• PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      It is a very thick but even taller strip of land.

      The point of reference for it’s thinness shouldn’t be it’s own height, but rather the sizes of countries in general.

      I mean, it’s still be thin, but the UK has no place throwing stones from within that glass house lol

      • Noturbuddy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        2 days ago

        It just looks skinny because of how long it is baby I promise it’s more than thicc enough for you 😏

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s not very thick, it is thin, but it’s extremely long. Chile that is.

        Not many countries outside of Europe are as small east-to-west as Chile. Even in Europe the major countries like France, Germany, Spain and even the UK are bigger east-to-west. Italy is bigger east-to-west, but mostly because it’s angled. If it were oriented vertically like Chile it would be thinner along most of the boot, but still wider than Chile along the top from the coast near Nice to Venice.

        Also worth noting that although the UK isn’t all that wide, it has major port cities on both east and west coasts. Chile has an inhospitable mountain range on its eastern side, so really the population is concentrated in an area that’s much thinner than the geographic boundaries of the country.

      • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        I feel like this is stretching the definition of “thin” to make sure nobody feels insecure about the proportions of the land claimed by local government.

        What are we doing here, folks?