Why is Southern Italy poorer than Northern Italy?

[Roy]

Because they like to scream '''fucking notherner you took our resources'', while in reality they don't like to change and they like to be nourished by Rome and, obviously, by our northern money.

That's why regions like Calabria have almost half of Lombard or Venetic GDP, both nominal and pro-capita.



...and that's why they (southerners) compose 60-65% of northern italian population.




...ah, don't forget another important factor: organized crime.

I would not expect such a big gap between North Italy and South.

[Wolf]

Do it by county breakdown for California and a whole different picture emerges, some counties even have similar per-capita incomes as second-world/third world countries.

Stick to the topic, please!

[Peyrol]

I would not expect such a big gap between North Italy and South.

Lol, why not?

[alfieb]

Just prior to unification, 2/3 of the economy of Italy was based in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies (aka Southern Italy).

Where did things go sour?

When we began being ruled out of Turin, Florence, and later Rome, rather than Palermo and Naples. The elites in Italy were Northern, the industries were moved to the North, it was doomed from the start.

The island of Sicily had been, at one time, one of the richest regions in all of Europe, and Naples was a humongous world city comparable to Paris and London. Indeed, it was, for many years, the second-largest city in Europe. In the Kingdom of Italy, however, they wanted nothing to do with that. Their interests and our interests have never been the same.

Northern Italians often complain about "terrone" migration from the Mezzogiorno (south) but the truth of the matter is, it's the chickens coming home to roost. You ruined our economy, so now our excess labour are going where the jobs are. As a result, Milan and Turin look nothing like they did 150 years ago, while Palermo is 97% Sicilian.

It's not even nearly as bad as it could be. Sicilian and Calabrian unemployment is among the worst in all of Europe. Imagine if those hundreds of thousands of out-of-work Sicilians all moved North. Lega Nord would have a fit.

[King Claus]

They're more black than northern italians

[glass]

too many negro-arabian sicilians in south Italy...

[Peyrol]

Just prior to unification, 2/3 of the economy of Italy was based in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies (aka Southern Italy).

Where did things go sour?

When we began being ruled out of Turin, Florence, and later Rome, rather than Palermo and Naples. The elites in Italy were Northern, the industries were moved to the North, it was doomed from the start.

The island of Sicily had been, at one time, one of the richest regions in all of Europe, and Naples was a humongous world city comparable to Paris and London. Indeed, it was, for many years, the second-largest city in Europe. In the Kingdom of Italy, however, they wanted nothing to do with that. Their interests and our interests have never been the same.

Northern Italians often complain about "terrone" migration from the Mezzogiorno (south) but the truth of the matter is, it's the chickens coming home to roost. You ruined our economy, so now our excess labour are going where the jobs are. As a result, Milan and Turin look nothing like they did 150 years ago, while Palermo is 97% Sicilian.

It's not even nearly as bad as it could be. Sicilian and Calabrian unemployment is among the worst in all of Europe. Imagine if those hundreds of thousands of out-of-work Sicilians all moved North. Lega Nord would have a fit.

That's true and false at the same times, since the only industrial states were austrian Lombardy-Veneto and obviously us.

Duosicilian kingdom had a great income, but the problem was that 99% of this income went to the nobles and to the landlords, since the Kingdom was feudal-based and very theocratic.

Don't mention also to the fact that neapolitan occupation of Sicily was totally illegal...your island revolted about 4-5 times against neapolitan rules...wonder why Fernando I of Bourbon was called ''Re bomba''...


Here the reaò industrial incomes (and emigration):







Another interesting fact is the alphabetization of the country at the Unification:

[Peyrol]

Northern Italians often complain about "terrone" migration from the Mezzogiorno (south) but the truth of the matter is, it's the chickens coming home to roost. You ruined our economy, so now our excess labour are going where the jobs are. As a result, Milan and Turin look nothing like they did 150 years ago, while Palermo is 97% Sicilian.

It's not even nearly as bad as it could be. Sicilian and Calabrian unemployment is among the worst in all of Europe. Imagine if those hundreds of thousands of out-of-work Sicilians all moved North. Lega Nord would have a fit.

...and so, we've to be happy of this?

Lombards are 27% of lombardian population (they were nearly 98% before 1950), piemontese about 45% if Piemonte's population, Fòrlans less than 60% of Friuli...we lost our indentitieswith massive southern immigration (and now, with the islamization by MENA immigrants).

And it wasn't a ''piemontese fault''...it was a freemasonic falut, it's another thing.

[alfieb]

Duosicilian kingdom had a great income, but the problem was that 99% of this income went to the nobles and to the landlords, since the Kingdom was feudal-based and very theocratic.

And what happened when the Piedmontese took over? They abolished our nobility. The House of Bourbon went into exile. All of that wealth gone.

Don't mention also to the fact that neapolitan occupation of Sicily was totally illegal...your island revolted about 4-5 times against neapolitan rules...wonder why Fernando I of Bourbon was called ''Re bomba''...

They revolted because they didn't like the capital being in Naples. They didn't revolt when the capital was Palermo, as it was during the Napoleonic era. It wasn't illegal. The Bourbons were, by blood and by treaty, the kings of Sicily. Truly illegal was the Expedition of the Thousand and Garibaldi. They invaded and conquered a sovereign country with no legal basis, and annexed it to another country who had no claim to that territory. The Bourbons never renounced their claim to the throne, nor should they. The army gave up, the nobility did not.

...and so, we've to be happy of this?

I never said that, but there is blame to go around. It is not a matter of "Lazy agrarian criminals", that is an oversimplification.

Lombards are 27% of lombardian population (they were nearly 98% before 1950), piemontese about 45% if Piemonte's population, Fòrlans less than 60% of Friuli...we lost our indentitieswith massive southern immigration (and now, with the islamization by MENA immigrants).

That's my point. Sicily is over 95% Sicilian. We don't pay taxes to Rome or to Brussels. We were screwed over, but now we are using the system to our advantage.

.And it wasn't a ''piemontese fault''...it was a freemasonic falut, it's another thing.

Cavour and Victor Emanuel could have said no to the annexation of the South. They didn't care about territorial integrity. They sold out your Nizzard brothers in order to gain support against the Austrians, as if the House of Savoia had any right to rule Lombardo-Venetia.

[Harkonnen]

Professor Tatu Vanhanen co-author of IQ and the Wealth of Nations has made a controversial proposition that the political and financial elites in Africa should be replaced by Europeans or Asians given their higher IQ. Do you think this same idea could work for Southern Europe, should the top political positions be given to North Euros* for the benefit of the common man?

*Preferably Finns for the reason them being the most intelligent and least corrupted bunch