Why Puerto Rico should NOT become a state (state government, programs, 2015)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
PR is a total economic basket case. If made a State they will expect the rest of us to bail them out in perpetuity.
I as well do not want PR as a newly minted State to be able to demand that the US become officially bilingual, expecting the rest of us to do everything in two languages such as occurs in Canada.
The one you are replying to sure has a big chip on their shoulder and apparently has a grudge against non-Hispanic whites. Pulls the race card left and right. You are right about Puerto Rico becoming a financial burden to us if they became a state. My main reason for opposing it though is because they would mostly vote Democrat. So no race card pulling is necessary.
Trump has been roundly denounced, by the left and right, for saying U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel may be biased against him because of his Mexican heritage.
"...acting attorney general Sally Yates, who had concluded that the executive order was intended to discriminate based on religion..." [Which our courts have agreed with btw]
Pull your head out...
Oh not this one again! For the umpteenth time Curiel had ties to La Raza a known advocacy group of illegal alien Hispanics. His lawyer's association granted scholarships to illegal aliens. I believe the group even had "La Raza" in it's name. It had nothing to do with the judge's heritage per se. Since a big part of Trump's platform was opposing illegal immigration and deporting illegal aliens there couldn't have been a conflict of interest, now could there been? Please................... Pull your head out!
As for religious discrimination in his travel bans it was based on vetting those from known terrorist countries more thoroughly which produced a lot of Muslim radicals. Oh dear, what was he thinking trying to protect the citizens of this country.
There was no bigotry or racism in either of the above scenarios. Only in a liberal leftist wet dream.
The one you are replying to sure has a big chip on their shoulder and apparently has a grudge against non-Hispanic whites. Pulls the race card left and right. You are right about Puerto Rico becoming a financial burden to us if they became a state. My main reason for opposing it though is because they would mostly vote Democrat. So no race card pulling is necessary.
the one has a name......and if the U.S. leaves it as a territory with that big of a population is a bigger burden.
if the federal government doesn't give Puerto Rico representation and sovereignty rights as a state they will be a bigger burden for the federal government because under the Constitution Territorial clause the Feds are ultimately responsible for their territories and possessions in everything that goes on from top to bottom......and "cutting them loose" is not legally possible.
So you have 2 choices....stay with the status quo and the federal government takes care of their territories or give them statehood that comes sovereignty and representation so that they have the tools and means to take care of their needs and just let the feds handle federal jurisdiction as it was meant to be.
Pretty simple to understand.....if you don't want to have the federal government to have all the burden on Puerto Rico then getting out of the territorial status is what you should be rooting for not the opposite............but then again many here explained that to you and you still don't get it or refuse to understand, so that means it has nothing to do about the burden to the federal government....its something else, so comeout of the closet and be honest with yourself.
Last edited by Hellion1999; 06-25-2017 at 04:10 PM..
oldglory let me explain one last time the situation and not just your baseless bias opinions on Puerto Rico:
Puerto Rico is a U.S. Territory under full jurisdiction of the federal government and all of their residents are U.S. Citizens. The Federal government owns Puerto Rico and the people living in there are fully protected under the U.S. constitution. Meaning you can't "cut them loose"
so in reality you have 2 options under the U.S. CONSTITUTION:
A) Stay with the status quo and keep it a territory and let the federal government have all the burden and ultimate responsibility on their territories and possessions including all their debt like the Constitution demands and keep them fully dependent on the federal government which is hurting growth in the territory because of the size of the population and limited resources.
B) Make them a state give them sovereignty rights and representation on their own land so they have the tools and responsibility to take care of their needs and not put the whole burden on the federal government who obviously can't do the job of a state and federal tasks all at once. That's why the Constitution created the separation of state and the federal government and states rights.
now your argument all along in this forum is you want the best option that is the least burden on the federal government....if that's your argument then option B Statehood is the best option, because it limits the burden on the federal government and it shifts sovereignty rights and the tools the locals needs to solve their needs.....but you argue the opposite when the current territorial status is a burden on both sides.
Oh not this one again! For the umpteenth time Curiel had ties to La Raza a known advocacy group of illegal alien Hispanics. His lawyer's association granted scholarships to illegal aliens. I believe the group even had "La Raza" in it's name. It had nothing to do with the judge's heritage per se. Since a big part of Trump's platform was opposing illegal immigration and deporting illegal aliens there couldn't have been a conflict of interest, now could there been? Please................... Pull your head out!
As for religious discrimination in his travel bans it was based on vetting those from known terrorist countries more thoroughly which produced a lot of Muslim radicals. Oh dear, what was he thinking trying to protect the citizens of this country.
There was no bigotry or racism in either of the above scenarios. Only in a liberal leftist wet dream.
No Curiel had no ties to that La Raza. He belonged to an entirely different organization which was in fact a Hispanic bar group. It may well have granted scholarships to dreamers. As does any number of groups including the State of CA. But it was strictly a small deal no big organization or such. And it did not advocate for illegal aliens.
The problem with the religious discrimination is that Trump made it clear in his public speech that he intended to do so.
oldglory let me explain one last time the situation and not just your baseless bias opinions on Puerto Rico:
Puerto Rico is a U.S. Territory under full jurisdiction of the federal government and all of their residents are U.S. Citizens. The Federal government owns Puerto Rico and the people living in there are fully protected under the U.S. constitution. Meaning you can't "cut them loose"
so in reality you have 2 options under the U.S. CONSTITUTION:
A) Stay with the status quo and keep it a territory and let the federal government have all the burden and ultimate responsibility on their territories and possessions including all their debt like the Constitution demands and keep them fully dependent on the federal government which is hurting growth in the territory because of the size of the population and limited resources.
B) Make them a state give them sovereignty rights and representation on their own land so they have the tools and responsibility to take care of their needs and not put the whole burden on the federal government who obviously can't do the job of a state and federal tasks all at once. That's why the Constitution created the separation of state and the federal government and states rights.
now your argument all along in this forum is you want the best option that is the least burden on the federal government....if that's your argument then option B Statehood is the best option, because it limits the burden on the federal government and it shifts sovereignty rights and the tools the locals needs to solve their needs.....but you argue the opposite when the current territorial status is a burden on both sides.
^ as always, you hit the nail right on the head!
Under statehood, Puerto Ricans would not have to move to Florida, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, etc to obtain equal citizenship rights. This would save money because many Federal programs have a cost of living adjustment, and Puerto Rico has a lower cost of living than most, if not all, states.
The CBO confirmed in 2014 that it would be cheaper to make Puerto Rico a state than to retain the current territorial status. This is why the anti-statehood chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, Doc Hastings hid the report in his desk drawer until Democrats began to question "Whatever happened to that CBO report on statehood?".
This what happens when Americans don't know their own constitution and what are the responsibilities of the federal government and oppose the only option that is best on both sides and takes most of the burden off the federal government.
Under a territorial status which is what Puerto Rico is at this moment, the federal government is fully responsible for everything that happens in the territory including the debt.
Clause 2: Property Clause. The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
Under the current status, the federal government by default makes the territory all but dependent on the federal government including their debt because that's how the federal government set it up.
the only option under the constitution and respecting the rights of the U.S. Citizens in the island is statehood. It gives the local residents sovereignty and representation on their land and their needs and it limits the burden on the federal government and it limits dependency on the federal government because they don't have to manage it all in the island which by default of the current territorial status is hurting growth.
There is a reason why 37 U.S. Territories once their population got bigger they wanted statehood because they wanted sovereignty and control of their lands and representation over the federal laws that rules them......without statehood those territories couldn't sustain their population and would be 100% dependent of the federal government which will hurt any growth in the private sector.
so if the argument for some here that Puerto Rico would be a burden to the federal government by becoming a state and they must stay a territory then they have no clue what they are talking about because the biggest burden on both sides that is hurting growth is the current territorial status which the federal government has total responsibility in the territory including the debt because they set up the system in Puerto Rico to be what it is.
the one has a name......and if the U.S. leaves it as a territory with that big of a population is a bigger burden.
if the federal government doesn't give Puerto Rico representation and sovereignty rights as a state they will be a bigger burden for the federal government because under the Constitution Territorial clause the Feds are ultimately responsible for their territories and possessions in everything that goes on from top to bottom......and "cutting them loose" is not legally possible.
So you have 2 choices....stay with the status quo and the federal government takes care of their territories or give them statehood that comes sovereignty and representation so that they have the tools and means to take care of their needs and just let the feds handle federal jurisdiction as it was meant to be.
Pretty simple to understand.....if you don't want to have the federal government to have all the burden on Puerto Rico then getting out of the territorial status is what you should be rooting for not the opposite............but then again many here explained that to you and you still don't get it or refuse to understand, so that means it has nothing to do about the burden to the federal government....its something else, so comeout of the closet and be honest with yourself.
To be fair: since PR's birthrate's well BELOW replacement level AND the island's pop's already dropping, it becoming a state will probably "kill" the Hispanic culture there since a LOT of anglo white US citizens WILL move there.
To be fair: since PR's birthrate's well BELOW replacement level AND the island's pop's already dropping, it becoming a state will probably "kill" the Hispanic culture there since a LOT of anglo white US citizens WILL move there.
To be fair: since PR's birthrate's well BELOW replacement level AND the island's pop's already dropping, it becoming a state will probably "kill" the Hispanic culture there since a LOT of anglo white US citizens WILL move there.
how does living in statehood compare to a territory will "kill" the Hispanic culture (Whatever that means)?
it sure hasn't "kill" Hispanic culture in the states......have you been to many places in California, Texas, Florida, Arizona, Colorado and New Mexico lately? lots of Hispanic culture there, statehood didn't "kill" it........many anglo white U.S. citizens in those states, I'm sure they haven't got your memo to "kill" it..
Puerto Rico still has 3.4 million residents, that's a bigger population than 20 states.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
