So there's the answer to that question. 2% of the land accounts for about 4 trillion dollars per year. They must grow ambrosia there or something.
Further, there's no particular reason to lump everybody living between Washington, DC, and Boston as just one big megalopolis, and as soon as you start to consider those metropolitan areas individually, then they are no more intimidating than many other similar all over the United States.
And what does "Washington DC" produce to make it such a large part of GDP? While we're at it, i'm not recalling having used too many products manufactured in New York City. Sure, i've seen products manufactured in New York State, but not so many from New York city itself.
What exactly are they doing in New York city that "creates" so much money for them to spend?
Now explain why you skipped right over the more important point, which is, on that 2% of land live 17% of our population producing (take your pick) 15% to 20% of US GDP.
In other words, the population of the "Northeastern Megalopolis" is, on average, no more and no less economically productive than any other Americans.
In short, there's nothing special about them, they just happen to live more closely together than the rest of us find comfortable.
And there's no special reason to think those 50+ million Americans are any more or less wicked, evil or controlling than anyone else.
Sure, they're mostly Democrats but that's true of any large cities.
DiogenesLamp: "And what does "Washington DC" produce to make it such a large part of GDP?
While we're at it, i'm not recalling having used too many products manufactured in New York City."
I doubt if Washington would be self-sustaining at its current size without massive Federal spending there.
As for New York: finance, technical services, media, trade, health care and still some manufacturing in lower rent districts.
And your problem with all that is what, exactly?