United States and a "Union"

Ansar

Détente avec l'été
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
10,555
Location
Ithaca, NY (soon)
How come the US hasn't formed a union with any other countries? (Btw, I'm not talking about something like NAFTA or OPEC, I mean a union like the EU)

I mean, like, how come the US hasn't done anything like the EU? No similar countries?
Could there be any sort of union with Canada in the future?

Maybe Canada, UK, and the US?
 
How come the US hasn't formed a union with any other countries? (Btw, I'm not talking about something like NAFTA or OPEC, I mean a union like the EU)

I mean, like, how come the US hasn't done anything like the EU?
Could there be any sort of union with Canada in the future?

Maybe Canada, UK, and the US?
Because the US likes how everthing is now!
 
Because the US has a tremendous cultural tradition of being sovereign in its affairs.

Oh and yeah, we're already a union. :p
 
We're big enough not to need a union. One fifth of world GDP, one half of world defense spending, 300 million people and 50 states is a pretty good union in and of itself.

Although I wouldn't be opposed to a US-UK-Canada-Australia-NZ economic pact. I think it was VWRCAgent who proposed it earlier...

Economic unions > political unions anyway. ;)


-Integral
 
Because we are a Union of states? Just because there's enough history in Europe to consist of countries, doesn't mean it's that different. They are just following our lead (and about time, good for them).

Canada? In time, it's not far... once we go back to a passive power it will happen. This policing crap will not encourage it. Mexico is on their own... maybe they can do something in Central America...
 
And a civil war made sure we stayed a Union! :yeah:
 
Yes, the United States of America is already an union - just look at the name!

UK: Too far.

Canada: Would be dominated by US, self-image of Canada is being Not-America. Itself an union, with large portions of it already resentful of submitting to Ottawa.
 
A union of 50 states?

The Declaration of Independence reads "these united States," not "these United States." Note the subtle difference. Though it's been two hundred years heretofore, and that line has been considerably blurred, especially to the modern populace, that distinction was once very important, and in fact, one of the principles of the Early Republic itself.
 
NEVER.

I would rebel against the government. I would not submit to the US occupation. I would vote NON on the referendum and urge others to as well. STAY united, NOT United!
 
In many ways the EU is what the US once was 200 years ago -- a confederation of independent States.

Over those 200 years the central government has grown to the point that people identify the US as their nation, but back then, if you asked an American his nationality he would tell you which state he was from.

In short: Bin there, done that.
 
Ugh, please no. I'm all for closer ties (open border between the US and Canada, common currencies a la Euro) but political integration isn't attractive.
 
Integral said:
Although I wouldn't be opposed to a US-UK-Canada-Australia-NZ economic pact. I think it was VWRCAgent who proposed it earlier...

Called it! :D


Augurey said:
Ugh, please no. I'm all for closer ties (open border between the US and Canada, common currencies a la Euro) but political integration isn't attractive.

NAU FTW!

...Really. It's not like the US-Canadian border is fortified anyway. And since the currencies are trading near parity, a single currency wouldn't be hard to arrange (may or may not be a good idea, but not hard to implement nonetheless). An economic union would probably benefit both countries. Though not a political union. The Canadians didn't do anything to deserve our debt. I wouldn't wish that on anyone. ;)


-Integral
 
The Canadians didn't do anything to deserve our debt.
They burned our capital down and brought us Celine Dion. They deserve much worse than sharing the debt.
 
Top Bottom