Puerto Rico votes for statehood

[Robert High Hawk]

BostonBMW,

Thank you for your response. To reply with your cut statements bolded:


Therefore, I question the veracity of your argument that the policies of the United States are primarily and directly at fault for the Puerto Rico’s economic woes. Did American policies impact PR negatively? Sure. However the primary cause is linked to poor/corrupt governance and the societal shadow markets outside of government purview.

You are again grossly exagerating what I have said several times. Here's what I wrote to Fisto when he too, said I was mostly blaming the USA for Puerto Rico.
"Not sure what else to say, but I'll make it perfectly clear: The problems Puerto Rico is experiencing are largely and mostly due to their own poor decision making. The government management of Puerto Rico is retarded, and the people who elected them to power are perhaps deliberately ignorant."

You are painting a rather broad brush of this leftist/anticolonialist accusation, not that I particularly care since it's patently false, but I should at least make note of it.

We cannot be tasked with “improving” the situation there any longer. We should be devolving power to PR with the eventual planning for their independence. United States involvement in PR has yielded nothing but criticisms from the left/anti-colonialists such as yourself, therefore, we need to do the right thing and let PR become independent so that they can self-govern, make decisions to improve their country. Most of all, this dependency relationship needs to end.

I said something incredibly similar in my orignal post: that the US government through massive welfare subsidies encouraged a culture of dependency, and that this was bad and a factor in the screwed up situation today. So what exactly is your disagreement again? This is what I wrote specifically "we should write (sic) the ship, get Puerto Rico off of welfare/subsidies, remove economic handicaps and then slowly grant greater autonomy in the direction of Independence." - if you think that sounds leftist or even anti-colonial, we have a fundamental disagreement on some basic definitions.

So I make a post, point out anti-capitalist actions that helped screw up Puerto Rico (while fully acknowledging Puerto Rico's own fault in this situation), recommending removing said leftist impositions, and then you say I'm a leftist and anti-colonialist. Not sure what else to say at this point but it feels like I'm going around in circles.

If you can find an country with 3-4 million people who have won or finaled in more Miss World/Miss Universe pageants, please let me know. Per capita they would be quite high.

And FINALLY... the great flag debate:

[attachment=36924]
[attachment=36925][attachment=36924]

The Cuban and Puerto Rican flag in particular are EXACTLY the same, just opposite colors. (I uploaded from two different sources so it looks a bit different in the post, but I assure the dimensions are exactly the same).

Was Cuba's flag derived from the US too? To compare the Ohio flag is just reaching at this point. You said the Puerto Rican flag was derived from the US flag. It's clearly not.

 

[BostonBMW]

Robert High Hawk,

I appreciate the follow-up. Response in similar formats:

You are again grossly exagerating what I have said several times. Here's what I wrote to Fisto when he too, said I was mostly blaming the USA for Puerto Rico.
"Not sure what else to say, but I'll make it perfectly clear: The problems Puerto Rico is experiencing are largely and mostly due to their own poor decision making. The government management of Puerto Rico is retarded, and the people who elected them to power are perhaps deliberately ignorant."

You are painting a rather broad brush of this leftist/anticolonialist accusation, not that I particularly care since it's patently false, but I should at least make note of it.

So we’re in agreement then. Puerto Rico and its residents are largely responsible for their own economic circumstances. The poor economic result of the contemporary period is a result of low achievement and an undeserved sense of entitlement among Puertoriquenos both on the Island and in the Mainland.

I said something incredibly similar in my orignal post: that the US government through massive welfare subsidies encouraged a culture of dependency, and that this was bad and a factor in the screwed up situation today. So what exactly is your disagreement again? This is what I wrote specifically "we should write (sic) the ship, get Puerto Rico off of welfare/subsidies, remove economic handicaps and then slowly grant greater autonomy in the direction of Independence." - if you think that sounds leftist or even anti-colonial, we have a fundamental disagreement on some basic definitions.

So I make a post, point out anti-capitalist actions that helped screw up Puerto Rico (while fully acknowledging Puerto Rico's own fault in this situation), recommending removing said leftist impositions, and then you say I'm a leftist and anti-colonialist. Not sure what else to say at this point but it feels like I'm going around in circles.

The main issue with your post is the condescending tone in providing a compendium of complaints against the United States and it’s actions in a perceived attempt to shift the blame for PR’s economic situation towards the United States, while retaining a hedge in that very same post. Later on, you decide to expand on that original hedge (I, too, am against Statehood and towards pro-independence) to align with the prevalent position in the thread, which is: PR should in no way be added as the 51st State and the Commonwealth and it’s people are primarily responsible for their current economic state. If you compare your initial post and compare it with later posts which progressively (heh) conform to the main position, then you’ll have your answer of why you’re being challenged here.

I will agree that we exhausted this discussion with your eventual agreement with the dominant position.

The Cuban and Puerto Rican flag in particular are EXACTLY the same, just opposite colors. (I uploaded from two different sources so it looks a bit different in the post, but I assure the dimensions are exactly the same).

Was Cuba's flag derived from the US too? To compare the Ohio flag is just reaching at this point. You said the Puerto Rican flag was derived from the US flag. It's clearly not.


Again, you need to read my post 57 and verify the sources which clearly state: resembling that of the flag of the United States, to keep it distanced from its revolutionary roots.

How is comparing to Ohio’s flag reaching when both Ohio and Puerto Rico are linked to the United States?

As for the Cuban flag, I wasn’t going to engage, but I am actually enjoying proving you wrong at each turn. How about we read up on the History of the Cuban flag:

After fighting for the Spanish Crown against the rebel armies of Venezuela, Narciso López moved from his native Caracas to Havana, Cuba. His involvement in anticolonial movements forced him to be banished. In 1849 he moved to New York City, where he continued to fight for the rights to be an independent Cuban.

The three blue stripes represent the three departments in which Cuba was divided at that time, the white purity of ideals, the light; the red triangle, originating from the French Revolution – and the three ideals of liberty, equality and fraternity: red for the blood and the courage; the star was the new state that should be added to the United States.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Cuba

I suggest that you drop the Puerto Rican, Cuban flag matters by admitting that you have been factually and utterly wrong in each and every instance. The Flag of Cuba (since we’re expanding the discussion) has a significant United States connection as well.

So please don’t waste any more of my time on this matter and accept that you are wrong about the origins of the Cuban, Puerto Rican flags.

 

[Yatagan]

This place should've been cut loose a loooong time ago.

 

[Robert High Hawk]

BBMW,

You wrote:

The main issue with your post is the condescending tone in providing a compendium of complaints against the United States and it’s actions in a perceived attempt to shift the blame for PR’s economic situation towards the United States

Lets go back to my post.

Several high ranking and ostensibly conservative members "liked" my post. Did they see any attempt to shift blame or leftist dribble? I wrote that there was a dysfunctional relationship between the US and Puerto Rico, and for many aspects the US certainly had a big role in creating the issues today with Puerto Rico, starting with not granting them independence when they should have.

I pointed out harmful anti-capitalist policies that handicap Puerto Rico's economic potential.

You said that was leftist and "standard fare apologist". How exactly? Do you support these policies or not?

Aside from the flag issue, you choose not to give attention to any of these original point because you don't want to discuss any kind of complicity the USA has had in the problems facing Puerto Rico. You can do that while keeping the appropriate blame on the Puerto Ricans. Who exactly is having a victim mentality here?

If one of your main problems with my post was that it was "condescending", I humbly request you demonstrate some more emotional resiliency to get at the points listed, which you have yet to do (aside from the flag issue). With such charming quips as "Comprende?" to emphasize your imaginary interpretation of my original post, who exactly is condescending here? As we say here in Germany: Das geht nichts....

Finally, I admit being wrong on the flag. Poor research on my part. It would not be nice to get this thread back to substantive conversation about Puerto Rico.

 

[ElFlaco]

It would be nice to get this thread back to substantive conversation about Puerto Rico.

Is there really a need for more 'substantive conversation'? The situation can be summed up succinctly:

1. Puerto Rico's a mess. See Stefan Molyneux video above.

2. For this reason, the US should separate from Puerto Rico as much as possible. Statehood, hell no. We don't need to fix Puerto Rico's problems or make them ours.

 

[BostonBMW]

It would be nice to get this thread back to substantive conversation about Puerto Rico.

Is there really a need for more 'substantive conversation'? The situation can be summed up succinctly:

1. Puerto Rico's a mess. See Stefan Molyneux video above.

2. For this reason, the US should separate from Puerto Rico as much as possible. Statehood, hell no. We don't need to fix Puerto Rico's problems or make them ours.

You sum it up well. I am not even bothering to respond to RobertHighHawk as he is clearly looking to get the last word.

Further adding to your comments: If the United States attempts to "fix" PR's problems, we will get none of the credit and all of the blame if things go wrong. Academics, Leftists will deride American "colonialist" policies in extracting value/benefits out of a struggling Island economy, the cost to the U.S. taxpayers will be exceptional, and this will not quell Puertoriqueno nationalist eventual desire for independence. We lose in most scenarios.

 

[WanderingSoul]

When making any political decision, there should only be one question.

Is this good for America and Americans?

If the answer is no, as in this case, then it shouldn't be done. End of story.

Cut PR loose.

Puerto Rican participation in the Armed Forces is significant, and to my knowledge they serve quite well - that deficit alone would not be made up easily since the Armed forces are already struggling to fill with qualified candidates.

It would be easy to make up.

Take the $20B of AMERICAN tax payers money we currently send to the Puerto Ricans, who have no business getting it go begin with, and put it into veterans services, higher pay, better retirement, health care, signing bonuses, etc.

American tax dollars should go to Americans and veterans way before it ever leaves our soil to begin with.