phil25 Posted August 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2006 Can someone please tell me why Puerto Rico is maintained as a colony by America, but not made a State? Surely is has been a US possession for long enough. Would welcome it - and is not too disimilar from Hawaii in being non-continental and non anglo-saxon? The question has always puzzled me. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted August 30, 2006 Report Share Posted August 30, 2006 Can someone please tell me why Puerto Rico is maintained as a colony by America, but not made a State? Surely is has been a US possession for long enough. Would welcome it - and is not too disimilar from Hawaii in being non-continental and non anglo-saxon? The question has always puzzled me. Phil The people of Puerto Rico have the right to begin the process of statehood, but "votes" (these were not binding but rather more like a public opinion poll) over the last century have consistently shown that they have no desire to change their status. They are citizens of the US with all corresponding rights, except the right to vote for President. As a tradeoff, they do not pay US income taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tflex Posted August 30, 2006 Report Share Posted August 30, 2006 I don't think the Hawaiians want to be independant from the U.S., and I don't think Puerto Rico wants to let go if it's special relations with the U.S., not when they benefit from it. The U.S. spread it's freedom, democracy and constitution to Hawaii, and they didn't have to force or oppress the local inhabitants, the Hawaiians simply embraced it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Porcius Cato Posted August 30, 2006 Report Share Posted August 30, 2006 Can someone please tell me why Puerto Rico is maintained as a colony by America, but not made a State?.. The question has always puzzled me. Me too. PR voted No. They don't want to be a state; they don't want to be an independent country. What are you going to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlapse Posted August 30, 2006 Report Share Posted August 30, 2006 When law is interpreted, law is effectually created. I'm talking about when rulings are made that create an entirely new restriction, not just an interpretation. Homogenization of the citizenry has its benefits as it tends to prevent the Balkanization of a nation. But will Balkanization occur when power is widely distributed and not endowed to few? Of course homogenization has its benefits. It makes all the people predictable and easy to manage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted August 31, 2006 Report Share Posted August 31, 2006 (edited) . Homogenization of the citizenry has its benefits as it tends to prevent the Balkanization of a nation. But will Balkanization occur when power is widely distributed and not endowed to few? Of course homogenization has its benefits. It makes all the people predictable and easy to manage. What I am trying to get at is that sectionalism causes break aways and civil wars.(Spain, Italy, U.S.A.) "The greater the extent, the less the comprehension." Puerto Rico is a commonwealth in theory. Of course, not like the other four commonwealths in the Union. I am not so certain that the native Hawaiians were four square for territorial status and the later statehood. Edited August 31, 2006 by Gaius Octavius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlapse Posted August 31, 2006 Report Share Posted August 31, 2006 What I am trying to get at is that sectionalism causes break aways and civil wars.(Spain, Italy, U.S.A.) "The greater the extent, the less the comprehension." Agreed, when the sections involved have their own means of homogenization and majority rule. The thing that gets me about representatives, is that people may vote 50% This, 40% That, and 10% Other during election, but the winning representative's actions really only represent half the people in this case. I think this contributes to polarization - us vs them. We have 535 people representing almost 300 million people, based on semi-accurate generalizations. I'd rather have more democracy and less logrolling and lobbying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pantagathus Posted August 31, 2006 Report Share Posted August 31, 2006 The question has always puzzled me. Nobody wants to change the flag. The Puerto Ricans don't want to give up theirs and where are you gonna put the 51st Star on ours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gini Posted September 1, 2006 Report Share Posted September 1, 2006 Haven't read all the recent posts but I will add a couple of things If you are happy with your own system - great!! The US started off with a good system I cannot beleive that corruption is rare with all that is known about company corrruption and its hold over government. The bully boy tactics that the US has tried with my own country is far from commendable - do exactly as we say or we will wreck your economy etc etc. sure America enjoys a good standard of living - but also remember if it paid back what it owed it wouldn't!! While other countires try to repay their debts America doesn't bother as who can make it pay so the debt just mounts and mounts All the fanfare of what America gives out in aid too - also remember that for every $1 of aid that America gives to Africa it takes $8 out. No wonder Africa is poor! The US system is fine- it's just that big business has sordied it all and has a lot more say than it should Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antiochus of Seleucia Posted September 2, 2006 Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 do exactly as we say or we will wreck your economy etc etc. If it prevents us from getting nuked. No wonder Africa is poor! So it's our fault Africa is poor? That's the stupidest attempt at slander I've ever heard! It's people like Robert Mugabe that make Africa the charity case. How much does your country donate?! I would also love to see where you get your information from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gini Posted September 2, 2006 Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 Tsk tsk!! Africa is poor for a multiplicity of reasons - I merely mentioned 1 and puppet (politically useful) governments is another way. The info is commo knowledge My contry actually gives quite a lot of aid the entire economy of a few very small states as well as medical and peacekeeping but there is no business profit involved. Abd do exactly what we say had othing to save from beingnuked - it was just bully boy stuff As I said American bigbusiness has a lot to answer for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Dalby Posted September 2, 2006 Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 How much does your country donate?! I have heard Americans, otherwise well-informed, claim that their country makes the running in international aid. I think the media in each Western country tend to underestimate aid contributions made by other Western countries and overemphasise their own; whether this is particularly true in the US I don't know. What statistics I've seen suggest that the US is not among the biggest donors if you calculate aid as a percentage of national income or of average personal income; am I wrong there? It's also a fact that a lot of aid comes with strings attached, visible or invisible. And, yes, it's also a fact that many African countries are much poorer than they 'ought' to be because of mis-government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlapse Posted September 2, 2006 Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 If you're going to talk about Africa you should look at something called the dependency ratio, the number of people who are too young or old to work compared to the number who are able to work. Sub-saharan African countries are typically 1:1, which is incredibly stifling to economic growth. All other setbacks are not realy the source of the problem, but additional aggravations. If you are going to talk about foriegn aid, you might as well consider charitable donations as well and find some real numbers, instead of referencing 'common knowledge'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Porcius Cato Posted September 2, 2006 Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 What statistics I've seen suggest that the US is not among the biggest donors if you calculate aid as a percentage of national income or of average personal income; am I wrong there? I can't confirm your claim. But I do wonder: Why on earth would you calculate aid as a percentage of average personal income? From the perspective of the aid recipient, it's better to have 10 apples from the rich than have 1 apple from the poor; from the perspective of the aid recipient, help is what you want, not sacrifice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted September 2, 2006 Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 A.D., you are probably right about percentages, but see M.P. C. above. This 'aid' should be further broken down into its components of guns and butter. The donor 'aid' is invariably 'aid' to the donor nation's supplier corporations. Where actual money is concerned, that reposes in the Swiss bank accounts of the leaders of the donee nations. However, the huddled masses do get chicken feed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts