TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why didn't Denmark sell Greenland? (2011)

68 点作者 ultrasaurus超过 7 年前

13 条评论

room271超过 7 年前
This is a very strange and unconvincing article. Greenland is massive; and, while it&#x27;s very hard to give &#x27;worth&#x27; to part of a country (and potentially misguided to attempt to do so in most cases), $2bn is pocket change for a wealthy country, and the potential upsides of owning such a vast tract of land are much bigger over time.<p>If I was offered $2b or such a large swathe of land, I know which I would take.<p>(The argument becomes crass anyway when you consider that real people live there.)
评论 #16033755 未加载
评论 #16033784 未加载
评论 #16037004 未加载
deepsun超过 7 年前
Actually, Denmark filed claims onto part of Arctic offshore oil reserves, along with Canada, Norway, Russia, USA etc, all thanks to Greenland.
评论 #16033402 未加载
dang超过 7 年前
Previous discussion at <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=10037132" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=10037132</a>.
foobarbazetc超过 7 年前
“It might be fairer to multiply every figure by 60, to get a range from $180b to $960b”... uhmmm but you can’t just multiply random numbers when you’re talking about real, actual money in a real, actual bank account.
评论 #16032916 未加载
runarberg超过 7 年前
A fun relevant fact: Denmark sold today&#x27;s U.S. Virgin Islands in 1916 for $25M ($600M today)<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Treaty_of_the_Danish_West_Indies" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Treaty_of_the_Danish_West_Indi...</a>
lokimedes超过 7 年前
An excellent example of how ridiculous applying financial thought to everything can be.<p>As a dane, having Greenland as part of the kingdom is as natural as being able to see with two eyes. It may not serve a essential function in my everyday work but it would feel as a unconditional loss to me if I gave it away for any sum. You really can’t rationalize it, but for a nation that once was the superpower of the north, Greenland as the very last reminant of the empire is not something we will give up freely. The obivious (and slightly heartbreaking) exception is to give it up to the Greenlanders themselves as is being done gradually.
评论 #16036526 未加载
Fnoord超过 7 年前
Related:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;jessicadavidson.co.uk&#x2F;2017&#x2F;11&#x2F;13&#x2F;research-notes-greenland-sirius-patrol&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;jessicadavidson.co.uk&#x2F;2017&#x2F;11&#x2F;13&#x2F;research-notes-gree...</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Sirius_Dog_Sled_Patrol" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Sirius_Dog_Sled_Patrol</a><p>I read a good article about this subject [of these patrols] in a local mag around 2014. The point being, that Denmark puts money and effort into protecting Greenland.
hackbinary超过 7 年前
Inflation is not the only way to calculate the relative &#x27;cost&#x27; of Greenland. I think a more accurate perspective would be calculate the offer in terms (a percentage) of GDP.<p>American GDP in 1946 was $228M [1] (in 1940 it was $100M). The USA essentially offered half of their GDP for Greenland.<p>American GDP in 2016 was $18,625M.<p>So in relative terms, the Americans offered roughly $9Trillion.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.thebalance.com&#x2F;us-gdp-by-year-3305543" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.thebalance.com&#x2F;us-gdp-by-year-3305543</a>
评论 #16037030 未加载
评论 #16043065 未加载
pipio21超过 7 年前
Denmark uses Greenland for fishing, it is really important for them for eating. This is basic strategic decision. Food is a priority over anything else.<p>To only talk in dollars is ridiculous. You know how much it cost food when you don&#x27;t have it, like in a war? infinite. My grandfather paid a fortune in order to survive during the escape from a totalitarian country.<p>What was portrayed in the West as &quot;Arab Spring&quot;, &quot;fighting for freedom&quot; was in reality people that could not buy food because it became too expensive. Prices for food went to double or triple within months as some rich bastards had stockpiled all rice and cereal surplus in to world knowing well the situation in the north of Africa months before the conflict became visible.<p>That is what happens when your country leaders could not warranty your basic needs.<p>Another thing, Greenland is part of Europe, which is industrialized and needs raw materials. Selling to the US would have meant making Europe even smaller and weaker, and making the US even stronger.<p>In Geoplolitics you don&#x27;t want to make other countries so powerful that they could basically enslave you. It is called &quot;Ballance of Power&quot;.
评论 #16033428 未加载
msh超过 7 年前
The story goes, that allowing US military bases with nuclear wepons on greenland denmark entry into NATO without fullfilling any of the normal requirements (like military spending).<p>If somewhat true it was properly a better deal than selling greenland.
评论 #16043109 未加载
mceoin超过 7 年前
I love that this article links to the HN discussion thread at the bottom of the article.
评论 #16033973 未加载
评论 #16033276 未加载
21超过 7 年前
Not selling the biggest island in the world for $2.4 bln in today monies was a mistake?<p>That&#x27;s like the price of two London skyscrapers.<p>Denmark has a 305 bln GDP. That money would barely register.<p>Sure, today Greenland is not very useful, but what about in 50 years? Who knows what Denmark may be able to do with it then. And Denmark is not exactly a country with vast tracts of unused land.<p>If Greenland was mine, I wouldn&#x27;t even pick up the phone for an offer &lt; $100 bln.
评论 #16032820 未加载
评论 #16032902 未加载
评论 #16043101 未加载
评论 #16033449 未加载
评论 #16032851 未加载
评论 #16033461 未加载
评论 #16033482 未加载
评论 #16032688 未加载
评论 #16032877 未加载
评论 #16032840 未加载
azinman2超过 7 年前
&gt; It is not as if European countries sending foreign aid to Africa is some hugely novel and experimental concept. It is well-understood how to do good in Africa and the Danish would be more competent than most at the job.<p>Actually it’s not well understood at all, and whatever lessons we think we’ve learned aren’t normally applied as aid is emotional and not rational [1]<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Dead-Aid-Working-Better-Africa&#x2F;dp&#x2F;0374532125" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Dead-Aid-Working-Better-Africa&#x2F;dp&#x2F;037...</a>