ForumGarden

I'd like to make a proposal which would defuse the present crisis relating to fourteen million residents of the United States having no right of residence or permit to work.

I suggest that Mexico abandon its sovereignty and allows its entire territory to be amalgamated into the United States, which would thereby gain twenty additional states and a vastly enhanced economy. The upper house in Washington would expand to 140 seats, the lower house would retain the present number of Congressors distributed proportionately across the revised states, the population density of the USA would only rise by 10%, all Mexican law would become obsolete and I suggest each of the new Mexican states should adopt and adjust the existing state law of whichever US state it chooses to model itself on.

Problems fixed, everyone a winner. The minimal number of residents of the expanded United States of America still having no right of residence or permit to work can then be dealt with expeditiously and nobody will have built a wall. The Canadians could even have a referendum on whether they should be included.

I have no problem with that. But will I have to learn to speak Spanish?

YZGI;1500614 wrote: I have no problem with that. But will I have to learn to speak Spanish?


That would probably depend on how far north you are. That increase of 10% (!?) density would probably be in California, Arizona and Texas. I live in a border town and as it is, when I go to a doctor or hospital I am usually the only Anglo or English-speaking person in the waiting room. At WalMart all the clerks are Mexican and some of the signs are in Spanish with NO English translation. Fortunately I speak Spanish.

Maybe I can teach it.

I think we should float that idea before the Mexican president and see what he thinks.

Any truth to the rumour canada is planning to build a wall keeping out americans fleeing after trump wins the presidency?

Meanwhile inspired by trump Scotland to rebuild Hadrian's Wall and charge it to London.

gmc;1500617 wrote: Any truth to the rumour canada is planning to build a wall keeping out americans fleeing after trump wins the presidency?

Meanwhile inspired by trump Scotland to rebuild Hadrian's Wall and charge it to London.


I reckon it will be a wall of snow.

If Mexico is going to pay for the wall will they pay in Peso's? Aint gonna be much of a wall.

The US tried to annex Canada once, in 1812. Some politicians thought that England would be too busy with Napoleon to resist. They were wrong and it didn't work.

The US did annex the part of Mexico they wanted in 1846.

Mexico would never go for it.

Much more profit taking some of our states.

gmc;1500617 wrote: Meanwhile inspired by trump Scotland to rebuild Hadrian's Wall and charge it to London.
Hey! London paid for it first time round.

Wandrin;1500626 wrote: The US tried to annex Canada once, in 1812. Some politicians thought that England would be too busy with Napoleon to resist. They were wrong and it didn't work.

The US did annex the part of Mexico they wanted in 1846.


We did allow Texas to become a part of the Union.

Gave the people what they wanted.

spot;1500630 wrote: Hey! London paid for it first time round.


No they didn't it was those italian immigrants.

Nigel farage thinks the wall is feasible so that's it settled then.

tude dog;1500634 wrote: We did allow Texas to become a part of the Union.

Gave the people what they wanted.


Actually, Texas wanted to be a state in Mexico and were negotiating that until Mexico outlawed slavery in 1830. Only then did they want to be part of the US.

spot;1500597 wrote: I'd like to make a proposal which would defuse the present crisis relating to fourteen million residents of the United States having no right of residence or permit to work.

I suggest that Mexico abandon its sovereignty and allows its entire territory to be amalgamated into the United States, which would thereby gain twenty additional states and a vastly enhanced economy. The upper house in Washington would expand to 140 seats, the lower house would retain the present number of Congressors distributed proportionately across the revised states, the population density of the USA would only rise by 10%, all Mexican law would become obsolete and I suggest each of the new Mexican states should adopt and adjust the existing state law of whichever US state it chooses to model itself on.

Problems fixed, everyone a winner. The minimal number of residents of the expanded United States of America still having no right of residence or permit to work can then be dealt with expeditiously and nobody will have built a wall. The Canadians could even have a referendum on whether they should be included.


Taking out under 17's, pensioners and women, America would gain another million or so, of conscripts to the US military which could come in pretty handy in their next invasion of the middle east or flexing of muscles at Iran and Russia. After all, what could possibly wrong ?

I can't see women escaping the draft next time round, there's too many equality laws.

Wandrin;1500641 wrote: Actually, Texas wanted to be a state in Mexico and were negotiating that until Mexico outlawed slavery in 1830. Only then did they want to be part of the US.


Who was the yellow rose of texas? A real person or a tale blown up from am old song.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Yello ... xas_(song)

gmc;1500658 wrote: Who was the yellow rose of texas? A real person or a tale blown up from am old song.Back in the days when Texas was new to the Union and had very few settlers, this song was intended to attract farmers to the region. Years later, the original hand-hoed "rows" became misinterpreted as "Rose" and has always appeared that way in print, but the song started out as propaganda describing the healthy state of the Texan soil for planting agrarian produce - especially cotton which grew easily in "The Yellow Rows of Texas".

Sorry posted wrong link.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Yello ... xas_(song)

posted by spot

Back in the days when Texas was new to the Union and had very few settlers, this song was intended to attract farmers to the region. Years later, the original hand-hoed "rows" became misinterpreted as "Rose" and has always appeared that way in print, but the song started out as propaganda describing the healthy state of the Texan soil for planting agrarian produce - especially cotton which grew easily in "The Yellow Rows of Texas".


Sorry that seems a bit unlikely the wiki explanation makes more sense soldiers aren't likely to sing songs about planting the fields but about a girl left behind oh yes.

Funny how skin colour can be made to matter.

The girl left behind was, I have always been taught, allergic to pollen and consequently incapable of harvesting.

The rows were yellow on account of the soil appearing so when freshly turned.

spot;1500662 wrote: The girl left behind was, I have always been taught, allergic to pollen and consequently incapable of harvesting.

The rows were yellow on account of the soil appearing so when freshly turned.


Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Yello ... xas_(song) is probably a more accurate story of the song origins.

spot;1500630 wrote: Hey! London paid for it first time round.


Actually, London wasn't even the Capital City until 1265. Before that it was Winchester. And Chester, being a Roman suffix would probably indicate that it was Winchester that paid for it.

FourPart;1500841 wrote: Actually, London wasn't even the Capital City until 1265. Before that it was Winchester. And Chester, being a Roman suffix would probably indicate that it was Winchester that paid for it.


Hadrian's Wall started construction after Hadrian's Visit, 122CE.

During the later decades of the 1st century, Londinium expanded rapidly, becoming Great Britain's largest city. By the turn of the century, Londinium had grown to about 60,000 people, almost certainly replacing Camulodunum (Colchester) as the provincial capital and by the 2nd century, Londinium was at its height. Its forum and basilica were one of the largest structures north of the Alps, when the Emperor Hadrian visited Londinium in 122.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Londinium#Status



I'm not sure there was ever a time when Winchester could have been described as the capital city of anything larger than the Kingdom of the West Saxons. Perhaps you can suggest someone who claims otherwise, or that it applied beyond the Norman Conquest, and I can discover what I've so far misunderstood. But as far as 122CE is concerned, taking another quote referenced in Wikipedia, Although in the early years of the Roman province it was of subsidiary importance to Silchester and Chichester, Venta [as Winchester was then named] eclipsed them both by the latter half of the second century - some generations after Hadrian had been and gone.