(03-08-2021, 01:33 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: This is something I haven't been able to quite understand, and am frankly too lazy to fully do the research on.
There's lot of information that seems somewhat conflicting regarding their laws. They do have their own laws, their own constitution, their own bill of rights, and their own court system. But it also says they're subject to most federal law. I've also read that decisions between their Supreme Court and ours can arrise in some conflicts from time to time, but federal court can no longer appeal their decisions. US courts cannot appeal their rulings, nor can they prosecute someone once they've ruled.
Here's just one tiny thing I just found, that I think presents an interesting example of something few consider when it comes to statehood. Puerto Rico's current minimum wage is set $5.08. So this is an example of something that is not regulated by federal law. ...
Puerto Rico being suddenly subjected to all sorts of regulations, labor laws, OSHA, and liabilities would be tremendous change. And this list probably goes on and on and on. I just listed some examples of potential differences.
Fwiw, this is what I think a lot of the comments about their, what they call "statehood party" needing to have education prior to adding these votes onto their elections are getting at. A lot of Puerto Ricans feel that some in politics are presenting statehood in a simplistic way without properly educating people on what it actually means. And apparently, they attactch these votes, which are for all intents and purposes meaningless onto general elections to bring out their supporters.
Well those are two substantive points. PRs do, then, in some areas, exert greater control over their own legal system than US states can.
And if they are currently exempted from many federal regulations, then the sudden (or even gradual) imposition of such could be a helluva shock.
I'm guessing that should PR receive statehood, it would be graduated, perhaps over five years, and with some aid to help with the transition.
Well then two states are going to have to combine because I like 50.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall
(03-08-2021, 02:39 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Well then two states are going to have to combine because I like 50.
The Dakotas look like an obvious candidate. There seems to be no apparent reason to have two of those.
Speaking of Puerte Rico, I want to reiterate that I consider all considerations made on their behalf, like what does it mean for their identity and all the other questions, are not for mainland Americans to decide.
It's what a colonial power would do. Denying them basic civic rights and arguing why that's actually better for them.
(03-08-2021, 05:49 PM)hollodero Wrote: The Dakotas look like an obvious candidate. There seems to be no apparent reason to have two of those.
Speaking of Puerte Rico, I want to reiterate that I consider all considerations made on their behalf, like what does it mean for their identity and all the other questions, are not for mainland Americans to decide.
It's what a colonial power would do. Denying them basic civic rights and arguing why that's actually better for them.
I'm of the opinion that for all of our non-state territories, we should allow them the option to vote for independence or statehood. DC's referendum would be a little different, but this is just my view on it. If we control territory, the people there should have full rights or we shouldn't control the territory. Period.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
(03-08-2021, 06:57 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm of the opinion that for all of our non-state territories, we should allow them the option to vote for independence or statehood. DC's referendum would be a little different, but this is just my view on it. If we control territory, the people there should have full rights or we shouldn't control the territory. Period.
(03-08-2021, 05:49 PM)hollodero Wrote: The Dakotas look like an obvious candidate. There seems to be no apparent reason to have two of those.
Speaking of Puerte Rico, I want to reiterate that I consider all considerations made on their behalf, like what does it mean for their identity and all the other questions, are not for mainland Americans to decide.
It's what a colonial power would do. Denying them basic civic rights and arguing why that's actually better for them.
The other option would be to just cut Puerto Rico loose and let it be it's own country. Why has no one mentioned that option?
(03-08-2021, 07:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The other option would be to just cut Puerto Rico loose and let it be it's own country. Why has no one mentioned that option?
That option is what everyone who has posted so far agrees on when he says "let the Puerto Ricans decide for themselves whether they want independence."
Or did you mean just dump them--our decision, not theirs?
(03-08-2021, 07:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The other option would be to just cut Puerto Rico loose and let it be it's own country. Why has no one mentioned that option?
I thought about that. I guess there isn't much willingness to be on their own, there's so much entanglement and being an independent country somewhere in the ocean didn't really pay off for other islands. Moreover, the US made all Puerto Ricans US citizens, I'd figure giving that citizenship up is not an attractive option. The polls seem to indicate there's no strong independence push within Puerto Rico.
(03-08-2021, 07:36 PM)hollodero Wrote: I thought about that. I guess there isn't much willingness to be on their own, there's so much entanglement and being an independent country somewhere in the ocean didn't really pay off for other islands. Moreover, the US made all Puerto Ricans US citizens, I'd figure giving that citizenship up is not an attractive option. The polls seem to indicate there's no strong independence push within Puerto Rico.
If we "cut them loose" without their consent, we would be deciding for 3 million+ U.S. citizens that they were not citizens anymore.
(03-08-2021, 07:43 PM)Dill Wrote: If we "cut them loose" without their consent, we would be deciding for them that they are not U.S. citizens anymore.
Yeah, that was some kind of implied point. You cannot quite do that, rescind citizenships. They'd have to decide so for themselves.
Of course, if they do so, hold a referendum and a majority is actually for independence, then so it shall be, imho.
If that isn't so, as it appears (as far as I can tell), they need to have all the rights citizens in a democracy have - especially when it comes to voting for their nation's leader and being represented in Congress. Which does not necessarily mean statehood, but practically probably is tied to it.
Anything else is unworthy of a democracy. Maybe not so much if Puerto Ricans decide themselves they'd rather keep the status quo. Not so much if mainland America decides that for them.
Oh my, that would be such a sweet purchase for Austria. Can we get dips? We'd happily trade you Corinthia for them too. If you don't know them: They are great. (I you know them, maybe we can find another deal.)
(03-08-2021, 07:52 PM)hollodero Wrote: Yeah, that was some kind of implied point. You cannot quite do that, rescind citizenships. They'd have to decide so for themselves.
Of course, if they do so, hold a referendum and a majority is actually for independence, then so it shall be, imho.
If that isn't so, as it appears (as far as I can tell), they need to have all the rights citizens in a democracy have - especially when it comes to voting for their nation's leader and being represented in Congress. Which does not necessarily mean statehood, but practically probably is tied to it.
Anything else is unworthy of a democracy. Maybe not so much if Puerto Ricans decide themselves they'd rather keep the status quo. Not so much if mainland America decides that for them.
Oh my, that would be such a sweet purchase for Austria. Can we get dips? We'd happily trade you Corinthia for them too. If you don't know them: They are great. (I you know them, maybe we can find another deal.)
I suppose we could de-citizenize them, but that would turn our political foundation on human rights upside down. Other countries have done that to classes of citizens.
PS Re: the trade for Karinthia. No Hollo. Don't think I don't know what you are up to. You guys are not getting an empire back together. And shame on you for willingness to trade away a state full of Social Democrats.
(03-08-2021, 08:13 PM)Dill Wrote: I suppose we could de-citizenize them, but that would turn our political foundation on human rights upside down. Other countries have done that to classes of citizens.
Well, usually democracies have a hard time with that step even if a citizen literally joined ISIS. You can't just take citizenship away from Puerto Ricans just because you're a bit tired of them or their situation. I know you have kind of a throwaway society, but this would take it too far.
If any, do that indeed with Wyoming. This appears to be a totally pointless state anyway.
(03-08-2021, 08:13 PM)Dill Wrote: PS Re: the trade for Karinthia. No Hollo. Don't think I don't know what you are up to. You guys are not getting an empire back together. And shame on you for willingness to trade away a state full of Social Democrats.
What you mean, "back together". We never really had one. When all the rest of Europe sailed out to rob, slaughter and enslave natives all around the globe, we sat back. No, we're not involved in that dark chapter in history, we said, we are Austrians, we're better than that and also we're really really broke. We never had one colony, no austrian marauders ever set foot on an overseas shore to terrorize anyone. If any, Puerto Rico should be ours as some kind of global fair play trophy. And from what I can tell, we'd be nicer to them than you are anyway.
Also, Corinthia a state full of social democrats. Yeah, that's kinda not wrong, but they are also full of brown stuff, if you see what I mean. Trump might have been interested. Shame that guy's gone.
(03-08-2021, 07:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The other option would be to just cut Puerto Rico loose and let it be it's own country. Why has no one mentioned that option?
I don't know why, but I was reminded of this clip reading this post.
I picture Puerto Rico as Spaulding in this clip (demanding statehood) and the US as Judge Smails (if you don't want to stay as a territory, then you can just go off on your own.)
(03-08-2021, 07:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The other option would be to just cut Puerto Rico loose and let it be it's own country. Why has no one mentioned that option?
Ahem.
(03-08-2021, 06:57 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm of the opinion that for all of our non-state territories, we should allow them the option to vote for independence or statehood. DC's referendum would be a little different, but this is just my view on it. If we control territory, the people there should have full rights or we shouldn't control the territory. Period.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
My bad. As for the citizenship question, all current Puerto Rican US citizens could have dual citizenship. There are definite work around that wouldn't involve revoking citizenship from anyone.
I suppose my whole outlook on this issue is tainted by the blindly partisan nature of the Democratic position on this issue.
(03-08-2021, 10:32 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: My bad. As for the citizenship question, all current Puerto Rican US citizens could have dual citizenship. There are definite work around that wouldn't involve revoking citizenship from anyone.
I suppose my whole outlook on this issue is tainted by the blindly partisan nature of the Democratic position on this issue.
Is there a way the Democrats could advocate Puerto Rico statehood without appearing to be driven by purely partisan motives?
There is at least a case to be made that it is also the right thing to do, after all.
(03-08-2021, 08:41 PM)hollodero Wrote: What you mean, "back together". We never really had one. When all the rest of Europe sailed out to rob, slaughter and enslave natives all around the globe, we sat back. No, we're not involved in that dark chapter in history, we said, we are Austrians, ...
Also, Corinthia a state full of social democrats. Yeah, that's kinda not wrong, but they are also full of brown stuff, if you see what I mean. Trump might have been interested. Shame that guy's gone.
Corinthia is a state full of Greeks. You mean Karinthia/Kaernten, don't you?
One of the many minor duchies that "just happened" to fall into your Duke Rudolf's lap three centuries before the rest of Europe was out robbing, slaughtering and enslaving indigenous peoples around the globe.
No "dark chapters" there, I'm sure.
How many poor countries spun out your non-empire and into independence with the peace of 1918?
(03-09-2021, 01:37 AM)Dill Wrote: Corinthia is a state full of Greeks. You mean Karinthia/Kaernten, don't you?
Yeah that's right. Carinthia.
You know that there's actually an Austrian term called Korinthenkacker? It means nitpicker. It is almost comically fitting.
(03-09-2021, 01:37 AM)Dill Wrote: One of the many minor duchies that "just happened" to fall into your Duke Rudolf's lap three centuries before the rest of Europe was out robbing, slaughtering and enslaving indigenous peoples around the globe.
No "dark chapters" there, I'm sure.
How many poor countries spun out your non-empire and into independence with the peace of 1918?
Eh, we usually waited for local rulers to die without heirs, or we married off our princes and prncesses, to gain territories. We were not that bad, all things considered. And restricted. To pre 20th century times. And rather not asking the farmers. And... ah well. I really start feeling bad taking all the focus away from those poor Puerto Ricans, just because of you slandering my troubled nation with fake history.
(03-08-2021, 08:41 PM)hollodero Wrote: What you mean, "back together". We never really had one. When all the rest of Europe sailed out to rob, slaughter and enslave natives all around the globe, we sat back. No, we're not involved in that dark chapter in history, we said, we are Austrians, we're better than that and also we're really really broke. We never had one colony, no austrian marauders ever set foot on an overseas shore to terrorize anyone. If any, Puerto Rico should be ours as some kind of global fair play trophy. And from what I can tell, we'd be nicer to them than you are anyway.
(03-08-2021, 11:04 PM)hollodero Wrote: Is there a way the Democrats could advocate Puerto Rico statehood without appearing to be driven by purely partisan motives?
Not anymore. They poisoned that well by making it blindingly obvious that they only want Puerto Rican statehood (and D.C.) because it will give them two more Democratic senators. The kvetching from the Dems about how the Senate works preceded that. It's almost like they don't understand that the Senate is what it is by design.
Quote:There is at least a case to be made that it is also the right thing to do, after all.
Oh sure, just as there's a case to be made to keep things as is. In a way Puerto Rico has a sweet set up, they have their own government and a large degree of autonomy, but also get automatic US citizenship, something millions (billions?) of people would love to have.
I suppose, like most things nowadays, the naked partisanship of the push for it turns me off.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
