Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The END of the United States = North American Union

Page 2 of 3 [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

25 Jul 2006, 9:49 pm

Laz wrote:
Surely this is just a continuation of state policy through other means. That state policy being Manifest Destiny of the North Americain continent. Several wars have been fought over such issues before and this time the methods are through trade and commerce not a bunch of drunken soldiers going over the border

I tend to doubt that any annexation will take place. It is probably just a continuation of free trade policies and other things that business likes. I don't think that annexation is in the plan though, it is too difficult to accomplish as I doubt that either Canada or Mexico want to be states and I also doubt that we would let them either we might allow Canada but they would never ever join, but we would probably not allow Mexico due to the language barrier.



VesicaPisces
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 198
Location: Earth

27 Jul 2006, 1:22 am

From what I have been able to piece together, part of the the "plan", is to establish Common laws. Just as humanity as a whole have commonalities, so do sovereign nations. Mexico, Canada, and the United States, all have very similar policies. Yet just as people have differences, so do nations. The European Union may be a single entity, though it is composed of a conglomerate of sub-entities. Systems within systems. Just as the U.S. and Mexico have states and Canada has provinces. A U.nited N.orth A.merica will allow unimpeded travel throughout the continent. It will also strengthen our perimiter. The benefits far outweigh any disadvantages. Short term suffering, for long term prosperity. Feel free to comment. :)


_________________
Any thing that can happen, will happen, has already happened, and is happening right now.


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

27 Jul 2006, 2:54 pm

VesicaPisces wrote:
From what I have been able to piece together, part of the the "plan", is to establish Common laws. Just as humanity as a whole have commonalities, so do sovereign nations. Mexico, Canada, and the United States, all have very similar policies. Yet just as people have differences, so do nations. The European Union may be a single entity, though it is composed of a conglomerate of sub-entities. Systems within systems. Just as the U.S. and Mexico have states and Canada has provinces. A U.nited N.orth A.merica will allow unimpeded travel throughout the continent. It will also strengthen our perimiter. The benefits far outweigh any disadvantages. Short term suffering, for long term prosperity. Feel free to comment. :)

Ok, I think that you are on to something. Freer trade benefits all 3 nations and common laws allow for such trade to be easier to accomplish. It would improve economic conditions for all 3 nations.



Pi
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 53

28 Jul 2006, 12:11 pm

Terrorists, shmerrorists. We don't have to worry about terrorists. We have to worry about our own government. And they're already IN the United States.



medianmistermustard
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 69

16 Aug 2006, 12:53 am

I wrote:
B. Look at the EU. They have open borders between the world's wealthiest nations (Luxembourg, Norway...)


I just revisited this post and I realized, Norway isn't in the EU. And I felt stupid. Anyway, carry on... :oops:



Mithrandir
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2004
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 614
Location: Victoria, BC Canada

16 Aug 2006, 1:23 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
VesicaPisces wrote:
From what I have been able to piece together, part of the the "plan", is to establish Common laws. Just as humanity as a whole have commonalities, so do sovereign nations. Mexico, Canada, and the United States, all have very similar policies. Yet just as people have differences, so do nations. The European Union may be a single entity, though it is composed of a conglomerate of sub-entities. Systems within systems. Just as the U.S. and Mexico have states and Canada has provinces. A U.nited N.orth A.merica will allow unimpeded travel throughout the continent. It will also strengthen our perimiter. The benefits far outweigh any disadvantages. Short term suffering, for long term prosperity. Feel free to comment. :)

Ok, I think that you are on to something. Freer trade benefits all 3 nations and common laws allow for such trade to be easier to accomplish. It would improve economic conditions for all 3 nations.


How about Fairer trade?

Anyway, similar to EU we have something called NAFTA, which really benefits US.

I say lets lower Tarriffs as much as we can.
There are many cases of problems (Softwood Lumber big one)


_________________
Music is the language of the world.
Math is the language of the universe.


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

16 Aug 2006, 1:37 am

Mithrandir wrote:
How about Fairer trade?

Anyway, similar to EU we have something called NAFTA, which really benefits US.

I say lets lower Tarriffs as much as we can.
There are many cases of problems (Softwood Lumber big one)

Freer trade gives them opportunities to sell us stuff that we would like thus making them richer and it allows us to do the same. If one side buys stuff cheaper then it gets richer, and if the other side sells more stuff then it also gets richer. So long as nobody has their rights being violated it is fine.

Lowering tarriffs is a part of free trade and allows countries fairer grounds in the market, which can help their economic growth.



waterdogs
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,088

25 Aug 2006, 1:24 pm

Well, i mean you can thank all the religious nuts for voting for him. if you think im talking about the south you are correct. look if the southern states want to be thier own goddamn country i say let them. they'll just go back to living in the stone age era since thats always what they've wanted to do in the first place, why with their extreme views on religion and how it applies to there life and all. george bush is a freaking idiot.



Litigious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,505
Location: Nearest Wells Fargo trade

25 Aug 2006, 3:59 pm

medianmistermustard wrote:

I just revisited this post and I realized, Norway isn't in the EU. And I felt stupid. Anyway, carry on... :oops:


Since 1947 you can cross the borders between the Nordic countries (Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland) without a passport. This hasn't changed just because Denmark, Sweden and Finland are in the EU and Norway and Iceland aren't. I just drove over the border to Norway about a month ago. Most of it is unguarded, and it's about 1000 English miles long. Sorry, a little OT. 8)



Litigious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,505
Location: Nearest Wells Fargo trade

25 Aug 2006, 4:03 pm

We have 20 different official languages in the EU, that all documents have to be translated into. That's tough. :?



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

25 Aug 2006, 4:34 pm

waterdogs wrote:
Well, i mean you can thank all the religious nuts for voting for him. if you think im talking about the south you are correct. look if the southern states want to be thier own goddamn country i say let them. they'll just go back to living in the stone age era since thats always what they've wanted to do in the first place, why with their extreme views on religion and how it applies to there life and all. george bush is a freaking idiot.

Um, the southern states don't want to be their own country. In fact, there were many non-southern states that voted for Bush so it is not like it is some regional issue.Image Heck, every state in the US has their own republicans. The south also doesn't want to go back to the stone age, in fact, if you look at cities like Dallas then you will see a lot of growth in those areas in fields related to technology. Pretty much all you are doing is creating some false stereotype of southerners. George Bush is definitely not one of the best presidents, however, he also isn't the worst.



parts
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2005
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,579
Location: New England

25 Aug 2006, 4:59 pm

Quote:
Heck, every state in the US has their own republicans. The south also doesn't want to go back to the stone age, in fact, if you look at cities like Dallas then you will see a lot of growth in those areas in fields related to technology. Pretty much all you are doing is creating some false stereotype of southerners

I have lived in both and found a fair aound of nut jobs all around it's not just a southern thing I think some of the people up north are just as crazy and known some very libral southerners too it's not always so clear cut as you think. I live in a blue state with a Republican governor who I will probally vote for in the fall becuse I think she is doing a good job


_________________
"Strange is your language and I have no decoder Why don't make your intentions clear..." Peter Gabriel


waterdogs
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,088

25 Aug 2006, 5:43 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
waterdogs wrote:
Well, i mean you can thank all the religious nuts for voting for him. if you think im talking about the south you are correct. look if the southern states want to be thier own goddamn country i say let them. they'll just go back to living in the stone age era since thats always what they've wanted to do in the first place, why with their extreme views on religion and how it applies to there life and all. george bush is a freaking idiot.

Um, the southern states don't want to be their own country. In fact, there were many non-southern states that voted for Bush so it is not like it is some regional issue.Image Heck, every state in the US has their own republicans. The south also doesn't want to go back to the stone age, in fact, if you look at cities like Dallas then you will see a lot of growth in those areas in fields related to technology. Pretty much all you are doing is creating some false stereotype of southerners. George Bush is definitely not one of the best presidents, however, he also isn't the worst.
Listen that map is missleading. first of all the way the system is set up is the more people you have in you're states the more votes you get. those southern states, especially texas have a bigger population than 3 or 4 or 5 of the western states combined. also many of the western states only have one big city in them, and guess where most of the republicans got there votes from? everyone in the rual areas of the west didn't vote for him. so don't put up your maps acting like the whole country voted for bush, when in reality the majority of his support comes from the south. where suprise suprise there all christain just like george bush.



McJeff
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 4 Nov 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 361
Location: The greatest country in the world: The USA

25 Aug 2006, 6:22 pm

Actually, everyone DID vote for Bush... except the inner city folks. The welfare-dependent urban types, and the college educated far-leftists.

Normal people, who are not far-left lunatics and welfare-dependent vote Republican because the Democrats have nothing to offer.

Don't you people see that all you're doing is driving the centrists towards the Republicans with your demonization of religion and all things that come with it, and your yammering about the Christian Right? Maybe if the Democrats weren't so anti-Chrisitan, they wouldn't force the average Christian to vote Republican.

I've been meaning to ask you lefties, though. Seperation of Church and State. How does that both encompass banning christmas trees and nativity scenes, but giving Muslims their own prayer rooms in their places of employment? Where's the equality?



waterdogs
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,088

25 Aug 2006, 6:45 pm

i found a better map, looks like everyone did vote for bush exept me. coconino county in northern arizona the second largest county in the country. (we must be smart)

Image

But that still doesn't mean most of his supporters aren't christans. i don't know alot about politics but aren't the majority of republicans christain?



McJeff
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 4 Nov 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 361
Location: The greatest country in the world: The USA

25 Aug 2006, 7:18 pm

waterdogs wrote:
i found a better map, looks like everyone did vote for bush exept me. coconino county in northern arizona the second largest county in the country. (we must be smart)


Actually, the areas that tended to vote for Kerry were those with large concentrations of minorities - specifially blacks, hispanics and native americans (which I figure is what you got in AZ).

if you use the scores on the SAT as a good indicator of intelligence, it's an undisputed fact that on average these minority groups score lower.

So that would mean that on average the Kerry voters were stupider than the Bush voters.