Reminder: If the UK was a state in the union then (from memory) I think it would be something like the 2nd or 3rd poorest. Very little is said about this.
The US? GDP of the UK is close to 3 Trillion USD.
Ohio, NJ, Nebraska, Maine, and Florida combined have a lower GDP.
in fact, it seems like California is the only state which has a higher GDP than the UK.
Or is wealth measured another way..?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/248023/us-gross-domestic...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/281744/gdp-of-the-united...
It's pretty misleading to frame this as though the UK is drastically lower than any other comparable countries though. The UK's GDP per capita is similar to Canada, France, Israel, Japan. And that doesn't even get into whether GDP is actually a realistic measure of how "poor" a country's people are (c.f: Ireland, which has a much higher GDP per capita than the US, but similar material conditions to the UK).
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...
GDP is a silly metric anyway. GDP(PPP) is ightly better, and IDHI is imo the best way to chose a country you want to immigrate to for your children.
As someone who spent 30 years in the UK (give or take) before moving to the US, and having lived on both coasts and in the south, something does not sit right about this assertion. Perhaps by unadjusted income it might technically be true, but I suspect not once adjusted for the reality of cost of living.
When you consider cost of living, wealth distribution, money controlled by trillion dollar corporations (mostly in the US), infrastructure, health care, etc, dollars become an unequal scale. The bottom 20% of British society probably does much better than the bottom 20% of Americans. The difference is likely more stark with the bottom 10%.
The UK might have a average lower household income than West Virginia, but virtually nobody could really say West Virginia is better off than the UK.