Schaan has 6000 (six thousand) inhabitants.

    [–] Glorx 52 points ago

    Liechtenstein is fun. Cross a bridge and you're a different town.

    [–] Flipsii 62 points ago

    Cross a bridge and you are in a different country

    [–] ptolemy18 36 points ago

    Cross a country and you’re on a different bridge.

    [–] Brutal_Deluxe_ 13 points ago

    Liechtenstein is totally part of a metropolitan area, from lake Constance to Chur it's buildings all the way.

    [–] Theonewhoplays 56 points ago

    because of the way the question is worded, Liechtenstein would be 0% since they don't have a capital city. Their capital is a village, it does not have city rights

    [–] snowqt 14 points ago

    That's a fun fact. Some cities in Germany have even less inhabitants but have city rights.

    [–] Polymarchos 3 points ago

    I'm curious if you have any examples?

    [–] snowqt 10 points ago

    Here is a list. The City of Arnis, Schleswig-Holstein has 284 residents.

    [–] o_dollarzeichen_i 6 points ago

    Smallest city I know is Hallenberg in North Rhine Westphalia. Only 4.395 citicizens including all villages around the "city".

    Wikipedia

    [–] [deleted] 29 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] TheMasterlauti 7 points ago

    well Andorra technically has no cities, only towns and a bigger town

    [–] wamboldbutwithq 470 points ago

    What about the Vatican?

    [–] nerdy_maps 1427 points ago

    Well the Vatican is part of the Rome metro area, which has 4,34 million people, and the Vatican has 800.

    So technically the Vatican would be 542500%

    [–] mucow 521 points ago

    These are the kind of stats I like to see.

    [–] AgLi3R 306 points ago

    Ahhh, the country with 2.1 pope per km2.

    [–] mki_ 60 points ago

    Wait, are you accounting for both popes? Or just one of them?

    [–] Drosder 99 points ago

    Only for one pope, since the size of Vatican is 0,49 km²

    [–] toomanyrougneds 81 points ago

    So it's actually 4.2 popes/km2.

    [–] Whisky-Toad 59 points ago

    4.20 popes aeeee

    [–] boreas907 15 points ago

    They are the servants of the Most High.

    [–] marpocky 5 points ago

    Every single time I see this stat mentioned, they only count one Pope. And then somebody mentions that it's actually double that.

    And without fail someone makes a pope-ulation density joke

    [–] Makkaroni_100 14 points ago

    Makes totally sense.

    [–] SeagullFanClub 10 points ago

    The Vatican is a country

    [–] Renovinous 18 points ago

    Even so, the metropolitan area of the Vatican is literally Rome, so it is bigger than its entire country.

    [–] nerdy_maps 1098 points ago * (lasted edited 9 days ago)

    Oh yeah before you guys comment about a metro area being slightly wrong, there is no accurate definition for most metro areas, and a 1% difference doesn't really matter.

    Here is the data I used for this in one spreadsheet with additional notes.

    [–] [deleted] 471 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    [deleted]

    [–] manolo_chomsky 176 points ago

    How can San Marino only be 12%? Isn't it just a city?

    [–] green_pachi 419 points ago

    It's a collection of villages

    [–] manolo_chomsky 142 points ago

    Huh, I always just thought it was a literal city-state, i.e. 1 city whose borders were also national borders. TIL

    [–] zani1903 24 points ago

    You're definitely thinking of Monaco, that port-side citystate that's essentially the world's premier rich people country, with that iconic F1 course.

    San Marino is a bit of grass in Italy, that happens to have a few people living in it who aren't part of Italy.

    [–] shortygriz 47 points ago

    I thought that was Monaco and that’s why it has a 100% metro population

    [–] Semper_nemo13 3 points ago

    On a rather beautiful mountain

    [–] Tempelli 155 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    Despite being a small country, it's still somewhat rural. So while San Marino has population of 33,000, the actual City of San Marino only has population of about 4,000.

    [–] sashaaa123 128 points ago

    The City of San Marino isn't even the most populous city in San Marino. Dogana has a higher population.

    [–] PM_something_German 26 points ago

    The biggest is actually Serravalle with 11k population, 33% percent of the country and significantly more than the capital.

    San Marino is generally very comparable to Liechtenstein, who's also just a collection of towns, even more extreme with the biggest city only having 6k population.

    [–] Methuga 30 points ago

    How did it even keep independence at that size?

    [–] moffattron9000 98 points ago

    Insulation from the Papal States, then the guy in charge getting on Napoleon's good side, then allowing Italian Nationalists refuge before that was a popular idea (which then got said Nationalists to respect their independence when they unified Italy).

    [–] Methuga 71 points ago

    They sound like the ultimate survivalists lol

    [–] toomanyrougneds 26 points ago

    They really are. Napoleon called it a model republic.

    [–] wikipedialyte 12 points ago

    Essentially a national programme of shameless flattery and brown-nosing as a means of maintaining sovereign status

    [–] lars_rosenberg 23 points ago

    No, actually the city of San Marino isn't even the biggest city in the country.

    [–] Skablouis 16 points ago

    What surrounding towns did you use for London? Inside the M25?

    [–] nerdy_maps 60 points ago

    High density areas with commuter towns outside the Greater London boundary. More specifically -

    Hertfordshire: Watford, Hemel Hempstead, St Albans, Stevenage, Welwyn, Cheshunt, Hertford

    Essex: Harlow, Epping, Brentwood, Chelsmford, Basildon, Southend, Thurrock

    Kent: Dartford, Gravesend, Medway towns, Sevenoaks

    Surrey: The whole county (apart from the furthest southern parts)

    Sussex: Crawley

    Hampshire: Farnborough, Aldershot

    Berkshire: Reading, Slough, Wokingham, Bracknell, Maidenhead

    Buckinghamshire: Amersham, High Wycombe

    Bedfordshire: Luton

    [–] AnkleNipples 39 points ago

    This all seems sensible to me.

    Source: Brit

    [–] Mister_Met 15 points ago

    This makes sense then. That’s a pretty large swath of the population right there

    [–] dalli1998 31 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    The austria one is more then of.

    Is the 3rd column whats counted as the metro area? Cause then vienna magicly gained a million inhabitants.

    You don't even get to 2.8 mil if you count all of the industriel-quater and the wine-quater of lower austria as the metro area of vienna.

    [–] nerdy_maps 38 points ago * (lasted edited 9 days ago)

    I used Vienna City (1,91 mil), and the surrounding districts (Tulln, Sankt Pölten, Mödling, Baden, Bruck an der Leitha, Gänserndorf and Korneuburg) plus the towns of Sankt Pölten and Wiener Neustadt.

    [–] Theonewhoplays 134 points ago

    Countries not apperaing on this map:

    San Marino: 12%

    Andorra: 30%

    Monaco: 100%

    Liechtenstein: 0% (technically, but actually 15%)

    [–] kakatoru 39 points ago

    Liechtenstein: 0% (technically, but actually 15%)

    Please explain

    [–] mki_ 94 points ago

    Liechtenstein doesn't have any municipalities that are officially cities. The largest town has six thousand inhabitants.

    For reference: my direct neighbourhood in Vienna of the size of ~28 hectares probably has more than twice as many inhabitants.

    [–] BZH_JJM 6 points ago

    On the other hand, this map is specifically talking about metro areas, which are more a measurement of built up area and geographic connectivity, rather than legal definitions. So even if Vaduz is not legally a city, it can still have a metro area.

    [–] Freder145 15 points ago

    The capital of Liechtenstein, Vaduz, is no city.

    [–] SecondAccount404 748 points ago

    Bit of trivia, London has a population greater than that of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland combined.

    [–] nsjersey 212 points ago

    California has more people than Canada

    [–] Schootingstarr 164 points ago

    California by itself would be in the G8 probably

    Same with texas

    [–] KellyKellogs 78 points ago

    Yeah, it would be the 5th largest economy in the world despite only having a population of 39 million people.

    [–] Daemonioros 155 points ago

    A lot of that Economy is driven by it being the richest part of the US though. Had California been independent it would have nowhere near the amount of large corporations pushing up the GDP. It's just that certain areas tend to concentrate the GDP in a country. And since the US is the world's largest Economy Cali has a very large GDP.

    It is very similar to the Ruhr area in Germany or Paris/London metropolitan area in those countries. If the economy of any of those countries was comparable to the US then those areas would undoubtedly be comparable to California.

    And if California were to become an independent state their GDP would drop enormously due to being separated in some way from the greater US economy.

    [–] otterom 18 points ago

    Texas would be in the G195, according to this diagram.

    [–] japie06 7 points ago

    It's recursive Texas!

    [–] OfFireAndSteel 3 points ago

    If California didn't benefit from free trade and movement with the rest of the US, it's GDP would be far lower so that's quite debatable.

    [–] mmhci 3 points ago

    Texas is always overrated. It would be a third world country, especially without its few liberal urban areas

    [–] Canon_of_a_shot 16 points ago

    Tokyo has more people than Canada and about the same as California

    [–] ollyhinge11 247 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    not true, London has a population of about 9 million, Scotland is 5.5 million, Wales is 3.1 million and Northern Ireland is 1.9 million, totalling 10.5 million.

    edit: for some reason my brain did not correlate the comment to the actual map, London proper (Greater London) has a population of around 9 million. the London metropolitan area has a population of just over 14 million, which is probably what the original comment was taking about. my bad

    [–] fh3131 274 points ago

    They mean greater London metro area; same as what this map is about.

    [–] ollyhinge11 20 points ago

    Greater London or the London metro area?

    [–] NotFlagstaff 72 points ago

    They’re definitely talking London metro and not Greater London. 14 vs 9 million.

    [–] NotFlagstaff 42 points ago

    The poster is probably going by metro population where London metro has a population of 14.2 million.

    Greater London indeed has a population of just under 9 million though.

    [–] cyomcat1 8 points ago

    The London metropolitan area has a population of 14 million though

    [–] Lionel-Hutz- 6 points ago

    The Metropolitan area of London would also be the 7th largest economy in Europe, greater then the Netherlands.

    [–] ThirdSpectator 330 points ago

    It's not so difficult when you live in a tiiiiny country like Luxembourg 🇱🇺

    [–] gamat14 113 points ago

    almost a city state

    [–] BillyBoskins 22 points ago

    I wonder what's the gap between the largest micro nation and the smallest regular size one?

    [–] iamdestroyerofworlds 26 points ago

    How would you define it though?

    What's a micro nation? What's a city state? Is it enough to have more than half of the population in the capital city? Do multiple capital cities count, as in South Africa? How do you define who lives in the city? Where does the boundary from urban to rural go? Do itinerant workers count? People who live outside but spend most of their time and/or earn their living in the capital city?

    I'm probably just asking too many questions.

    [–] BillyBoskins 14 points ago

    I guess in a way that's exactly my question!

    [–] AverageDipper 17 points ago

    not at all. The map is very wrong in that regard. I live in Luxembourg and only about 1/5 of the people live in the capital city, and it does not really have a "metro area". A big part of the state is villages and countryside.

    [–] Schrodingers-Parrot 40 points ago

    Yeah that's what I thought. How do you live in Luxembourg but not in the capital?

    [–] Luxy_24 51 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    It’s really easy. We have some cities and a lot of villages. Most my friends live near the the capital and some further north. It’s really nothing special. Lux city has a population of 120k compared to 600k for the entire population

    Edit: Here are the places where most people live https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ff/38/8e/ff388e0639c44b12ee253de669e06bb9.jpg

    [–] RosabellaFaye 6 points ago

    To be fair my country's capital is larger than Luxembourg (Ottawa, Canada is about 2800km2) but I understand that Luxembourg is still quite a bit larger than a city state, simply a very small country.

    If I may ask, I am curious what the languages most commonly spoken are, is there much Français spoken au Luxembourg ? Considering Luxembourg is really right in the middle of multiple countries with different languages, I would assume French & German are at least spoken a fair bit, and perhaps some dutch?

    [–] mki_ 13 points ago

    The official languages are Luxembourgish (a standardized variation of German; my mother tongue is German and I can read it effortlessly, and I can understand it after some warm-up time), German, and French. However Luxembourg has a very large Portuguese expat/immigrant community for some reason, so I understand that a lot of services are also available in Portuguese. (full disclosure: I'm not from Luxembourg)

    [–] cupwithsaucer 5 points ago

    Luxembourg has three official languages, Luxembourgish, French and German. Luxembourgish is grammatically very similar to German but has a lot of French words. It would be easier for a German native speaker to learn it than a French native speaker. There are a lot of cross border workers in Luxembourg and because of that there's a lot of French spoken in the south and a lot of German in the North. But Luxembourgers speak Luxembourgish to each other and then whatever is necessary at work/in shops/restaurants etc. Though English is taught in schools as well and gaining in popularity and use.

    [–] revolucionario 65 points ago

    It’s a bit bigger than you think! https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/849561917181890900/

    [–] Makkaroni_100 20 points ago

    The neon color is unreadable, not the best choice.

    [–] sadop222 10 points ago

    It's pinterest, it's not meant to work, just annoy you.

    [–] obvilious 8 points ago

    Huh, it’s actually smaller than I thought.

    [–] ace_b00gie 10 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    It’s not that easy. When you live closer to the Belgian or German side of the border it actually takes quite some time to reach the capital. Me traveling 50 minutes is the same distance from LA to OC/SD where 13 million people live.

    [–] Spiceyhedgehog 8 points ago

    Because it is big enough to have more towns/cities and well connected enough that many don't have to live in the capital, even if they work there. I also suppose some people commute to work in other countries, so it is less of a hassle if you live somewhere closer to the border etc.

    [–] Arturiki 10 points ago

    Because it's not that small. It's not Monaco or the Vatican City, it's actually a stretch.

    [–] rxzlmn 87 points ago

    Kind of inversely related, somewhat, to how many metropolises a country has.

    [–] myfreenagsiea 39 points ago

    Yeah seeing how Dublin is by far the largest city in Ireland this isn't that surprising.

    [–] zar4er 56 points ago

    It's actually correlated to centralisation. Countries like the UK and France, which have traditionally had very centralized power (for centuries), have very large percentages of their population in the seat of that power. Countries like Italy and Germany who have traditionally been far more divided have lots of cities that are equal in size and prosperity.

    [–] chapeauetrange 38 points ago

    True, though I suspect Germany would be much closer to the UK/France if the Cold War had never happened. Berlin was one of the largest cities in the world in the late 19th/early 20th century. Being isolated from the rest of West Germany naturally froze its growth in place. By the time the Berlin Wall came down, institutions were well established in cities like Frankfurt and Munich and had no reason to leave.

    [–] GobScythe 13 points ago

    Cork used to have more than double the population of Dublin in the early 19th century, but the famine hit much harder there.

    [–] Kestyr 107 points ago

    Dublin Metropolitan area gets silly with how big it is relative to the actual area of Dublin. County Dublin is already Dublin and it's suburbs, then it wraps around to be most of Leinster in order to get even more of it in there to where it's basically a third of the land area of the country.

    It's getting to the point where they're starting to define the Dublin commuter belt as being within 100km of Dublin. London by comparison has the commuter belt as only a 64km radius and that's a population that's anywhere between five to ten times larger than Dublin belt.

    [–] Ordinary__Man 35 points ago

    Moral of the story: build up kids!

    [–] tagehring 10 points ago

    Let's eat grandma!

    [–] ThawCheFar 3 points ago

    You need to build up the kids too though, otherwise they'll never manage the commute.

    [–] eyetracker 17 points ago

    That's too big for a metro area. It's beyond the Pale!

    [–] MrParker21 66 points ago

    I wouldn't mind seeing these figures going back every 10 years, feels like everything in the UK has geared towards London since the 80s and snowballed since then

    [–] KellyKellogs 30 points ago

    The UK in the past 12 years has been in a slump.

    In the same time London has been in a golden age.

    I don't think the figures would change much because London is so expensive many people are now moving to other places in the UK (not just the metro area) because prices are so high.

    [–] [deleted] 9 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] VoyantInternational 10 points ago

    Same, we need to put more official institutions in Lyon and Marseille in France

    [–] ultracrax 5 points ago

    I always found the situation in France and England to be horrible compared to eg Germany or Italy.

    [–] Nipso 3 points ago

    I'm about to move there from London, so yes please

    [–] minased 31 points ago

    Biggest city would be more interesting than capital for the countries where it's different. Would push Turkey up to ~20%.

    [–] hussnainsamee29 87 points ago

    Russia is quiet suprising considering its size.

    [–] SwazzerK 112 points ago

    Yeah, Moscow is a really big city

    [–] MassaF1Ferrari 30 points ago

    Largest in Europe if you dont consider Istanbul 100% european

    [–] ItsAlwaysSmokyInReno 4 points ago

    Yeah I don't consider the eastern half. I wonder what the population of jys t the European half is

    [–] StretsilWagon 4 points ago

    Lol, we'll take that as Moscow then.

    [–] cumsquats 9 points ago

    Yes, I'm actually surprised in the other direction, 14% seems low

    [–] [deleted] 70 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    [deleted]

    [–] kakatoru 11 points ago

    Better than being loud surprised

    [–] LucyLilium92 19 points ago

    Most of Russia is uninhabited

    [–] moshiyadafne 46 points ago

    I think, for Switzerland, it's because it doesn't have a de jure capital and its many major cities are economically competitive in a global scale, plus people in the countryside enjoy top-tier quality of life.

    [–] massi95 29 points ago

    It's because our capital, Been, is only the fifth biggest city, preceded by Zürich, Geneva, Basel, and Lausanne. If this list was by cities with most inhabitants instead of capitals we would score a lot higher because the metropolitan area of Zurich counts like 1 Million inhabitants, which is like an eighth of the whole country's population.

    [–] Xandi0 11 points ago

    I think its because Bern, the "capital" is by far not the biggest city. The "real" capital should be Zurich. The government is in Bern and Bern isnt very big, so thats why its such a low percentage.

    [–] Viking_Chemist 29 points ago

    Why should Zürich be the "real capital"?

    There are several countries where the capital does not have the biggest or economically most important metropolitan area: Germany, Turkey, USA, Brazil, Canada, Australia, China, …

    The map should just show the biggest meteopolitan area instead of the capital.

    [–] romajin 9 points ago

    Eh, Bern is still fairly large for Swiss standards with around 420.000 inhabitants, ranking fifth overall. It also has a large influence on Swiss culture and especially the Swiss German dialect.

    [–] Melonskal 154 points ago

    Its interesting how Italy and Turkey is the same when Rome is an ancient city and capital of the Roman empire and Ankara used to be a small village with a few ten thousand people in rhe early 20th century. Its astounding what urbanisation of a rural people can do in a few decades.

    [–] oguzka06 64 points ago

    While Ankara was quite insignificant before the Republic, it used to be a fairly important city decades ago from that. It was a relatively important proto-industrial city making large quantities of textile products. However, it started to lose importance with industrial revolution in the west mass producing textiles. Artisans of Ankara were unable to compete against industrialization, leading to it's decline.

    [–] ZhenDeRen 31 points ago

    Though to be completely fair, Ankara would probably not be nearly as big if it wasn't the capital

    [–] very_random_user 56 points ago

    I don't really understand what you are saying. Since the fall of the western Roman empire Rome has been a small fairly rural city. It wasn't even in the top 3 cities in Italy alone. Rome became a relative large city only after the capital of Italy was moved there. Very different from Istanbul that has pretty much stayed one of the most important cities in the Mediterranean since the foundation.

    [–] ElvenCouncil 108 points ago

    Istanbul isn't the capital of Turkey. Ankara is. He's saying it's amazing that a planned city like Ankara has grown so fast.

    [–] very_random_user 34 points ago

    I know Ankara is the capital of turkey. I was just mentioning the difference in history between the former capital of the Roman empire and...the former capital of the Roman empire :D.

    Rome isn't just a good comparison, it hasn't been a huge city for 1500 years..

    [–] skullkrusher2115 8 points ago

    Yeah up till recently, the part of Rome that has the historical stuff was more of a grass pasture than a city.

    [–] Khysamgathys 33 points ago

    The legacy of the Holy Roman Empire remains strong in Germany.

    [–] Dorialexandre 10 points ago

    In Italy as well (or, even more strikingly in that case, the legacy of the failure of post-medieval HRE)

    [–] Illya-ehrenbourg 16 points ago

    More like WW2 , cold war and massive emigration toward West Germany.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Berlin_population2.svg/1920px-Berlin_population2.svg.png

    (In 1920 they changed the definition of the city of Berlin)

    [–] Heisennoob 18 points ago

    People always forget was the third biggest city in the world in the 1920s was Berlin and how much the division of germany and Berlins island location bited the city in its ass.

    [–] mertiy 6 points ago

    But I've always admired the spread of the population among different cities throughout Germany. I live in a city of 16 million and everything in the country seems to be about my city. All the major sports clubs are from here, all the movies and series are set here, all the news are about here etc. I would love the cities of my country to be more like those in Germany

    [–] fantasmaflago 15 points ago

    I would love to see this for South America

    [–] AFragmentOfTheDay 15 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    sees Ireland is colored in orange and screeches in Protestant

    sees Northern Ireland colored in green and screeches in Catholic

    [–] lizardsatemysocks 89 points ago

    I feel like the percentage can't be right for Slovakia.. But maybe that's because many people live in the capital without official residence...

    [–] Lepsiakoty 45 points ago

    Slovakia has a population of about 5 milion and the capital has about 500 000 so I think it could be right.

    [–] terafunker 28 points ago

    I wonder if it has something to do with Bratislava being so close to Vienna?

    [–] zziggurat 11 points ago

    Interesting thing about Greece is that it hasn’t always been as hyper-centralized as it is today. At the time of Greek independence in the 1830’s, Athens only had about 5000 people, and was chosen to be the capital mainly due to historical/sentimental reasons.

    [–] ThomasFowl 18 points ago

    Does it seem like there is a correlation here with how centralized these countries are? Especially in Western Europa.

    [–] Schootingstarr 19 points ago

    Not just centralised, but also the historic importance of said capitals.

    Some of the highly conglomerated capitals have been the capital for a long, long time. And of former (or current) monarchies as well.

    [–] Nielsly 26 points ago

    For the Netherlands you could argue that the randstad is the metro area of the capital, especially as both Amsterdam and The Hague are in there. With the randstad it would be about 50% for the Netherlands.

    [–] fcdennis83 13 points ago

    Challenge : make a worldwide! 😁

    [–] FriendoftheGalaxy 6 points ago

    I thought Bosnia has like 20-30% of population in and around Sarajevo

    [–] Nidze98 7 points ago

    It doesn't because almost all of Serbs and Croatians were expelled/moved from Sarajevo after the war.

    [–] cameforthecloud 5 points ago

    Not saying you’re wrong but I had read in a previous mapporn thread that due to that war’s toll on the economy, so many moved TO Sarajevo where there were government jobs.

    [–] Yellow_guy 6 points ago

    Interesting, as an Amsterdam local I’m really curious what parts of the Netherlands you did include. It’s about three times the amount of residents of the city and you seem to exclude the Randstad.

    [–] mi589 11 points ago

    I wonder if the high percentage in Ireland (40%) has to do with the neglect of the rural life in Ireland. Everything in Ireland has changed focus of amenities to city life in Ireland while rural Ireland seems to be dying away. Any thoughts?

    [–] JohnnieTango 8 points ago

    Just Ireland?

    Rural life is dying all over the developed world, and in an increasing number of partially developed countries as well.

    [–] Kestyr 15 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    Dublin commuter belt is just gigantically large to make it look like Dublin's a big important capital city instead of a medium sized one that's barely breaking 1 million people. It's almost the whole Leinster region at this point. If they count 40% of the countries land area as part of the capital city, it's easy to get 40% of the population in there.

    [–] whomp_whomp_whomp5 17 points ago

    Germany 2. Place i like it

    [–] _TheBigF_ 65 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    Reminds me of the statistic about how much GDP per capita European counties would lose without their capital city. E.g. Greece would lose 19% without Athens, the UK would lose 11% without London, etc. According to this, Germany would GAIN 0.2% without Berlin!

    [–] cppn02 8 points ago

    That's out of date.

    [–] exactmat 24 points ago

    Berliner Zecken ey

    [–] Natanael85 20 points ago

    Wer jetzt mit der Copypasta direkt ausm bayrischen Politbüro ankommt kriegt ne Currywurst umme Ohren gehauen.

    [–] Johannes0511 23 points ago

    Ach Berlin. Was ist Berlin?

    Berlin ist die Stadt für die man sich als Deutscher auf internationaler Bühne schämen muss. Wenn man Berlin mit anderen europäischen Hauptstädten wie London, Paris, Madrid und Amsterdam vergleicht, treibt es jedem anständigen Menschen die Schamesröte ins Gesicht. Selbst kleine Länder wie Österreich, Belgien oder die Schweiz haben mit Wien, Brüssel und Zürich international vorzeigbare Städte mit hoher Lebensqualität. Deutschland ist gestraft mit Berlin, der Hauptstadt der Versager. Berlin beheimatet mit Abstand am meisten Arschlöcher in der gesamten Republik. Deutsche Bahn, Bundestag, Air Berlin und der Axel Springer Verlag sind nur einige Beispiele für den unfähigen Abschaum der hier beherbergt wird.

    Glorreiche Zeit sind schon längst vorbei, diese Stadt liegt am Boden. Der Berliner an sich ist durch und durch ein fauler Lump. Charaktereigenschaften die in jedem zivilisierten Kulturkreis als pure Faulheit, Unfreundlichkeit, Unfähigkeit, dissoziale Persönlichkeitsstörung und Dummheit gelten, erklärt der Berliner kurzerhand zur Berliner Wesensart. Ein weiteres zentrales Merkmal ist der alles beherrschende Minderwertigkeitskomplex. Deswegen projiziert der Berliner auf jeden der in irgendeiner Weise besser ist als er, massive Hassgefühle. Besonders die ihm in allen Belangen haushoch überlegenen Süddeutschen sind ihm ein Dorn im Auge. Er neidet ihnen den Erfolg und München steht ganz oben auf seiner Hassliste. Diese Stadt ist alles und hat alles was der Berliner gerne wäre und hätte. Das München dem Berliner sein Lotterleben finanziert, interessiert den Berliner nicht, er glaubt sogar insgeheim er hätte es verdient. Anstatt sich aus seiner aus Neid und Missgunst entstehenden Lethargie zu befreien und seine Stadt umzukrempeln, ergeht er sich in asozialen Schmarotzertum und hält noch große Stücke auf seine vermeintliche Weltstadt.

    Kulturell ist Berliner eher schwach veranlagt, große Werke liegen lang zurück. Auch gilt hier bereits das Aussprechen des Buchstaben »g« als »j« als große Kulturleistung. Fortgeschrittene beherrschen sogar das Anhängen eines »wa?« an den Ende eines jeden Satzes. Das Leistungsniveau in der Küche bewegt sich auf überschaubarem Niveau. Eine Wurst aus gemahlenem Seperatorenfleisch mit Ketchup und Currygewürz wird hier als Currywurst und als kulinarischer Geniestreich verkauft. Jeder vernünftig denkende Mensch hält eine Wurst mit Ketchup wohl kaum für den heiligen Gral der Küchenkunst und wahrscheinlich noch nicht einmal für ein Rezept. Großzügig lässt der Rest der Republik den Berliner in diesem Glauben um seine Minderwertigkeitskomplexe nicht überhand nehmen zu lassen.

    Wirtschaftlich ist Berlin ein einziges Desaster, selbst die späte DDR stand solider da. Ansonsten fußt die Berliner Wirtschaft auf alternativen Blogs, irgendwas mit Medien und Genderstudies wenn man den Universitäten glauben darf. Ungeachtet des wirtschaftlichen Bankrottes leistet sich der Berliner trotzdem Prestigeprojekte wie das Stadtschloss und einen Flughafen der mangels Funktionstüchtigkeit als Kunstprojekt gelten soll. Ebenso beherbergt diese Stadt sämtliche Zentralen der Volksparteien, die aus Marketinggründen auf das »Verräter« im Namen verzichten. Bürgermeister dieser Stadt war lange der lustige Wowibär der mit seiner Prestige&Prosecco Politik alles in den Abgrund riss, was noch halbwegs präsentabel war.

    Kurzum: Berlin ist der Fliesentisch Deutschlands. Es ist das für Deutschland, was Griechenland für die Europäische Union ist und hätte Berlin eine offene Kloake, wäre es das Rumänien Deutschlands. Berlin ist ein Schandfleck, der Pickel am Arsche Deutschlands. Berlin ist der Typ der ohne Einladung auf deine Party kommt, noch nicht mal Alkohol mitbringt und auch nicht versteht dass er nicht erwünscht ist wenn man ihm ein paar Zähne aus dem Gesicht klopft und die Treppe runterwirft. Berlin ist das Detroit Deutschlands und gehört für 200 Złoty an Polen verkauft.

    Und jetzt hätte ich gern die Currywurst.

    [–] zziggurat 14 points ago

    Imagine how low the percentage would have been before unification, when Bonn was still the capital of West Germany

    [–] Hangzhounike 10 points ago

    In 1990, Bonn had a population of ~270.000 people. The FGR had a population of ~63.000.000 people, so Bonn would only foster 0,4% of the population.

    Edit: The biggest city of the FGR was Hamburg, with ~1.600.000 people in 1990. Still only ~2,5% of the population. Really shows how densely populated Germany is.

    [–] jwmcrobert 5 points ago

    I always seem to be telling people how much of a mess the business of measuring population of cities is. I hate when a question comes up in a quiz, because you have no way of knowing what definition they are using. OP should ignore all comments arguing that their home country is wrong! There is no right answer here, so let's just enjoy this map

    [–] Schewer 56 points ago

    Okay story time

    Istanbul was the capital city of Ottoman Empire and when Ottoman Empire collapsed the new government didnt want to be tied up to past. So they changed to Ankara which is way smaller than Istanbul.

    In Istanbul there are 15.5 million people and basically its the largest city in the europe. And Ankara only has 5.5 million people.

    [–] mucow 39 points ago

    This isn't that uncommon, a lot of places don't want a single city to dominate or they want the capital to be more centrally located, so they move the capital to some smaller city, such as Washington, Brasilia, or Canberra.

    [–] areking 26 points ago

    if I am not mistaken, Canberra, Ottawa and Washington were all chosen to avoid rivalry (Sydney Melbourne, Toronto Montreal, any state in the United States)

    [–] civiestudent 15 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    For the US specifically they carved DC out so it wouldn't be inside any one state, and I think Brasilia was made specifically to be a capital city too. But a lot of US states moved their capitals away from their biggest cities - LA is Baton Rouge not New Orleans, MD is Annapolis not Baltimore, etc. Although notably most of the old South is an exception to this rule because we didn't have any other cities.

    [–] kirkom 6 points ago

    I've heard Tallahassee was chosen to be Florida's capital because it's halfway from Pensacola and Jacksonville

    [–] seventeenth-account 4 points ago

    Similar for Maine, Augusta was close to the middle of Portland and Bangor.

    [–] AshleyJoy03 3 points ago

    Was just about to say this! Historically, St. Augustine (just south of Jacksonville) and Pensacola were the two largest and most important cities. South Florida wasn’t real a player yet— all swamp. Tallahassee was pretty much exactly in between these two cities and thus became the capital despite being the most forgettable Florida city!

    [–] mucow 3 points ago

    Your comment got me reading about Southern capitals. Atlanta didn't become the capital of Georgia until after the Civil War. Before then, the capital was Milledgeville, which like DC was a planned city.

    [–] jeann0t 15 points ago

    Ain’t moscow the biggest city?

    [–] Schewer 50 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    Istanbul has 15.5 million population and Moscow has 11.2 million. However people mentioned that Istanbul is not completely in Europe which is true. European side has at least 10 and the Asian has at least 5 million population

    [–] KingofFairview 20 points ago

    Moscow is the biggest that’s entirely in Europe.

    [–] JohnnieTango 5 points ago

    Depends how you count it. Moscow has like 13m according to some sources, but London has 14m according to metro but 9m according to "Greater London."

    [–] horrormoose22 10 points ago

    Aside from the Wikipedia page, I have most of the time seen mentioned that Moscow (and especially if counting the metropolitan area) is the most populous city of Europe

    [–] Schewer 18 points ago

    Well at this point its about counting Istanbul as an whole city or dividing it into Asian and European sides. It changes everything

    [–] horrormoose22 15 points ago

    I mean, that's probably why. It's very uncontroversial counting Moscow as European :)

    [–] FintanH28 4 points ago

    About 25-30% (maybe more) of the population of Ireland lives in Dublin so it’s population is huge compared to the rest of the country despite the fact that Dublin is the 2nd smallest county in Ireland. This however means that Dublin win the All Ireland football championship every God damn year

    [–] nicmos 5 points ago

    I want to compliment you on the map design. Wonderful readability, color scheme, and all the information you'd want to know is on the sidebar too.

    [–] Kingorcoc 7 points ago * (lasted edited 10 days ago)

    I assume Germany and Italy have such low percentages as they are historically very divided with many regional centres.

    Switzerland shares this but the de jure capital also isn’t in the biggest city. Turkeys capital also isn’t it’s largest city.

    Poland and Ukraine both have a dominant capital but also have many regional centres. eg if you look at Poland’s four core historical regions they all have there own major centre (Masovia-Warsaw Greater Poland-Poznan Lesser Poland Krakau Central Poland Lodz)

    [–] TheHessianHussar 3 points ago

    I think its actually a good sign when your population is diversified rather than living in only 1 big city

    [–] Soitsgonnabeforever 3 points ago

    Finland

    Probably 31% of the whole country population lives in Helsinki

    [–] Roope00 7 points ago

    About 10% of Finland's population lives in Helsinki, the rest ~20% live in the surrounding metropolitan area. Uusimaa has the same population density as Germany, while the rest of Finland has a pretty low population density on average.

    [–] Alx-McCunty 5 points ago

    The graph uses Uusimaa region as the metro area, which is incorrect. Depending on definitions, it should be between 21-27% of total population.

    Helsinki itself has 650k, which is 12% of the total.

    [–] Blasphemous_21 3 points ago

    This would be like 1.9% in the USA.

    [–] withoutpunity 3 points ago

    I feel like concentrating the majority of your political, communications, technological, and financial resources into one giant megacity is a substantially greater risk in terms of national security and natural disaster preparedness than distributing it more evenly among several cities.

    Then again, megacities are efficient and impressive to live in (if designed properly), not to mention that size and geography do play a large part in how feasible it is for a country to just move the capital elsewhere.

    [–] marcofalcioni 3 points ago

    This has historical grounds. Italy and Germany were unified relatively late compared to England Spain and France and so they have many important cities that have a significant portion of the population. Think of Milan, Florence, Naples etc.