New England

>New England
Population: 14.9 million
Area: 186,458 km2
Density: 80/km2
Largest city: Boston
GDP: $1.0 trillion (17th in the world)
Per capita: $70,000 (4th in the world)
Largest communities:
Irish: 19.2%
Italian: 13.6%
French: 13.1%
English: 11.9%

Attached: 2843128.jpg (2270x3099, 580K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=49FWp7WLYKw
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Why don't they just merge together? It would be the second richest region in the US after Cali

Nope, 4th with Florida.
Texas would stay the 2nd richest State of the USA with a GDP of $1.8 trillion, because it has many more people (29 millions).
New York would stay the 3rd richest State of the USA with a GDP of $1.6 trillion, because it has more people (20 millions) and there is the city of New York in it.
It would be as rich as Florida though with a GDP of $1.0 trillion, but Florida has many more people (21.5 millions).

bump

I unironically thought that New England also included New York, I mean it kind of makes sense...even from a geographical standpoint

With New York it would be as rich as California.

No, it's not, new York isn't considered new England, it was too far south. Also it as actually a slave state

>as
Was

Imagine if we merged with New York

Why would we give up our local control and senate seats? I live in New Hampshire and don't want to be governed by niggers in Boston.

Best area in the states to live. I am extremely bias though.

To be relevant. Your State is of the size of a Californian county.

Being relevant is a meme. I want laws that reflect my beliefs and I want to be among my own kind. What benefit do I get from being "relevant"?

Upstate might as well be part of Massachusetts.

Western Massachusetts might as well not even be part of Massachusetts

the state is basically Worcester to the east coast

>New England
>Literally full of Micks and Wops

>Old England
>Literally full of pajeets and mohameds

most of New England is pretty bad farmland so there's been a lot of population exoduses into New York and onto the midwest from there
There were rural people that moved into mill towns but the rate at which they mixed with Irish is probably quite high
which is disgusting ngl

the fuck i though new england was just the whole east coast before the lake thing they share with Canada which wasn't the south

you're thinking of the northeast
middle states aren't New England, their colonization history and makeup is quite different

most of the micks and wops and pierres are like half english by this point

It's pretty disgusting. The only solidly English place in the US is Utah.

Murritards massively overstate their 'heritage'. If their great-great-grandfather was a spud forager from Donegal they're an Irish-American. It's all very try-hard.

a lot of americans also claim to descend from natives. i've unironically heard members of my own family say that their great great grandmother was a cherokee princess

Guy living in New Hampshire who spent most of my life in central NY here.

NY can't be part of New England, the state is way too different in terms of people and businesses.

What about upstate New York?

because centralization is bad when the central nervous system gets a brain tumor like it has in europe

To people in NY, anything north of the Catskils and outside Albany is upstate NY, but if you are specifically talking about the top half of the state and Adirondacks, you could call it New England. But that area only mirrors Vermont and north New Hampshire. It doesn't have the city life that New England also represents.

>It doesn't have the city life that New England also represents.
A lot of New England is rural though

Attached: JJnyo.jpg (900x569, 178K)

Would live in.

Sure, not major cities, and you can't really call them Towns. Portsmouth NH is a great example - one of the best places to go for New England comfort.
youtube.com/watch?v=49FWp7WLYKw

I agree with you, centralization is one of the worst thing for the well being of a State.

But, merging doesn't necessarily mean Boston would dictate to you everything.

It would be a way to gather a group people from the same region, with the same history and the similar ways of thinking together. That way, you would be stronger to impose your ideas to Washington.

Despite being unfortunately a Frenchman, I'm against collectivism (yes we are not many in France, but we exist), but grouping similar people together is a necessity. The opposite would be anarchism.

It was for you

Boston and Lowell do enough damage to NH in terms of traffic. I wouldn't want them to touch anything more.

I think you mean
>”””””””””irish”””””””””””” americans
>”””””””””””italian””””””””””” americans

>cherokee princess

Attached: A427D48B-5747-48B7-8C6D-E86D166D39CE.jpg (1124x598, 105K)

>merging doesn't necessarily mean Boston would dictate to you everything.

naive as all hell

>Boston and Lowell do enough damage to NH in terms of traffic.I wouldn't want them to touch anything more.

This.

the best part is that no one in my family actually has cherokee ancestry. it's just retarded larping and attention seeking

california is better prove me wrong

Whaddup NH bros