|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 7:45 am
I know from experience at the OTC that most athletes don't go to the olympics to make a political stand. I never wanted to go to 'represent my politicial ideals'. I wanted to make it because I wanted to prove I was the best in my game, and maybe drag my country along for some glory for giving me the chance to show the world who had the biggest kahones.
Garunteed, I never made it past the national development squad of the top 25 competitors in the country, but the whole part about politics is something countries do, not olympians.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:48 am
So what do you guys think? Should I start scheduling my trip to Canada?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 8:22 am
The russians are 'retreating', and you're going to go to canada. I'm not following something right.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:18 pm
Canada? don't you mean Northern United States?
I haven't heard much about this, but I heard talk about a proposed reformatting of NAFTA, that would basically become the N.A. version of the European Union. Is it more thn just rumor?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:15 pm
And the Amero, the equivalent to the Euro?
Potentially, especially if hillary got the reins.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:38 am
Not to say that such an organization would necessarily be a bad thing. The currency would be the dollar (Not a big deal for Canada but Mexico would loose the Peso) and America would have the right to dictate economic policy in those two countries just like France does in the EU.
Maybe in 50 years or so they'll reformat the UN so that they can actually do something when conflict breaks out.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 10:00 am
If we're taking it as a purely effeciency basis, yes, it's not that bad. But I know for a fact most countries in the EU still hold regrets for changing to it, in spite of having such a strong economic basis at the moment.
There's more to simply becoming a one world order, a single united nation of people, than merely making money. With the EU came a severe blow to many european people, because they lost a chunk of their identity. Stop a moment and think about it; money is stamped with the images of great leaders and inspirational monuments. It's one of the most widely used and accepted forms of patriotic propaganda used on the people to feel a sense of nationhood.
America is fairly young, but in the tradition steeped european countries, I've met more than a few people who still hold lingering regret about joining. Still, as they say, money can't buy you happiness but it will rent it.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 10:23 am
They still print historic figures on their money, depending on nation of origin, but the money still is worth the same wherever you go. Regardless, I see no real reason to make a North merican union save for to give the Mexicans no further reason to try and come over to America. Once a part of America, they got no place else to go.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:04 pm
Well the holy grail for free trade would be a single unified world economy with a single currency.
Though I think Free Trade is just a passing fad, trade barriers may be falling but shipping costs... shipping costs are surging with the price of oil.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:07 pm
making profit's easy. it's keeping profit that's the hard part.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:06 pm
Ain't that the truth.
I'm kinda surprised this thread is still up.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 10:56 am
I think someone needs to conquer all nations bet leave them all alone. Have free trade and stuff like that.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 2:14 pm
That would cause a hell of a lot more problems than it would ever solve. People hate to be ruled by foreign governments no matter how much freedom they receive. Especially when multiple cultures are involved. Just look at the wars the U.S. are fighting now and try to multiply something like that by 1,000. And lets not even mention that trying to build all of the worlds economies at once would be damn near impossible.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2008 8:01 am
yes but after it is all done there would be no more wars or anything bad. The goverment would have all the money the same. I am also not talking about culture just a larger view of things.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2008 8:28 am
It still wouldn't work. Within a weak, everyone would be fighting each other, and we'd be right back where we started.
And if the government had all the money, that'd be even worse. All the other countries, especially those with conflicting culture, would rebel.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|