Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
And Texas being Texas.
And Texas being Texas.
Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States.
- Thread starter Guy Gardener
- Start date
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
Canada
Mexico
Cuba
Canada
Mexico
Cuba
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
You know, there are in fact plenty of things to criticize the US about that make it a case-study in how not to run a first-world democracy, at least in the eyes of many who care and think about things.
A lot of people here believe that freedom of religion means freedom to impose their religion on everyone else, we have too much violence, too much potential for violence, too much that is criminalized, too much economic inequity, health care that is too expensive, we have a recent history of arrogantly invading other countries for no legitimate reason, we're in a forever war, our civil rights are behind the curve of other industrialized nations, and we have a gridlocked political system that is too responsive to cash and too unresponsive to the needs of the people. Arguably, a lot of that is traceable to structural problems in our Constitution that tend to make our government function in undemocratic ways.
None of that means that the US is a failure, but it does mean that there could definitely be better ways of doing things and ways that we could improve our country.
As to how we got into this sidebar, I took the suggestion that the US should join a supranational union such as the EU as a suggestion that the US should join a supranational union very similar to the EU. I think there are probably better ways of doing that, but at a minimum I believe open borders would be a good thing in North America.
You know, there are in fact plenty of things to criticize the US about that make it a case-study in how not to run a first-world democracy, at least in the eyes of many who care and think about things.
A lot of people here believe that freedom of religion means freedom to impose their religion on everyone else, we have too much violence, too much potential for violence, too much that is criminalized, too much economic inequity, health care that is too expensive, we have a recent history of arrogantly invading other countries for no legitimate reason, we're in a forever war, our civil rights are behind the curve of other industrialized nations, and we have a gridlocked political system that is too responsive to cash and too unresponsive to the needs of the people. Arguably, a lot of that is traceable to structural problems in our Constitution that tend to make our government function in undemocratic ways.
None of that means that the US is a failure, but it does mean that there could definitely be better ways of doing things and ways that we could improve our country.
As to how we got into this sidebar, I took the suggestion that the US should join a supranational union such as the EU as a suggestion that the US should join a supranational union very similar to the EU. I think there are probably better ways of doing that, but at a minimum I believe open borders would be a good thing in North America.
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
Well it's not strictly accurate to say the EU has no border controls, that is only true of the 26 Members of Schengen area (+ 4 non EU members), the UK and ROI still maintain border controls.
The only way economic integration such as a single currency will work is if have to have full political union. Given the recent EU elections with even the more favourable countries registering a shift to varying degrees to more eurosceptic parties, not to mention referrendum held in some of the more pro-EU countries have rejected treaties when the people have been asked. What this tells me is there appears to be a disconnect between what the leaders of the EU want and what the people want. Sure the EU has some benefits but isn't it time the people of the EU were asked what direction they want to take, political union or a free-trade zone or somewhere in between.
And one of the next possible crisis on the horizion for the EU is a British referredum on staying in the Union. The EU seems to lurch from one crisis to the other with national vested interests taking priority. Take your pick the Common Fisheries Policy, Common Agricultural Policy, Banking, manufacturing. With some countries supporting them or favouring change depending on how it'll affect them.
Well it's not strictly accurate to say the EU has no border controls, that is only true of the 26 Members of Schengen area (+ 4 non EU members), the UK and ROI still maintain border controls.
The only way economic integration such as a single currency will work is if have to have full political union. Given the recent EU elections with even the more favourable countries registering a shift to varying degrees to more eurosceptic parties, not to mention referrendum held in some of the more pro-EU countries have rejected treaties when the people have been asked. What this tells me is there appears to be a disconnect between what the leaders of the EU want and what the people want. Sure the EU has some benefits but isn't it time the people of the EU were asked what direction they want to take, political union or a free-trade zone or somewhere in between.
And one of the next possible crisis on the horizion for the EU is a British referredum on staying in the Union. The EU seems to lurch from one crisis to the other with national vested interests taking priority. Take your pick the Common Fisheries Policy, Common Agricultural Policy, Banking, manufacturing. With some countries supporting them or favouring change depending on how it'll affect them.
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
I know that and I'm sure most other people here know that, too. What's your point?
The fact that some countries don't take part in every single aspect of European integration doesn't mean there's none.
There's been enormous progress since the 1950s.
Hm, I feel like reposting something I posted in the SECRET SCARY AREA of the forum:
Bottom line: Serious issues after a major expansion AND integration push. Failure? No.
I know that and I'm sure most other people here know that, too. What's your point?
The fact that some countries don't take part in every single aspect of European integration doesn't mean there's none.There's been enormous progress since the 1950s.
Hm, I feel like reposting something I posted in the SECRET SCARY AREA of the forum:
Bottom line: Serious issues after a major expansion AND integration push. Failure? No.
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
Yes nearly everyone wanted to expand the common market i.e the free trade zone. Studying abroad, being able to cross broders within the Schengen Area without passports, working and living in other EU countries can all be achieved without political union. Which is the direction the EU has taken and several treaties which move along those lines when put to people in countries like Ireland, France the Netherlands have been rejected.
Serious integration issues after a massive expansion and intergration push = partial failure surely many of these should have been identified beforehand and steps taken to minimise them.
Whilst I likely would vote to remain in the EU as it has enormous economic benefits doesn't mean I don't feel that it needs root and branch reform, but then we come to the heart of the issues, each country wants slightly different things out of the EU.
As for a mult-speed europe, how many speeds are we talking about two, twenty-eight a number in between?
And lets not forgot therer are another 5 candaite countries, with have started negotians to join, with potnetially another 2-5 countries which may seek membership, not to mention some countries which have either frozen or withdrawn their application who may later reverse that decsion. So the EU may yet enlarge further and should it do so hopefully lessons will have been learned but I suspect not.
Yes nearly everyone wanted to expand the common market i.e the free trade zone. Studying abroad, being able to cross broders within the Schengen Area without passports, working and living in other EU countries can all be achieved without political union. Which is the direction the EU has taken and several treaties which move along those lines when put to people in countries like Ireland, France the Netherlands have been rejected.
Serious integration issues after a massive expansion and intergration push = partial failure surely many of these should have been identified beforehand and steps taken to minimise them.
Whilst I likely would vote to remain in the EU as it has enormous economic benefits doesn't mean I don't feel that it needs root and branch reform, but then we come to the heart of the issues, each country wants slightly different things out of the EU.
As for a mult-speed europe, how many speeds are we talking about two, twenty-eight a number in between?
And lets not forgot therer are another 5 candaite countries, with have started negotians to join, with potnetially another 2-5 countries which may seek membership, not to mention some countries which have either frozen or withdrawn their application who may later reverse that decsion. So the EU may yet enlarge further and should it do so hopefully lessons will have been learned but I suspect not.
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
Since we're obviously not at all being serious:
Canada: I mean, what is the point of having the border anyways? Our governments and laws are mostly similar, and you wouldn't need a passport, you could just drive over. Or do we do those things already? Or we can just combine both governments. We can bring over better health care here!
Mexico: The government clearly needs help there. We'll send in the National Guard to clean out the more notorious drug lords (Chavez, if you're spotted, you're dead!), and we won't need to build a wall after all! Plus, everyone becomes a citizen, and, uh, we can create new jobs there, by uh, modernized the infrastructure to that found in the U.S., yeah! No more dusty roads! Except maybe after dust storms.
South Korea: to give a big fat middle finger to the Kim Jong Un and his cronies. That way, the next time they think about invading or stirring up trouble, they'll know the consequences will involve the full might of the United States military on their behinds! And if North Korea nukes Seoul, we can drop a bomb straight on Jong Un's palace, and we can legally tell China and whatever other allies that North Korea has that they attacked United States soil, and committed an act of war! If they can't keep their dog on a leash, then sometimes, said dog needs to be put down (or be given a new brain).
Since we're obviously not at all being serious:
Canada: I mean, what is the point of having the border anyways? Our governments and laws are mostly similar, and you wouldn't need a passport, you could just drive over. Or do we do those things already? Or we can just combine both governments. We can bring over better health care here!
Mexico: The government clearly needs help there. We'll send in the National Guard to clean out the more notorious drug lords (Chavez, if you're spotted, you're dead!), and we won't need to build a wall after all! Plus, everyone becomes a citizen, and, uh, we can create new jobs there, by uh, modernized the infrastructure to that found in the U.S., yeah! No more dusty roads! Except maybe after dust storms.
South Korea: to give a big fat middle finger to the Kim Jong Un and his cronies. That way, the next time they think about invading or stirring up trouble, they'll know the consequences will involve the full might of the United States military on their behinds! And if North Korea nukes Seoul, we can drop a bomb straight on Jong Un's palace, and we can legally tell China and whatever other allies that North Korea has that they attacked United States soil, and committed an act of war! If they can't keep their dog on a leash, then sometimes, said dog needs to be put down (or be given a new brain).
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
Who needs to be a wall, when there won't even be a need for a border. Then we can use the money saved towards something more important, like a high speed rail system.
Our roads and highways could also use some work. Then again, I'd like nothing better than for us to just start again from scratch, and rebuild our highways based off the systems used in Germany and Italy. Speeding down large stretches of highways at 100+ MPH in American muscle cars, in America (and I guess Mexico and Canada should get them too)!
We'll also need all the money we can save for that hyperloop system.
^How would that work with wall some want to errect along the USA/Canadian border, though I suspect it's less about keeping Canadians out but Americans in.
Who needs to be a wall, when there won't even be a need for a border. Then we can use the money saved towards something more important, like a high speed rail system.
Our roads and highways could also use some work. Then again, I'd like nothing better than for us to just start again from scratch, and rebuild our highways based off the systems used in Germany and Italy. Speeding down large stretches of highways at 100+ MPH in American muscle cars, in America (and I guess Mexico and Canada should get them too)!
We'll also need all the money we can save for that hyperloop system.
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
Well, it is in Canada. My theory was you would use the official languages of the countries joining. Mexico also has no official language, so Spanish is an official language because of Cuba.
Well, it is in Canada. My theory was you would use the official languages of the countries joining. Mexico also has no official language, so Spanish is an official language because of Cuba.
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
Ah, gotya. Well, in that case, we could all be trilingual!
Ah, gotya. Well, in that case, we could all be trilingual!
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
Wow. America, Burma & Liberia are the only 3 countries in the world too stubborn not to have converted to the metric system from Imperial... Although the list I'm looking at calls Imperial the "customary system" since it'd be kinda whack for the yanks to still suck royal #### in this one quarter after the big deal they made about their independence.
Seriously this is not something you can be polite about it.
Stubborn must be code for dumb, or possibly lazy.
Which is ridiculous considering how fricking more complex it is to work in imperial if you have to actually calculate lots of factors for large systems.
So would these new states have to backslide to imperial, or would 200 million Americans finally embrace meters and kilograms 220 years after the French?
Wow. America, Burma & Liberia are the only 3 countries in the world too stubborn not to have converted to the metric system from Imperial... Although the list I'm looking at calls Imperial the "customary system" since it'd be kinda whack for the yanks to still suck royal #### in this one quarter after the big deal they made about their independence.
Seriously this is not something you can be polite about it.
Stubborn must be code for dumb, or possibly lazy.
Which is ridiculous considering how fricking more complex it is to work in imperial if you have to actually calculate lots of factors for large systems.
So would these new states have to backslide to imperial, or would 200 million Americans finally embrace meters and kilograms 220 years after the French?
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
I agree. I'm tired of waiting although metric does get used a lot...just not officially.
I agree. I'm tired of waiting although metric does get used a lot...just not officially.
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
Ask NASA didn't they lose a multi million dollar probe because someone idiot used the imperial system instead of the metric system?
But lets examine it shall we
12" = 1 foot
3 feet = 1 yard
1 760 yards = 1 mile
or what about
16oz = 1 lb
or
20 fluid oz = 1 pint
8 pints = 1 gallon
with metric
1km = 1000 metres
1kg = 1000 grams
1 litre = 1000 ml
Ask NASA didn't they lose a multi million dollar probe because someone idiot used the imperial system instead of the metric system?
But lets examine it shall we
12" = 1 foot
3 feet = 1 yard
1 760 yards = 1 mile
or what about
16oz = 1 lb
or
20 fluid oz = 1 pint
8 pints = 1 gallon
with metric
1km = 1000 metres
1kg = 1000 grams
1 litre = 1000 ml
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
Back in the early 21st century, the world economy got so bad that the United States literally couldn't afford to keep its form of government going. So various multinational conglomerates stepped in, bidding every four years for the right to govern. One of those, Synthetic Food & Combine, annexed Canada and Mexico. Then a few years later UET took over and decided there would be no more "elections." When Europe objected, UET used nukes to convince them.
We've got 4 main political parties (5 in Quebec). We had a female Prime Minister over 20 years ago. And most of our politicians know how to leave their religion at the door and not bring it to work with them.
So no, thank you anyway, but I don't think that becoming one country would be appealing.
Celsius has always been easier for me to understand than Fahrenheit. I do have to admit that I still prefer to think in miles and pounds instead of kilometres and kilograms. As for inches and centimeters, it depends on what I'm measuring.
There's a series of science fiction novels written in the '80s, by F.M. Busby. The Hulzein Saga's core books (Young Rissa, Rissa and Tregare, and The Long View) show a dystopian type of future in which there are only three governments on Earth: The Hulzein Establishment controls Argentina, the Australians are independent (though at one time were Hulzein-connected), and the rest of the world is controlled by a massive fascist government called United Energy & Transport (UET).
Back in the early 21st century, the world economy got so bad that the United States literally couldn't afford to keep its form of government going. So various multinational conglomerates stepped in, bidding every four years for the right to govern. One of those, Synthetic Food & Combine, annexed Canada and Mexico. Then a few years later UET took over and decided there would be no more "elections." When Europe objected, UET used nukes to convince them.
There are some regions that effectively are already. For example, in Nunavut there are three recognized official languages: English, French, and Inuktitut.There were those who believed that Manifest Destiny should include all of the Western Hemisphere.
We couldn't have a SuperUnion. We'd get bogged down arguing over the color of the money...and how to spell things.
Although I could get on board with becoming an official bi-lingual country (which we are in everything but name anyway) and would Canada become 'tri-lingual'?
I suppose it depends on whether you consider a continent to only be the part that's above the water, or if you consider it to be everything that's part of the plate it's on. If the latter, then there are parts of North America that aren't really parts of North America (and the same can be said for the rest of the world).
No. Just. No. Our country's name is fine as it is, thank you.
Our governments are definitely not "mostly similar" and neither are our laws. Once upon a time you didn't need a passport to cross the border; it's only after 9-11 and the Age of Paranoia started that we've had to put up with this.
We've got 4 main political parties (5 in Quebec). We had a female Prime Minister over 20 years ago. And most of our politicians know how to leave their religion at the door and not bring it to work with them.
So no, thank you anyway, but I don't think that becoming one country would be appealing.
The border runs right through the middle of some buildings, including private homes. Putting up a wall there would be extremely inconvenient if a person has to present a passport just to use the bathroom.^How would that work with wall some want to errect along the USA/Canadian border, though I suspect it's less about keeping Canadians out but Americans in.
Metric has been "customary" here since the '70s. Some people are still complaining about it, though.
It's a kind of mashed up bilingualism. When I order stuff from the deli, I have no problem thinking in grams. Same thing with liquids. I never did understand ounces. If someone tells me about a 16-oz container, I have no idea what they're talking about. But I get 250 mL, 500 mL, 750 mL, and full liters, no problem. And for lesser amounts, that's what measuring cups and spoons are for.
Celsius has always been easier for me to understand than Fahrenheit. I do have to admit that I still prefer to think in miles and pounds instead of kilometres and kilograms. As for inches and centimeters, it depends on what I'm measuring.
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
If we don't have the same system as you, it really comes down to "so what?" We're perfectly capable of employing the metric system on those limited occasion when it's needed. And while there are similarities, there are enough differences between the old imperial system and the current American customary system that they aren't the same system.
You point out that only three countries haven't officially adopted metric, but there are others where the adoption is only on a official level. In Brazil the metric system is used along with the old Portuguese customary units. And in Canada the building construction industry uses the imperial system.
In how many countries Guy Gardener, do the average people actually use the metric system in their daily lives?
You forgot one option, national preference.
If we don't have the same system as you, it really comes down to "so what?" We're perfectly capable of employing the metric system on those limited occasion when it's needed. And while there are similarities, there are enough differences between the old imperial system and the current American customary system that they aren't the same system.
You point out that only three countries haven't officially adopted metric, but there are others where the adoption is only on a official level. In Brazil the metric system is used along with the old Portuguese customary units. And in Canada the building construction industry uses the imperial system.
In how many countries Guy Gardener, do the average people actually use the metric system in their daily lives?
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
Almost every country in the world and that includes Brazil. You should travel more.
Almost every country in the world and that includes Brazil. You should travel more.
Re: Name 3 countries you'd consider inviting to join the United States
My God.
My God.
Similar threads
