[michiganmoon]

Lets not forget that the:

1) Northwest Ordinance, passed twice - specified that the states made from the Northwest Territory (Michigan) will forever be a part of the Union.

and

2) The Supreme Court ruled that states cannot unilaterally secede from the Union.

[baystater]

Originally Posted by darstar

And , South Michigan , will start having warmer winters , even sort of tropical, palm trees will sprout , monkeys will swing from the trees , and coconuts will fall on our heads....come on back to Michigan , it might be later than you think....O' , don't forget to bring your Tropical tanning oil !

Well If Global warm goes as they say it's suppose to we just may see it. But if not I bring the tanning oil anyways.

[100%Michigan]

Michigan should stay with America
Stay with the USA... our history goes back to far...

[darstar]

Originally Posted by 100%Michigan

Michigan should stay with America
Stay with the USA... our history goes back to far...

Most of us agree , but , the real issue is the UP , it can be said that because of the social, and geographical differences , north and south , that proper representation is lacking for the lesser peoples ( in numbers ) in the UP. .Taxation , with out representation , may be at the root of all this. As it is now , Michigan will have to increase almost all taxes , across the board , to make up for the failing economy in the lower section of the state. The jobs have gone, the auto industry is broken , the people from south of the US boarder are the only increase in population. This alone is putting a strain on the state budget, at , a time when affording it is out of the question.......... services will have to be cut, state programs will have to step in to bail out failing bus sines and industry's that are left , including the fruit farmers , if , they loose the cheap labor..( their statement , not mine ). So , I ask , should the Yoopers have to pay for this as well ? One could argue that they should , because of the investment the State has made in the UP over the years. The argument could also be made , that the land above the bridge , has paid a heavy price for the extracting and selling off it natural resources the past 150 years.
Sorry , this should be in another forum , but , I think everyone is watching both threads anyway........

[100%Michigan]

Good point, I talked with many Yoopers/Michiganders and they simply said that they would not want to break apart from Lower Michigan. Some said it will simply destroy the meaning of the Mackinaw Bridge that their ancestors put in fourth... others simply said only a man with no brain ( meaning a no good man ) will try to take the sisters apart.

[darstar]

Originally Posted by 100%Michigan

Good point, I talked with many Yoopers/Michiganders and they simply said that they would not want to break apart from Lower Michigan. Some said it will simply destroy the meaning of the Mackinaw Bridge that their ancestors put in fourth... others simply said only a man with no brain ( meaning a no good man ) will try to take the sisters apart.

I am not sure just where the Bridge comes to play here. Its only been 50 years since the bridge was built. before that , we had to cross by ferry. I do not know if it is a paying thing or not , need to look up the history and current stats. The Bridge could be sold , for needed revenue, to a private enterprise . There a lot of toll roads that are now in the hands of private industry. Not saying its a good thing , or , a bad thing , just something to look at. My guess , is , Lansing has that already on the table for discussion........

[STLCardsBlues1989]

I'm sure Canada would want more control of the Great Lakes, but would they want Michigan's employment issues also? Detroit itself is in pretty bad shape from what I hear.

[Frankie117]

I can see the UP becoming separate. But not leaving the Union...that won't happen.

If Michigan seceded from the Union...thats basically declaring war on the other 49 states.

If any state needs to be divided, its California..right across the middle (for management purposes, not really political)

[magellan]

Originally Posted by STLCardsBlues1989

I'm sure Canada would want more control of the Great Lakes, but would they want Michigan's employment issues also? Detroit itself is in pretty bad shape from what I hear.

Actually, Ontario's November 07 unemployment rate was 6.2%. Michigan's was 7.4%. I would think they might want unfettered access to Michigan, especially with all the automotive commerce between Detroit and Ontario.

[michiganmoon]

Originally Posted by darstar

Most of us agree , but , the real issue is the UP , it can be said that because of the social, and geographical differences , north and south , that proper representation is lacking for the lesser peoples ( in numbers ) in the UP. .Taxation , with out representation , may be at the root of all this. As it is now , Michigan will have to increase almost all taxes , across the board , to make up for the failing economy in the lower section of the state. The jobs have gone, the auto industry is broken , the people from south of the US boarder are the only increase in population. This alone is putting a strain on the state budget, at , a time when affording it is out of the question.......... services will have to be cut, state programs will have to step in to bail out failing bus sines and industry's that are left , including the fruit farmers , if , they loose the cheap labor..( their statement , not mine ). So , I ask , should the Yoopers have to pay for this as well ? One could argue that they should , because of the investment the State has made in the UP over the years. The argument could also be made , that the land above the bridge , has paid a heavy price for the extracting and selling off it natural resources the past 150 years.
Sorry , this should be in another forum , but , I think everyone is watching both threads anyway........

I find this a bit odd:

1) In the Michigan Legislature, the districts are carved out by population and in fact the upper peninsula gets slightly more represenation per capita than the lower peninsula.

2) Your same arguments for the upper peninsula getting taxed unfairly could be made for practically half of the lower peninsula counties.

3) I would be willing to bet that per capita the lower peninsula pays out a higher rate in taxes as that is where most of the biggest companies and wealthiest people are based in our state.

4) The "No taxation without representation" rhetoric was always a fraud gimmick. England offered us, the colonies representation, and we turned it down and chose not to have representation. On top of it people living in the North American colonies paid less in taxes than people living in England, despite the fact that it was highly expensive to maintain British armies in North America to fight the French in the French and Indian War and protect the colonists from some tribal nations - all of which the colonists had previously wanted help with and got at much expense to the British government. All Britain wanted to do, was have the Americans pay a small fraction of the debt that the Americans ran up from military protection that they wanted.