Some nations, like myself, operate multiple smaller carriers as an alternative to one large carrier. I may add a carrier if I switch over - but until then my budget allows for two of the "harrier carriers"; fine for small numbers of aircraft and UAVs.
If DC becomes a state it defeats the whole purpose of its existence, to form a capital district outside of any one state. The idea was so successful that numerous other countries followed suit. Should they have representation in the House, yes they should, but they should not now or ever be a state.
Why should they have representation in the house but not the senate? And if you think they should have senate representation, why should they not be a state?
This is pretty much the plan proposed by the bill. Federal buildings/land/monuments/etc will not be included as part of the state
Show me where the original agreement requires the land to be returned if this happens.
As an aside, I'm reasonably certain Maryland doesn't want it anyways
Maryland doesn't want them. Which as the case then they should be allowed to be their own state. Do you remember what the US was founded on? "No taxation without representation." That is the case for this, and also why Puerto Rico should be stated as well. I'd say Guam too but they don't actually want to be a state so fair enough.
Your right Maryland doesn't want them, nor do they want to join Maryland, but the US Constitution states that there must be a Federal Capital District that is outside of any state. If D.C. becomes a state, then can it legally still be the Capital? Puerto Rico, chose to become a Commonwealth and not a state or independent. There has been many plebiscites to change Puerto Rico's status and everyone of them has had the majority wanting to maintain the status quo.
[quote=shidei;43674153]Why should they have representation in the house but not the senate? And if you think they should have senate representation, why should they not be a state? The House of Representatives was set up to allow representation of the people in Congress, the Senate was suppose to give the State governments representation in Congress. Everyone should have a voting representation in the House, but the City of Washington lacks many requirements for statehood, population not being one of them. I remember this same discussion back in the 70s, one argument was that DC lacks any means to produce goods, they are strictly a service economy, no mines or farmland.
Hyukai
Athara magarat
I am just curious...how much do you guys think I like owe in war reparations and how much to whom. If my knowledge is right, both Germany and Japan paid around 23 billion USD each.
(Imperial War only. Plz don't dig into other wars started by me okay...)
tbh the constitutional arguments against the validity of DC statehood are all basically people muddying the water so they don't have to come out and say why they really don't want it to be a state. Like it's pretty clear the workarounds aren't particularly difficult even without amending anything.
like it's just a consistent thing you see all the time with these arguments, the right wing position is just a series of bad faith specious arguments that aren't as much an attempt to convince anyone as much as they are an attempt to just wear people down until they stop engaging.
I saw an argument that was, well if the Dems want DC and Puerto Rico, how would they feel about Texas splitting into five states. It's like sure, if that's how you feel represented go ahead, you have that option by Texas' constitution
"It's unfair and anti-democratic!" they cry, as they push forward legislation restricting the ability to vote
"We're being politically oppressed and censored!" they claim, on the most watched news outlet in the country listening to one of the biggest and most popular media personalities on the continent
Depends, I’d figure the amount remains somewhat proportional to the RL figure but there’s the question of if AM remains beholden to pay said reparations in the modern day.
For instance, the United Republics (or at least as far as I’ve considered it so far) was legally unbound from paying its IW reparations after reunification, since in that case it is a legally distinct entity from the wartime government and the successor states.
well keep in mind, germany finished paying off their WW1 debt by the early 2010's, and they paid off their WW2 debt by the 70's. It all depends on how much we think we need to punish you. IRL we discovered that if the reparations are too extreme then it could lead to the collapse of the country and lead to bigger problems.