- cross-posted to:
- housing_bubble_2@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- housing_bubble_2@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
No, this is what we do. 51=17x3. 52=26x2. 53, however is a prime number so it can’t be divided.
We make PR a state, Guam, and DC.
AND WE BECOME… One nation, indivisible.
You have . . . a point.
Squish the Dakotas together and make PR a state, we wouldn’t even need a new flag.
Wymonkota, anyone?
Yes!
As a former Dakotan of the north, screw South Dakota aka the lesser Dakota. North Dakota actually pays taxes unlike Switzerland of the us. A joke we had: how do you know you’re in South Dakota? Potholes every quarter mile instead of every mile in the road.
I like your idea. But instead of squish, I say death match and we detach the loser.
How would we detach a land locked state? I’m here for your idea, I’m just wondering about the logistics.
That’s for after, death match first.
No silly, we COMBINE some of the 18 low-population states so we can go back to 48! One nation 6x8, with a better balance in representation! Or 45 could be nice as well.
overly positive elementary school teacher voice* “okay low pop states find your buddy.” “to make it easier for some of you if your state starts with a cardinal direction congrats you’ve already got a preassigned merge buddy and new name!”… “ah no Kansas, ‘Ar’ is not a direction, you and Arkansas wont work you don’t even share a border hun” “…unless” Kansouri-Oklasas
Why combine extant states? Just pull a colonial Europe and draw a whole new map over it! Nuts to “natural boundaries” or “cultural similarities”, everyone on the east coast from DC to King’s Bay is now part of the State of Midlantic.
Gerrymander the state borders!
We need to copy Canada: just give up and assign that unpopulated blob as “Northwest Territories “. All done in one move
But even Canada gave up on that approach and is having Nunavut.
I was actually intending to phrase it like that since I thought one replaced the other but looked at a map and apparently both currently exist. Either I m looking at a bad map or haven’t paid enough attention to the news from our neighbor to the north
Heh i love making Nunavut jokes around Canadians. They split it off a while back forget the reason it’s recent ish ~25 years ago.
Just break a pool cue and force them to fight tbh
This needs to be a meme.
No factors, still divisible.
Guam + Marianas would make more sense, very low populations out ðere
Until Puerto Rico is a state, I believe they shouldn’t have to pay taxes. No taxation without representation.
They are exempt from federal income tax.
While a good start, they do still pay other kinds of federal taxes (without representation), such as payroll taxes
And paid $4 billion in federal taxes in 2021 https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/puerto-rico-us-territory-crisis#chapter-title-0-4
Are they getting anything for the taxes?
Yeah, they got 25 billion for it.
Exactly
this is also why the license plates in DC have the slogan “taxation without representation”
God you can’t even have colonies anymore, another victim of wokeness
I’m not sure that more than 50% of Puerto Rico wants to be a state.
They vote on it rather frequently. They do at the moment but it does waffle a bit.
deleted by creator
If “no vote” was a candidate I don’t think we would have had a president since Jefferson.
Now that’s an idea.
What are the downsides to becoming a state?
Puerto Rico doesn’t pay federal taxes
PR is so poor that very few there would pay income tax. The majority of people would actually receive money due to the EITC.
Poor people voting against their own interests because a rich asshole told them to is an American tradition, I guess they’re definitely ready!
I’m sure there’s good reasons involving Cultural identity and policy disagreement that they wouldn’t want to become a state, but it really seems like it would be a huge win financially.
It would be Missouri yet again holding the bag. They’d no longer be able to plead poverty for more federal funding.
But that would shift the election in favour of the Democrats…
Yes - if the GOP can’t survive more proportional representation, they shouldn’t.
Potentially. Puerto Rico is also a religious state.
Religious doesn’t MEAN republican, just so happens to be one of the things that usually indicates a Republican.
I know plenty of smart religious people who are democrats. Most of the draw for the US is Christian nationalism (aka white supremacy) that I think won’t work on most in PR.
There is nothing christian about republican policies. Most Black folks are christian and vote dem in overwhelming numbers.
You say white supremacy like a bunch of latino men don’t vote republican.
Lol no. There are no absolutes when humans are involved.
Most latinos are religious, or from religious areas, and, I would wager, most are pretty conservative in a lot of ways. However they, as a majority, go for the democratic party.
If it wasn’t for gerrymandering and voter suspension they would’ve been extinct a while back. We might’ve even had something other than a 2 party system and ranked choice voting. People would be surprised by what could be if we didn’t have a greedy minority in a big ass coat pretending we want to see them make all the money while they keep squeezing us for our pennies.
But hey, I should be thankful for my 30k a yr and paying for insurance that’ll tell you to forget about surgery just slap a bandaid on it
Don’t forget the electoral college…
Broken-ass excuse for a democracy that’ll be shattered if Trump wins.
Puerto Rico should be it’s own country.
Personally, I think we should force the island to choose its fate. We can’t keep the status quo going forever. The idea of a nation like the US maintaining a colony with millions of people on it is a historical anachronism. It was a mistake to ever create the colony in the first place, and it’s a mistake to keep it going. We should force the Puerto Ricans to make a choice. A new binding referendum. Pass a statehood bill that grants statehood to PR based on the results of a final binding vote. And that referendum has two and only two choices on it - statehood or independence. They’re either all the way in, or all the way out. The choice is theirs.
I know in principle that, from a self-determination perspective, that Puerto Ricans should have a full menu of choices available to it, including staying a territory. But it’s high time for the US to get out of the colony business. US territory status should be reserved for holdings that are so sparsely populated that they would never possibly make a viable state. But Puerto Rico is just way too large to justify holding as a territory.
We need to solve this problem. And I think we should have a final binding referendum, one where statehood or independence will automatically happen based on the results of that referendum.
We have tried to vote and indicate whatever desire we have for statehood or independence. Y’all (as in US Government, not citizens) just use the results to wipe your asses.
Slight edit: I’m Puerto Rican
PR has held referendums on this multiple times. During the five major referendums (not including the sixth one where voter turnout was like less than 20%) three of them – the majority of the five major referendums – resulted in not wanting statehood. Another had incredibly high levels of abstention, and the most recent one resulted in wanting statehood by only a 2% majority.
For such a long-term action with wide-ranging effects, I think it’s reasonable to expect Puerto Rico to clearly make the preference known by an unquestionable 2/3rd majority since it effects everyone on the island. Shoving through something so dramatic based on a slight majority is disrespectful to the half of the island that doesn’t want to become a state. Whether that would pass through congress is unknown, but certainly not in the current moment. But an irrefutable desire for statehood coming from PR itself seems a necessary first step before anything else is done, and that has not yet occurred.
There’s also the fact that a lot of people in power in Puerto Rico (and in mainland U.S.) are making a lot of money off of the grifty laws under which the territory is governed. So when these referendums come up the propaganda machine starts to do its work on the populace.
this is a critical point. any chance of a meaningful positive change for Puerto Rico runs the risk of being overrun with corruption at very high levels, especially corruption coming from the U.S. i would guess the island has a better chance if they become a U.S. state, because federal law on corruption in the states is strict, or at least more strict
I understand your point, but at the end of the day those that vote are the ones that “count”. I personally am one of the many that didn’t vote in those referendums due to feeling insulted by them.
The general consensus of this is that why would you vote in this when it won’t change anything? Congress didn’t approve it, so nothing will come out of it. There are some other reasons, of course, but this one of the most common ones.
You think the people that vote are the ones that count, but you were insulted by a domestically initiated internal referendum asking you to vote on the future political status of your community, so you didn’t vote…? Without a clear mandate from Puerto Rico itself, you seem to be saying you’d prefer congress to decide the status of Puerto Rico for Puerto Ricans.
If so, you got exactly what you asked for, and I see little room for complaining about it.
It’s a complicated situation, many people were upset due to the status consultation process being used as fear mongering for some national concerns and as leverage to have people vote a certain way to “guarantee the right choice” by multiple political parties.
This reason is why so many people abstained from voting in these last two.
I personally don’t believe Congress will ever grant statehood to Puerto Rico, but my opinion is hardly relevant to this particular situation.
Tldr of why I didn’t vote is very simple. If Congress won’t acknowledge the multiple results of past referendums and the local parties use the referendums for fear mongering…not a worthwhile effort.
But that’s my point. I think you have the order of operations wrong. The multiple results of past referendums have been, in general, against statehood. The most recent showed a bare majority. Without an unquestionable majority of Puerto Ricans making clear what they want for Puerto Rico, asking congress to take unilateral action on the political status of the island – whether it’s statehood, commonwealth, or independent nation – is just a rehearsal of the same domestic-dependent imperialism that made Puerto Rico a commonwealth in the first place. The fact that congress not doing anything means PR stays a commonwealth is a result of that being the current status quo. If the people of PR want a change in the political status of PR, they need to initiate that and make it clear.
You can’t say that the referendums don’t count, that internal politics influences the results, and that it’s just fear-mongering because PR wouldn’t be able to be economically stable as an independent nation – all internal problems that don’t need congress’s involvement to be remedied – and then simultaneously criticize congress for not doing anything. That’s a wildly colonized mindset. Not doing anything is precisely what congress should be doing, if they have any respect for the self-governance and desires of the Puerto Rico itself.
Why not a state? Seems silly to think they’d want to build up their own military and international relations.
I can see why some would want to be independent. There are downsides to being in a fixed currency union with the US. Inflation that’s driven by a booming economy on the mainland can drive up prices in PR, even if there isn’t a corresponding economic boom there to justify it. Puerto Rico currently has to endure the Jones Act, which substantially drives up the price of goods shipped there from the US mainland. They wouldn’t be subject to it if they were an independent country.
You mention a military, but as an independent country, they wouldn’t actually have to field a big military. Look at the other states in the neighborhood. The Dominican Republic is a good model. They currently spend about 0.7% of their GDP on the military, the US spends about 3.5%. And that’s what they spend sharing a giant land border with Haiti, a completely failed state. Most of their military is on that land border trying to keep people from coming across. As a whole, military spending in Central America and the Caribbean is quite low. The whole area is in the US’s backyard, and the US is never going to accept some other nation going on a warpath through the Caribbean. If tomorrow some later-day Napoleon takes over the Dominican Republic, and they decide to invade island after island in some grand imperial war, the US is not going to sit back and just let that happen. For the independent nations of the Caribbean and Central America, the US’s generations-long policy, overt or covert, is, “don’t worry too much about overt military threats from your neighbors. If anyone actually threatens your borders, we’ll stop them. Stay in our trading sphere and don’t ally with adversarial powers to the US, and your security is assured.”
Realistically, an independent Puerto Rico would have zero external military threats to worry about. What limited military it would need would mostly be spent protecting its territorial waters from illegal exploitation, or in preventing migrants from coming in from nations undergoing severe political discord. But if anyone ever tried to invade them, the US would certainly step in.
In fact, their only serious threat from invasion would come from the US itself. If an independent Puerto Rico decided for some reason to seriously ally itself with China, and let the Chinese Navy set up a huge base on the island, or something similar, they could end up as a second Cuba.
But as long as they don’t do that, they would face few security threats. Realistically, like other island states in the area, an independent PR would need very little military spending. Hell, the US would likely pay for the entire PR military through generous security assistance grants provided in exchange for letting the US keep military bases on the island.
If the citizens of PR want to go full Cuba - seize all the tourist and other assets held by mainland investors, become friendly with Russia/China, go fully overt socialist or Communist? In that case, independence would likely turn out very badly for the future of the island. But if they want to become independent, but just take on a roll very similar to the other independent island states in the area? - Remain friendly to the US, keep trading with the US, largely rely on the US for protection from overt military threats, etc? They could actually do quite well by independence.
Of course, there are advantages to statehood as well. Having your citizens fully eligible for all forms of federal assistance, when your population’s average wealth and income is well below national averages? That has some advantages. It would allow PR to give welfare benefits to their poorest people at a level of generosity that they could never afford to do as an independent state. Plus having representatives and Senators can’t hurt. Smaller states often are able to divert federal spending to within their borders in exchange for a vote in the Senate.
So really, I can see valid arguments on both sides. But personally, I think it’s time we settle the matter. I’m in favor of Congress passing a law which directly forces the issue. Pass an act that grants either full statehood or full independence to Puerto Rico - and make it entirely contingent on a final binding referendum. I think territories like PR are an anachronism in this day and age, and I think the US needs to get out of the business of holding heavily populated territories. I think our territories, at least those with any more than a trivial number of people on them - should either be granted independence, be fully integrated as proper states, or be folded into existing states. I don’t mind some tiny rock with 5 people on it remaining a territory indefinitely, but we shouldn’t have territories where thousands of people live on them without full representation. I’m in favor of passing laws that force the issue on all of our present territories. Personally I would be fine giving the US Virgin Islands the choice - join PR in statehood or become independent. For the ones in the Pacific, the choice could be - join Hawaii or become independent. Or maybe we could just fold all the remaining non-Hawaii states into a single new state called “The State of Outlying Pacific Islands”. I’m sure the first act of that state’s legislature would be to come up with a better name for the place.
Of course, there are advantages to statehood as well. Having your citizens fully eligible for all forms of federal assistance, when your population’s average wealth and income is well below national averages? That has some advantages.
Especially since Puerto Rico is right in hurricane alley. This is going to become increasinly relevant, fast.
Also, it seems like such a huge issue to force unless there’s a giant majority one way or another, which would only happen if there was some MASSIVE benefit or detriment to becoming a state (which is totally possible). If they marginally decide to go one way, and the next years the population realizes it was a huge mistake due to changes, they’re screwed.
Just as an example, the U.S. could actually go mad, and Peurto Rico would want nothing to do with them. If they were already a state… that would suck. Alternatively, maybe we hit some climate tipping point sooner than expected, and hurricanes become such an existential threat that they need federal help to deal with them. If they became independant, well, that’s not an option anymore. Both very possible scenarios.
I don’t see them as even tangentially American. It’s a totally different place, people, language and culture. They are as American as Barbados, Jamaica or Cuba.
Speaking as a Floridian and general Southerner… could not disagree more.
That’s how I feel about Dakotans. Not even close to American.
They can become a state if they want to. They have voted against it in the past.
Their most recent vote in 2020 results in favor of statehood (not by much). However, Congress has to make it happen, not Puerto Rico.
deleted by creator
What was the message behind abstaining?
deleted by creator
All those reasons sound entirely plausible, but perhaps statehood is one path toward fixing them. Clearly statehood would result in better representation. I don’t see how you get that any other way.
- If PR were a state, would the FEMA response to that hurricane a few years back, be so bad?
- Would they get more infrastructure spending to keep rebuilding their electrical grid: heck turn the island into 100% renewables, with mini-grids for resilience?
- Would there be more trade, tourism, commercial development, leading to more well paying jobs?
- would their local government get more oversight, higher standards (I’m assuming but maybe not)
What’s the objection to tourism? A bunch of people travelling there, spending tons of money, chances for Puerto Ricans to make much more money than they typically would …. How can I visit there and not be part of the problem?
deleted by creator
For sure it’s not up to us whether they should pursue statehood, but understanding the objection to tourism is important to being a successful tourist
- as a tourist I expect to go somewhere and spend way too much money getting at least some exposure to a different culture or spectacle. I expect to be respectful and open minded. I hope to have an authentic experience rather than an Americanized or fast food experience. I expect some locals to earn quite a bit of money off my travels, even if I can’t afford it
- as someone living in a city that does attract a lot of tourists, I see that it makes a huge contribution our local economy. Some thing’s are tourist traps but local culture thrives and those of us living here are not unduly impacted
- cruise ships seem like a nightmare in many ways. In this context perhaps it’s a sudden overwhelming flood of tourists that has most impact, plus they wouldn’t be staying so the local benefit is minimized
- I’ve encountered the occasional rude or disrespectful tourist but not very often
Actually, no, understanding objections to statehood is also important. I mean it’s their choice but the highest form of patriotism is self-criticism, learning to be better. Regardless of their choice, I want to understand how we can make the US better
Have you looked into how native Hawaiians feel about being a US state?
I’m not sure that’s a good analogy. Given the history of Hawaii with corporate control, natives being pushed off their land and now a minority on their own islands, that more like asking the Sioux how it’s going. Clearly an era we did poorly.
I really enjoyed visiting there a few years ago and definitely want to go back! I’ve since paid more attention and at least from what I’ve seen, statehood seems like the best path forward. My wife and I also visited Iceland last year, but that island is in a completely different situation in multiple ways. Their geothermal power is awesome though. PR could certainly benefit from renewables but more local control and growth. You’re asking some good questions though.
What are some of your best experiences in Iceland?
Both have been on my list for a while, but out of the blue, one of my kids asked about visiting Iceland. I have no idea where his interest is from, but I’m excited about the idea. Just need to get the kid a passport and wait for an opportune school break
Independence wasnt on the menu
came to say this. Its kinda their own fault. Which more than anything indicates how american they are.
My understanding is that many Puerto Ricans don’t even want statehood.
About 50-60% want statehood, it’s the majority opinion, but a lot of people like not having income taxes
deleted by creator
They just want independence iirc
That’s actually a pretty fringe belief on Puerto Rico
Just take statehood away from North Dakota and give it to PR so we can keep the number of stars and stripes.
Number of stripes isn’t going to change; it’ll stay at 13.
50 stars is boomer shit. Time for 51.
Change the number of stripes, too. Add blue stripes, turn the red stripes pink, and ditch the Bald Eagle for a shark.
Only then will America truly be Woke.
Merge north and south dakota
North Dakota isn’t real anyway.
But South Manitoba is.
West Virginia is an illegal state
That’s actually an interesting question. SCOTUS kinda dodged answering it, though there’s a 1970 decision that seems to imply they accept WV’s validity. The ultimate question comes down to if states that left to form the Confederacy were still US states during that period, because that determines whether or not the clause in the Constitution about creating a state from territory held by another state applies. If Virginia was under the US Constitution during the Civil War then yeah, WV is an illegal state.
And North Carolina and South Carolina while we’re at it.
That would make space for DC statehood as well.
South Dakota is cool so they can just be in charge of ND from now on.
Having lived in both, sounds like ND would be the only one benefitting there. Have Noem and Burgum fight for which state has the power.
ND is a shithole with an insignificant population, its the capital of the US in terms of wild dogs and birth defects correlating with flare stack methane emissions.
The best part of ND would be the natives, but given their sovereignty they won’t be affected by the changeover.
ND rates high in birth defects? I didn’t know that. I tried looking up data, but everything from CDC, March of Dimes, and studies done by ND universities put the state about dead center among other states. Do you have a link about this statistic? I would like to learn more.
AFAIK there is no study comparing the rates of birth defects in new births every year by state, though just about every state tracks it, rather most states only get rated by number of infant mortalities which is a different stat: only 1 in 4 fatalities are from birth defects.
My comment was just a big sharp jab at North Dakota for its policies, but if there was any truth to it that was because of methane emissions correlating highly. ND has the second largerst emissions per capita in 2017 according to World Research Institute and those emissions are further concentrated to specific counties involved in the oilfield. Articles talking about emissions impacts on public health like This One point out that 80% of Fracking is done in Texas and North Dakota, and articles like This Other Article which also mentions North Dakota specifically. NRDC also has a write up about reduced weight as a result of emissions and exposure, and it again mentions North Dakota by name.
Unfortunately, though, no. I don’t have data to back up my earlier claim.
Oh no problem, I wasn’t trying to play gotcha. But thanks for this info. I don’t know much about ND.
Add DC and make it an even 52
Combine the Dakotas. Combine Montana and Wyoming. Make Puerto Rico a state. Return the vast majority of the District of Columbia back to Virginia and Maryland, save a core that actually contains the Capitol, White House, etc (to retain the point - which was that the seat of federal government is not subject to any state).
I think you underestimate the political power Wyoming wields. For a clue, take a look at one of Wyoming’s largest industries.
A better way to say is Puerto Rico has more US citizens than 18 US States. If the goal is to piss off maga that is.
This page from 2020 says 20
https://puertoricoreport.com/population-puerto-rico-exceeds-populations-21-states/
A comment on that linked story says:
Unfortunately, this article is 3 years old and the data is inaccurate. Immigration from PR to USA has been huge in last three years; thus, you should update your data!
Yeah, But if you look even closer and do the math. They updated that article in 2020. Its four years out of date. Hence the reason why the url has 21 in it and the current version of the article has 20 states but the current number is 18 states.
I honestly don’t think this would ever get support. Puerto Rico is very republican last I checked so dems aren’t exactly incentivized to vote it in. And republicans don’t want it because that would be fair treatment to a minority so
I’m more interested in PR having representation then how it affects my own opinions.
Yeah I agree, I meant more the actual lawmakers aren’t terribly incentivized
If they have enough people for four representatives, then if they stay a territory they ought to get more than the single delegate they have in the House. I don’t even care if that would add more siding with Republicans, they deserve more than they have.
Irony of the situation that the same Republican Party hates Puerto Ricans so much. I hope PR folks understand that when repubes say migrants are rapists, druggists, and murderers they also mean you - even though you’re not migrants - MAGA doesn’t give a fuck to the fact that you’re citizens.
"No no no…he’s talking about Haitians, those savages.
We Puerto Ricans are the exemption. We’re special."
We’re the good ones
first they came for the LGBTQ and we said nothing for we were not them, then they came for the couch cushions and we laughed… wait.
Cubans who came here legally are the exception.
The legal way for Cubans to come here is to come here. Literally, they can get residency as long as they show up
Which is why, like in all past state additions, you do it in a way that is balanced based on contemporary divides, like slave vs free states. Puerto Rico and DC at the same time.
I don’t think “very republican” is accurate but definitely not as left leaning as Dems like to believe. There is a deep seeded mistrust of government while at the same time high expectations of benefits from the government. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ So the bottom line is that you just can’t tell which way they would go and that’s not a gamble either party wants to take.
Until the population clearly wants statehood or independence, we get the status quo
Kamala should seize on this and say she’d push for statehood, if not for anything other than to watch Republicans say they would oppose it.
Dems don’t want it to have statehood either. It would make Puerto Rico less exploitable, and the donors don’t want that.
I am surprised conservatives don’t want to add PR as a state, Republicans would definitely get more reps voting along religious lines in congress
It’s because racism
They’ll take the votes. They just don’t want to be seen with them.
If a potential new state has a relatively heavily (say 60%+) lean then it’ll never be admitted unless steps are taken to balance it out. Like how certain subdividing of California could. Unless the Democrats have a supermajority in both houses, and the President, and they actually get their heads out of their asses enough to get something done, I doubt Puerto Rico will ever get statehood. They might want to kick out the overrepresented continental real estate assholes first.
That is some Missouri Compromise level bullshit and it led to the first civil war. Fuck that. Stop giving racists an unfair artificial advantage.
Where did he say that? All I see is then pointing out that unless dems control the house, senate, and presidency, it would never happen.
Surprised at 18, but guess it’s not that surprising.
It’s not hard to beat Wyoming in population especially.
