Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:War of 1812

2012-04-22T14:33:23Z

JamesVq: mischaracterised

This grossly mischaracterised the war. I don't want to get banned by editing it, but the war was a blantant act of unjustifiable American aggression, the writer would do well to be an apologetic for Pearl Harbour. Hugely outnumbered, the British citizens nevertheless managed to heroically rout the American forces in battles that made up for 1776 any day. The war was not a draw, by the end several states were considering leaving the Union and joining the British. We seized Washington. The only reason we did not impose heavy penalties was because war broke out in Europe. James Vanque To post this I had to delete someone else's post to get past the spam filter, sorry.

Re: The reversion of my revision of this article to "The War of 1812 AD"

I submit that leaving off the "AD" in "The War of 1812 AD" is as intellectually dishonest as using the ridiculous and meaningless terms "BCE" and "CE". It makes the actual date of the war quite uncertain (Was it 200 or 2000 years ago? Who can say? That's an uncertainty with an order of magnitude of 10, by the way, which is a lot). Granted, this uncertainty won't confuse everyone, especially many historians, but the main point I think we should all be making here is that to remove the "AD" is to deny the very event that the date 1812 is derived from--the very conception of Jesus of Nazareth. Now, I'm no religious nut or anything, but I think we can all agree that credit should be given where credit is due. Sure, we can shorten the "unimportant" part of the date, but I think what we are really doing is cheating History.

Then there's Sevenstring's reason for reverting--That nobody calls it "The War of 1812 AD". That, I can actually get behind. Sevenstring is completely right, there. And maybe that's reason enough to keep it simply "The War of 1812". But then again, aren't there a lot of things that many many people hold to be true, that are actually false? I think many of you know what exactly I'm talking about. In this Liberal Media Saturated Environment (LMSE) where we are constantly bombarded with "conventional wisdom" and "overwhelming evidence" and "common sense" from so-called "experts" and "scientists"; isn't it worth it, every once in a while, to stand up for what we believe?

I will, of course acquiesce to the collective will of Conservapedia. I really hope that, if nothing else, this fosters some intelligent discussion on this subject.

Thank you,
Mr. Pony

I disagree - putting EVERY date with the AD suffix is not only unnecessary, it makes the people who want this website to look credible look silly by association. Save the effort for things that make a more valuable intellectual contribution.

Sevenstring

I agree that it's a question of style, Sevenstring. It's also okay that you think I'm silly ;) Anyway, I think it's clear what side of the fence you fall on in this debate. I hope that others will read this, and decide for themselves.

Thanks for having the courtesy to respond so quickly and concisely!
Mr. Pony

:You're really good at math. I agree with you completely, and will try to improve this article, inspite of what the "liberals" may do for the sake of appearances. [[User:Nt|Nt]] 12:23, 8 October 2007 (EDT)

::Your attempts at "improving" this article resulted in silly editing. SILLY. Get the picture? If you cannot get serious about contributing here, you better get silly somewhere else. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:29, 8 October 2007 (EDT)

:::I had thought that all the liberal trolls from all the liberal blogs had stopped coming here at this point, and had gone back to looking at naked pictures of naked stars from the WB and crying about global warming. If you think faith is silly, fine; we get that, but attempting to silence a reasonable debate by declaring it "silly" (without citations, in all caps, no less) is unAmerican, unConservapedian, and downright cowardly. It's no wonder that all the good writers have left for the other Conservative Wiki. Here's hoping you see the light, Mr. Pony.
::::Two things. First, you never bothered to look at his edit, which is freely available for all to look at via the history page. Second, what he edited wasn't even part of a debate, unless you think revisionist history should be applied here. And there is the third thing, which someone else solved for me. You got banned. Have a nice day. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 07:52, 31 October 2007 (EDT)

== Abject failures ==

Both sides tried invasions which led in every case to humilation and defeat. The British did raid Washington and burned public buildings, but they failed to capture Baltimore, the Americans killed the commanding British officer, and the Brits immediately retreated to their ships and sailed away. Worse, the affair united the Americans who demanded revenge and got it at New Orleans. That's what failure looks like. The British commander of the invasion of New York state failed just as badly; he died just as he went to court martial. As for the British invasion of New Orleans, it was one of the most lopsided defeats in the history of the British army, with its top commanders both shot dead. On the other hand, the American performance in invading Canada was even worse, believe it or not. "Abject" is defined as "sunk to or existing in a low state or condition; cast down in spirit : without spirit or pride." It seems to fit.

Debate:Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?

2012-04-22T14:19:34Z

JamesVq:

{{debate-politics}}
What the bloody… er, well, what kind of question is this? --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]])</code> 13:57, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

this may be the dumbest question ever[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

Um...no. --[[User:Sulgran|Sulgran]] 21:21, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

No. In fact, the [[United States]] only has 50 states. [[User:Embarkr|Embarkr]] 17:12, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

Some Americans might like to think so, but no it hasn't. Not in the opinion of this expat Brit anyway, and I've only been in the US for five years.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:23, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

::I say there old chum, it's more like the US has re-established itself as a colony of the Brits. Bloody well on the way to that! When the North American Union is established we'll all be wearing the Union Jack on our heads. You really didn't think the United Kingdom would be giving Canada to us did you?--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 20:54, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

So what exactly do you base your theory of this evil British plan on?

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::Current events that are facts and not evil theory. I guess you didn't know what happened at the Earth Summit I in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro? How about the 2002 Earth Summit II in Johannesburg, South Africa? Never heard of Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, public-private partnerships? Remember in 1972 when the first Earth Summit was held in Stockholm, Sweden? Ever heard of Earth Day? Ever read about Prince Charles beliefs in the Gaia hypothesis that are written into the UN's Earth Charter? How the EU came from the European Economic Community the same way the North American Union is coming from NAFTA and GATT. Right, just an evil theory old chap.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 13:01, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
:::[citation needed] Let's pretend your theories/facts are true. How is a united earth a bad thing? [[User:GordonF|GordonF]] 18:54, 15 March 2009

I'd hardly call a justified concern for the environment an attempt by the British to take over the world.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:Wow! Just another good citizen of the world. That's all that is, just a justified concern for the environment. That's a good one. I feel all warm and safe now. Thanks, and happy earth day!--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 14:43, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

Well yeah, that's all it is.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

If conservatives would only be half as thorough in scrutinizing conspiracy theories as they are with evolution, it would take them less than 5 minutes to see that this kind of right wing conspiracy is utter paranoid bullsh**.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::Alright then, you can live in your little world where conservatives only have conspiracy theories and liberals have their evolutionary theories. I'll just keep studying geo-politics as they happen in real time. I did mention those as real events that actually happened? They weren't conspiracy nor theory. Actual, documented events. History has taught us that governments are just working for the common good of us all as well as having a justified concern for the environment.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 16:12, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Maybe, you're right, maybe the liberal British do have a plan to take over America, you know what, I bet the communists are secretly involved in it too!

Doesn't matter though, if they try anything, America will just send its black helicopters in (if they're not too busy mutilating cows of course), maybe they could even use that flying saucer they stashed away in area 51 to nuke the British!
Nevertheless you should watch out for flanking movements by the communist [[Bigfoot]] army led by Elvis The Immortal.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:::"Vulgas vult decepi" :::"The people wish to be deceived." - Phaedrus 15BC-50AD--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 10:42, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

:::: This is why British people are almost always portrayed as evil villains by Hollywood...... Read on...
BRITAIN IS REPOSSESSING THE U.S.A. A Message from John Cleese to the citizens of the United States of America:

In light of your failure to elect a competent President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately. Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths, and territories (excepting Kansas, which she does not fancy). Your new prime minister, Tony Blair, will appoint a governor for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire may be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed. To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

(You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary)

Then look up aluminium, and check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it.

2. The letter 'U' will be reinstated in words such as 'favour' and 'neighbour.' Likewise, you will learn to spell 'doughnut' without skipping half the letters and the suffix -ize will be replaced by the suffix -ise. Generally, you will be expected to raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels (look up 'vocabulary').

3. Using the same twenty-seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. There is no such thing as US English. We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. The Microsoft spell-checker will be adjusted to take account of the reinstated letter 'u' and the elimination of '-ize'. You will relearn your original national anthem, God Save The Queen.

4. July 4th will no longer be celebrated as a holiday.

5. You will learn to resolve personal issues without using guns, lawyers, or therapists. The fact that you need so many lawyers and therapists shows that you're not adult enough to be independent.

6. Guns should only be handled by adults. If you're not adult enough to sort things out without suing someone or speaking to a therapist then you're not grown up enough to handle a gun. Therefore, you will no longer be allowed to own or carry anything more dangerous than a vegetable peeler. A permit will be required if you wish to carry a vegetable peeler in public.

7. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and this is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean.

8. All intersections will be replaced with roundabouts, and you will start driving on the left with immediate effect. At the same time, you will go metric with immediate effect and without the benefit of conversion tables. Both roundabouts and metrication will help you understand the British sense of humour.

9. The Former USA will adopt UK prices on petrol (which you have been calling gasoline) -- roughly $6/US gallon. Get used to it.

10. You will learn to make real chips. Those things you call French fries are not real chips, and those things you insist on calling potato chips are properly called crisps. Real chips are thick cut, fried in animal fat, and dressed not with catsup but with vinegar.

11. The cold tasteless stuff you insist on calling beer is not actually beer at all. Henceforth, only proper British Bitter will be referred to as Beer, and European brews of known and accepted provenance will be referred to as Lager. American brands will be referred to as Near-Frozen Gnat's Urine, so that all can be sold without risk of further confusion.

12. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as good guys. Hollywood will also be required to cast English actors to play English characters. Watching Andie Macdowell attempt English dialogue in Four Weddings and a Funeral was an experience akin to having one's ears removed with a cheese grater.

13. You will cease playing American football. There is only one kind of proper football; you call it soccer. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which has some similarities to American football, but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full Kevlar body armour like a bunch of nancies).

14. Further, you will stop playing baseball. It is not reasonable to host an event called the World Series for a game which is not played outside of America. Since only 2.1% of you are aware that there is a world beyond your borders, your error is understandable.

15. You must tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us mad.

16. An internal revenue agent (i.e. tax collector) from Her Majesty's Government will be with you shortly to ensure the acquisition of all monies due (backdated to 1776).

17. Daily Tea Time begins promptly at 4 pm with proper cups, never mugs, with high quality biscuits (cookies) and cakes; strawberries in season!
--[[User:Eyupdutch|Eyupdutch]] 04:04, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Indeed America has been going to rot and ruin since they left Britain. They are so honest the actually write "In God we trust" on their God. During the War Of 1812, we had no problem finding spies, I'm sure Madison himself would have provided information if we'd tried paying him. As Madison himself said, the Constitution's job is to protect the minority of opulent from the majority. I have a cousin out there, paralysed his spine falling from a roof. When he saw the bill he wished he back home where the a civilised government would have not have charged him a penny.

::On October 24, 1945, the U.N. Charter was ratified and sovereign nations became nation-states under the United Nations. The consolidation of these mere states in economic trade regions is still ongoing. The EU model for europe is being followed by the NAU (North American Union). links: http://www.spp.gov/ http://www.nascocorridor.com/ The new north and south borders will be northern Canada and southern Mexico. So, that's a no on Britain to become the 51st State of the US.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 16:19, 30 April 2007 (EDT)

Europe has become stronger, both economically and politically, because of the EU, the EU also guarantees peace among its members.

The same would be true for an economic and political union between the U.S. and Canada, if they merge the best of the two countries.
But, I don't see what Canada and the U.S. would gain from an economic union with Mexico, in any case this has nothing to do with Britain.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:Regional economics for Europe and North America. Right you are right that once swallowed up there will be no longer a need to fight one another. You merely make them your subjects so that they are no longer a threat. Of which Britain is a part of all of these goings on. Apparently you've heard nothing about the little illegal immigration problem between Mexico and the U.S.A? The Queen was also just here recently also as part of the formalization of the US and EU economies. Just amuch ado about nothing then? I see.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 11:52, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

Roo, old bean, I'm a Brit and we don't all talk like that, don't ye know? EU, NAU, and whatever else means very little in the context of this discussion. What matters is that I can drink Coca-Cola, drive my Ford, eat some vague plasticky rubbish in McDonalds, pop into Starbucks, go home and watch CSI followed by Friends followed by whatever other tripe gets served up... The French call it ''Coco-Colonisation''. --[[User:Beanbag|Beanbag]] 18:58, 15 June 2007 (EDT)

==A British point of view==
Politically, successive British governments have found it hard to strike a balance between our "special relationship" with the US (as [[Winston Churchill]] termed it) and our allegiance to the [[European Union]]. Personally, as a British patriot I don't like to see our sovereignty compromised by either institution - but as a realist I recognise that we can't stand completely alone in the modern world, and that we need economic and political ties to other nations. However, I don't think this debate is asking the right question - we're in less danger of becoming a 51st US state than of becoming part of a monolithic United States of Europe. I don't want to be a scaremonger - the EU isn't an evil institution, and it has a valuable purpose in terms of our economic links to our neighbours - but we have to guard our national independence against encroachment. [[User:Palace1|Palace1]] 13:06, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

the reason for people calling britain wuld be that britain has in a way being going on the tracks of the unitited states or vaguely as people describe it '''''''''doing whatever us asks them to'''''''''. i'd say britain may be going on the tracks of the united states but it also has a reason for it because not only was united states a part of Britain at one time but it also has somewhat the the same culture and language. it is this which gives the influence to england to somewhat negotiate with the united states of america. another reason would be that united states and britain have been two allied contries for a very long time especially since united states of america became a very powerful state. these factors somewhat set the base for the reasons for britain negotiating with the united states but we call britain 51state because we don't understand the point that them so well allied it is obvious that they compromise have such a relationship between them, just like us and canada. i would call both of them brothers and good brothers always get along well each other. now if britain is called 51st state because britain is weak and is as also vaguely people say. "taking pro tection from the united states" then let me say that britain is also a first world country and also one of the strongest economies in the world. we might be forgeting that it has he strongest currency in the world. - kanishka(indian)

:::::::I really hope that all Americans do not hold the views that either the British want you back as a colony, or that we are just going to do whatever you want. We are an independant country, not the 51st state of the US

The land that now is the US was first settled by England. In a way of speaking our influence on you has been greater than any other nation. Most of your presidents came from an Anglican background. The Queen heads this church. Liberalism is rife in it. Britain historically, even when superseded by America ran its own foreign policy. The special relationship has not been without tensions. Reagan invaded Grenada during his tenure. Nothing wrong with that, great powers like to throw their weight around, Spain and France were no different. Labour party was outraged, Grenada is in the Commonwealth. Equally America opposed Britain's defence of the Falkland Islands. That didn't stop Thatcher. What I find incredible about Americans is that they have this concept of Unamericanism. Keeping slaves might be considered unBritish, but critising the Tories would not. The other thing would be your glorification of military victories. England has always been known as a land of shopkeepers, but when we won at Rourke's Drift we erected a plaque to the brave Zulus who had died there. Will Obama raise a plaque to the Iraqis? We fought sportingly, reluctantly, unlike the Americans, right and left alike, seem to relish killing. We only fought when our hand was forced as in South Africa and Crimea. We may have had our atrocities, the Opium Wars, but your War on Drugs and Terror have cost more lives. The New World seems to have made people more barbaric.

Debate:Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?

2012-04-22T14:08:58Z

JamesVq: /* A British point of view */

{{debate-politics}}
What the bloody… er, well, what kind of question is this? --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]])</code> 13:57, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

this may be the dumbest question ever[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

Um...no. --[[User:Sulgran|Sulgran]] 21:21, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

No. In fact, the [[United States]] only has 50 states. [[User:Embarkr|Embarkr]] 17:12, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

Some Americans might like to think so, but no it hasn't. Not in the opinion of this expat Brit anyway, and I've only been in the US for five years.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:23, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

::I say there old chum, it's more like the US has re-established itself as a colony of the Brits. Bloody well on the way to that! When the North American Union is established we'll all be wearing the Union Jack on our heads. You really didn't think the United Kingdom would be giving Canada to us did you?--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 20:54, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

So what exactly do you base your theory of this evil British plan on?

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::Current events that are facts and not evil theory. I guess you didn't know what happened at the Earth Summit I in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro? How about the 2002 Earth Summit II in Johannesburg, South Africa? Never heard of Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, public-private partnerships? Remember in 1972 when the first Earth Summit was held in Stockholm, Sweden? Ever heard of Earth Day? Ever read about Prince Charles beliefs in the Gaia hypothesis that are written into the UN's Earth Charter? How the EU came from the European Economic Community the same way the North American Union is coming from NAFTA and GATT. Right, just an evil theory old chap.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 13:01, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
:::[citation needed] Let's pretend your theories/facts are true. How is a united earth a bad thing? [[User:GordonF|GordonF]] 18:54, 15 March 2009

I'd hardly call a justified concern for the environment an attempt by the British to take over the world.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:Wow! Just another good citizen of the world. That's all that is, just a justified concern for the environment. That's a good one. I feel all warm and safe now. Thanks, and happy earth day!--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 14:43, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

Well yeah, that's all it is.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

If conservatives would only be half as thorough in scrutinizing conspiracy theories as they are with evolution, it would take them less than 5 minutes to see that this kind of right wing conspiracy is utter paranoid bullsh**.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::Alright then, you can live in your little world where conservatives only have conspiracy theories and liberals have their evolutionary theories. I'll just keep studying geo-politics as they happen in real time. I did mention those as real events that actually happened? They weren't conspiracy nor theory. Actual, documented events. History has taught us that governments are just working for the common good of us all as well as having a justified concern for the environment.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 16:12, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Maybe, you're right, maybe the liberal British do have a plan to take over America, you know what, I bet the communists are secretly involved in it too!

Doesn't matter though, if they try anything, America will just send its black helicopters in (if they're not too busy mutilating cows of course), maybe they could even use that flying saucer they stashed away in area 51 to nuke the British!
Nevertheless you should watch out for flanking movements by the communist [[Bigfoot]] army led by Elvis The Immortal.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:::"Vulgas vult decepi" :::"The people wish to be deceived." - Phaedrus 15BC-50AD--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 10:42, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

:::: This is why British people are almost always portrayed as evil villains by Hollywood...... Read on...
BRITAIN IS REPOSSESSING THE U.S.A. A Message from John Cleese to the citizens of the United States of America:

In light of your failure to elect a competent President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately. Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths, and territories (excepting Kansas, which she does not fancy). Your new prime minister, Tony Blair, will appoint a governor for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire may be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed. To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

(You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary)

Then look up aluminium, and check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it.

2. The letter 'U' will be reinstated in words such as 'favour' and 'neighbour.' Likewise, you will learn to spell 'doughnut' without skipping half the letters and the suffix -ize will be replaced by the suffix -ise. Generally, you will be expected to raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels (look up 'vocabulary').

3. Using the same twenty-seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. There is no such thing as US English. We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. The Microsoft spell-checker will be adjusted to take account of the reinstated letter 'u' and the elimination of '-ize'. You will relearn your original national anthem, God Save The Queen.

4. July 4th will no longer be celebrated as a holiday.

5. You will learn to resolve personal issues without using guns, lawyers, or therapists. The fact that you need so many lawyers and therapists shows that you're not adult enough to be independent.

6. Guns should only be handled by adults. If you're not adult enough to sort things out without suing someone or speaking to a therapist then you're not grown up enough to handle a gun. Therefore, you will no longer be allowed to own or carry anything more dangerous than a vegetable peeler. A permit will be required if you wish to carry a vegetable peeler in public.

7. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and this is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean.

8. All intersections will be replaced with roundabouts, and you will start driving on the left with immediate effect. At the same time, you will go metric with immediate effect and without the benefit of conversion tables. Both roundabouts and metrication will help you understand the British sense of humour.

9. The Former USA will adopt UK prices on petrol (which you have been calling gasoline) -- roughly $6/US gallon. Get used to it.

10. You will learn to make real chips. Those things you call French fries are not real chips, and those things you insist on calling potato chips are properly called crisps. Real chips are thick cut, fried in animal fat, and dressed not with catsup but with vinegar.

11. The cold tasteless stuff you insist on calling beer is not actually beer at all. Henceforth, only proper British Bitter will be referred to as Beer, and European brews of known and accepted provenance will be referred to as Lager. American brands will be referred to as Near-Frozen Gnat's Urine, so that all can be sold without risk of further confusion.

12. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as good guys. Hollywood will also be required to cast English actors to play English characters. Watching Andie Macdowell attempt English dialogue in Four Weddings and a Funeral was an experience akin to having one's ears removed with a cheese grater.

13. You will cease playing American football. There is only one kind of proper football; you call it soccer. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which has some similarities to American football, but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full Kevlar body armour like a bunch of nancies).

14. Further, you will stop playing baseball. It is not reasonable to host an event called the World Series for a game which is not played outside of America. Since only 2.1% of you are aware that there is a world beyond your borders, your error is understandable.

15. You must tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us mad.

16. An internal revenue agent (i.e. tax collector) from Her Majesty's Government will be with you shortly to ensure the acquisition of all monies due (backdated to 1776).

17. Daily Tea Time begins promptly at 4 pm with proper cups, never mugs, with high quality biscuits (cookies) and cakes; strawberries in season!
--[[User:Eyupdutch|Eyupdutch]] 04:04, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

::On October 24, 1945, the U.N. Charter was ratified and sovereign nations became nation-states under the United Nations. The consolidation of these mere states in economic trade regions is still ongoing. The EU model for europe is being followed by the NAU (North American Union). links: http://www.spp.gov/ http://www.nascocorridor.com/ The new north and south borders will be northern Canada and southern Mexico. So, that's a no on Britain to become the 51st State of the US.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 16:19, 30 April 2007 (EDT)

Europe has become stronger, both economically and politically, because of the EU, the EU also guarantees peace among its members.

The same would be true for an economic and political union between the U.S. and Canada, if they merge the best of the two countries.
But, I don't see what Canada and the U.S. would gain from an economic union with Mexico, in any case this has nothing to do with Britain.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:Regional economics for Europe and North America. Right you are right that once swallowed up there will be no longer a need to fight one another. You merely make them your subjects so that they are no longer a threat. Of which Britain is a part of all of these goings on. Apparently you've heard nothing about the little illegal immigration problem between Mexico and the U.S.A? The Queen was also just here recently also as part of the formalization of the US and EU economies. Just amuch ado about nothing then? I see.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 11:52, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

Roo, old bean, I'm a Brit and we don't all talk like that, don't ye know? EU, NAU, and whatever else means very little in the context of this discussion. What matters is that I can drink Coca-Cola, drive my Ford, eat some vague plasticky rubbish in McDonalds, pop into Starbucks, go home and watch CSI followed by Friends followed by whatever other tripe gets served up... The French call it ''Coco-Colonisation''. --[[User:Beanbag|Beanbag]] 18:58, 15 June 2007 (EDT)

==A British point of view==
Politically, successive British governments have found it hard to strike a balance between our "special relationship" with the US (as [[Winston Churchill]] termed it) and our allegiance to the [[European Union]]. Personally, as a British patriot I don't like to see our sovereignty compromised by either institution - but as a realist I recognise that we can't stand completely alone in the modern world, and that we need economic and political ties to other nations. However, I don't think this debate is asking the right question - we're in less danger of becoming a 51st US state than of becoming part of a monolithic United States of Europe. I don't want to be a scaremonger - the EU isn't an evil institution, and it has a valuable purpose in terms of our economic links to our neighbours - but we have to guard our national independence against encroachment. [[User:Palace1|Palace1]] 13:06, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

the reason for people calling britain wuld be that britain has in a way being going on the tracks of the unitited states or vaguely as people describe it '''''''''doing whatever us asks them to'''''''''. i'd say britain may be going on the tracks of the united states but it also has a reason for it because not only was united states a part of Britain at one time but it also has somewhat the the same culture and language. it is this which gives the influence to england to somewhat negotiate with the united states of america. another reason would be that united states and britain have been two allied contries for a very long time especially since united states of america became a very powerful state. these factors somewhat set the base for the reasons for britain negotiating with the united states but we call britain 51state because we don't understand the point that them so well allied it is obvious that they compromise have such a relationship between them, just like us and canada. i would call both of them brothers and good brothers always get along well each other. now if britain is called 51st state because britain is weak and is as also vaguely people say. "taking pro tection from the united states" then let me say that britain is also a first world country and also one of the strongest economies in the world. we might be forgeting that it has he strongest currency in the world. - kanishka(indian)

:::::::I really hope that all Americans do not hold the views that either the British want you back as a colony, or that we are just going to do whatever you want. We are an independant country, not the 51st state of the US

The land that now is the US was first settled by England. In a way of speaking our influence on you has been greater than any other nation. Most of your presidents came from an Anglican background. The Queen heads this church. Liberalism is rife in it. Britain historically, even when superseded by America ran its own foreign policy. The special relationship has not been without tensions. Reagan invaded Grenada during his tenure. Nothing wrong with that, great powers like to throw their weight around, Spain and France were no different. Labour party was outraged, Grenada is in the Commonwealth. Equally America opposed Britain's defence of the Falkland Islands. That didn't stop Thatcher. What I find incredible about Americans is that they have this concept of Unamericanism. Keeping slaves might be considered unBritish, but critising the Tories would not. The other thing would be your glorification of military victories. England has always been known as a land of shopkeepers, but when we won at Rourke's Drift we erected a plaque to the brave Zulus who had died there. Will Obama raise a plaque to the Iraqis? We fought sportingly, reluctantly, unlike the Americans, right and left alike, seem to relish killing. We only fought when our hand was forced as in South Africa and Crimea. We may have had our atrocities, the Opium Wars, but your War on Drugs and Terror have cost more lives. The New World seems to have made people more barbaric.

Debate:Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?

2012-04-22T14:05:57Z

JamesVq: /* A British point of view */

{{debate-politics}}
What the bloody… er, well, what kind of question is this? --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]])</code> 13:57, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

this may be the dumbest question ever[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

Um...no. --[[User:Sulgran|Sulgran]] 21:21, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

No. In fact, the [[United States]] only has 50 states. [[User:Embarkr|Embarkr]] 17:12, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

Some Americans might like to think so, but no it hasn't. Not in the opinion of this expat Brit anyway, and I've only been in the US for five years.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:23, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

::I say there old chum, it's more like the US has re-established itself as a colony of the Brits. Bloody well on the way to that! When the North American Union is established we'll all be wearing the Union Jack on our heads. You really didn't think the United Kingdom would be giving Canada to us did you?--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 20:54, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

So what exactly do you base your theory of this evil British plan on?

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::Current events that are facts and not evil theory. I guess you didn't know what happened at the Earth Summit I in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro? How about the 2002 Earth Summit II in Johannesburg, South Africa? Never heard of Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, public-private partnerships? Remember in 1972 when the first Earth Summit was held in Stockholm, Sweden? Ever heard of Earth Day? Ever read about Prince Charles beliefs in the Gaia hypothesis that are written into the UN's Earth Charter? How the EU came from the European Economic Community the same way the North American Union is coming from NAFTA and GATT. Right, just an evil theory old chap.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 13:01, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
:::[citation needed] Let's pretend your theories/facts are true. How is a united earth a bad thing? [[User:GordonF|GordonF]] 18:54, 15 March 2009

I'd hardly call a justified concern for the environment an attempt by the British to take over the world.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:Wow! Just another good citizen of the world. That's all that is, just a justified concern for the environment. That's a good one. I feel all warm and safe now. Thanks, and happy earth day!--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 14:43, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

Well yeah, that's all it is.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

If conservatives would only be half as thorough in scrutinizing conspiracy theories as they are with evolution, it would take them less than 5 minutes to see that this kind of right wing conspiracy is utter paranoid bullsh**.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::Alright then, you can live in your little world where conservatives only have conspiracy theories and liberals have their evolutionary theories. I'll just keep studying geo-politics as they happen in real time. I did mention those as real events that actually happened? They weren't conspiracy nor theory. Actual, documented events. History has taught us that governments are just working for the common good of us all as well as having a justified concern for the environment.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 16:12, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Maybe, you're right, maybe the liberal British do have a plan to take over America, you know what, I bet the communists are secretly involved in it too!

Doesn't matter though, if they try anything, America will just send its black helicopters in (if they're not too busy mutilating cows of course), maybe they could even use that flying saucer they stashed away in area 51 to nuke the British!
Nevertheless you should watch out for flanking movements by the communist [[Bigfoot]] army led by Elvis The Immortal.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:::"Vulgas vult decepi" :::"The people wish to be deceived." - Phaedrus 15BC-50AD--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 10:42, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

:::: This is why British people are almost always portrayed as evil villains by Hollywood...... Read on...
BRITAIN IS REPOSSESSING THE U.S.A. A Message from John Cleese to the citizens of the United States of America:

In light of your failure to elect a competent President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately. Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths, and territories (excepting Kansas, which she does not fancy). Your new prime minister, Tony Blair, will appoint a governor for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire may be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed. To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

(You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary)

Then look up aluminium, and check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it.

2. The letter 'U' will be reinstated in words such as 'favour' and 'neighbour.' Likewise, you will learn to spell 'doughnut' without skipping half the letters and the suffix -ize will be replaced by the suffix -ise. Generally, you will be expected to raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels (look up 'vocabulary').

3. Using the same twenty-seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. There is no such thing as US English. We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. The Microsoft spell-checker will be adjusted to take account of the reinstated letter 'u' and the elimination of '-ize'. You will relearn your original national anthem, God Save The Queen.

4. July 4th will no longer be celebrated as a holiday.

5. You will learn to resolve personal issues without using guns, lawyers, or therapists. The fact that you need so many lawyers and therapists shows that you're not adult enough to be independent.

6. Guns should only be handled by adults. If you're not adult enough to sort things out without suing someone or speaking to a therapist then you're not grown up enough to handle a gun. Therefore, you will no longer be allowed to own or carry anything more dangerous than a vegetable peeler. A permit will be required if you wish to carry a vegetable peeler in public.

7. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and this is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean.

8. All intersections will be replaced with roundabouts, and you will start driving on the left with immediate effect. At the same time, you will go metric with immediate effect and without the benefit of conversion tables. Both roundabouts and metrication will help you understand the British sense of humour.

9. The Former USA will adopt UK prices on petrol (which you have been calling gasoline) -- roughly $6/US gallon. Get used to it.

10. You will learn to make real chips. Those things you call French fries are not real chips, and those things you insist on calling potato chips are properly called crisps. Real chips are thick cut, fried in animal fat, and dressed not with catsup but with vinegar.

11. The cold tasteless stuff you insist on calling beer is not actually beer at all. Henceforth, only proper British Bitter will be referred to as Beer, and European brews of known and accepted provenance will be referred to as Lager. American brands will be referred to as Near-Frozen Gnat's Urine, so that all can be sold without risk of further confusion.

12. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as good guys. Hollywood will also be required to cast English actors to play English characters. Watching Andie Macdowell attempt English dialogue in Four Weddings and a Funeral was an experience akin to having one's ears removed with a cheese grater.

13. You will cease playing American football. There is only one kind of proper football; you call it soccer. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which has some similarities to American football, but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full Kevlar body armour like a bunch of nancies).

14. Further, you will stop playing baseball. It is not reasonable to host an event called the World Series for a game which is not played outside of America. Since only 2.1% of you are aware that there is a world beyond your borders, your error is understandable.

15. You must tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us mad.

16. An internal revenue agent (i.e. tax collector) from Her Majesty's Government will be with you shortly to ensure the acquisition of all monies due (backdated to 1776).

17. Daily Tea Time begins promptly at 4 pm with proper cups, never mugs, with high quality biscuits (cookies) and cakes; strawberries in season!
--[[User:Eyupdutch|Eyupdutch]] 04:04, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

::On October 24, 1945, the U.N. Charter was ratified and sovereign nations became nation-states under the United Nations. The consolidation of these mere states in economic trade regions is still ongoing. The EU model for europe is being followed by the NAU (North American Union). links: http://www.spp.gov/ http://www.nascocorridor.com/ The new north and south borders will be northern Canada and southern Mexico. So, that's a no on Britain to become the 51st State of the US.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 16:19, 30 April 2007 (EDT)

Europe has become stronger, both economically and politically, because of the EU, the EU also guarantees peace among its members.

The same would be true for an economic and political union between the U.S. and Canada, if they merge the best of the two countries.
But, I don't see what Canada and the U.S. would gain from an economic union with Mexico, in any case this has nothing to do with Britain.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:Regional economics for Europe and North America. Right you are right that once swallowed up there will be no longer a need to fight one another. You merely make them your subjects so that they are no longer a threat. Of which Britain is a part of all of these goings on. Apparently you've heard nothing about the little illegal immigration problem between Mexico and the U.S.A? The Queen was also just here recently also as part of the formalization of the US and EU economies. Just amuch ado about nothing then? I see.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 11:52, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

Roo, old bean, I'm a Brit and we don't all talk like that, don't ye know? EU, NAU, and whatever else means very little in the context of this discussion. What matters is that I can drink Coca-Cola, drive my Ford, eat some vague plasticky rubbish in McDonalds, pop into Starbucks, go home and watch CSI followed by Friends followed by whatever other tripe gets served up... The French call it ''Coco-Colonisation''. --[[User:Beanbag|Beanbag]] 18:58, 15 June 2007 (EDT)

==A British point of view==
Politically, successive British governments have found it hard to strike a balance between our "special relationship" with the US (as [[Winston Churchill]] termed it) and our allegiance to the [[European Union]]. Personally, as a British patriot I don't like to see our sovereignty compromised by either institution - but as a realist I recognise that we can't stand completely alone in the modern world, and that we need economic and political ties to other nations. However, I don't think this debate is asking the right question - we're in less danger of becoming a 51st US state than of becoming part of a monolithic United States of Europe. I don't want to be a scaremonger - the EU isn't an evil institution, and it has a valuable purpose in terms of our economic links to our neighbours - but we have to guard our national independence against encroachment. [[User:Palace1|Palace1]] 13:06, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

the reason for people calling britain wuld be that britain has in a way being going on the tracks of the unitited states or vaguely as people describe it '''''''''doing whatever us asks them to'''''''''. i'd say britain may be going on the tracks of the united states but it also has a reason for it because not only was united states a part of Britain at one time but it also has somewhat the the same culture and language. it is this which gives the influence to england to somewhat negotiate with the united states of america. another reason would be that united states and britain have been two allied contries for a very long time especially since united states of america became a very powerful state. these factors somewhat set the base for the reasons for britain negotiating with the united states but we call britain 51state because we don't understand the point that them so well allied it is obvious that they compromise have such a relationship between them, just like us and canada. i would call both of them brothers and good brothers always get along well each other. now if britain is called 51st state because britain is weak and is as also vaguely people say. "taking pro tection from the united states" then let me say that britain is also a first world country and also one of the strongest economies in the world. we might be forgeting that it has he strongest currency in the world. - kanishka(indian)

:::::::::I really hope that all Americans do not hold the views that either the British want you back as a colony, or that we are just going to do whatever you want. We are an independant country, not the 51st state of the US

The land that now is the US was first settled by England. In a way of speaking our influence on you has been greater than any other nation. Most of your presidents came from an Anglican background. The Queen heads this church. Liberalism is rife in it. Britain historically, even when superseded by America ran its own foreign policy. The special relationship has not been without tensions. Reagan invaded Grenada during his tenure. Nothing wrong with that, great powers like to throw their weight around, Spain and France were no different. Labour party was outraged, Grenada is in the Commonwealth. Equally America opposed Britain's defence of the Falkland Islands. That didn't stop Thatcher.
What I find incredible about Americans is that they have this concept of Unamericanism. Keeping slaves might be considered unBritish, but critising the Tories would not. The other thing would be your glorification of military victories. England has always been known as a land of shopkeepers, but when we won at Rourke's Drift we erected a plaque to the brave Zulus who had died there. Will Obama raise a plaque to the Iraqis? We fought sportingly, reluctantly, unlike the Americans, right and left alike, seem to relish killing

Debate:Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?

2012-04-22T13:59:00Z

JamesVq: /* A British point of view */

{{debate-politics}}
What the bloody… er, well, what kind of question is this? --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]])</code> 13:57, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

this may be the dumbest question ever[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

Um...no. --[[User:Sulgran|Sulgran]] 21:21, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

No. In fact, the [[United States]] only has 50 states. [[User:Embarkr|Embarkr]] 17:12, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

Some Americans might like to think so, but no it hasn't. Not in the opinion of this expat Brit anyway, and I've only been in the US for five years.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:23, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

::I say there old chum, it's more like the US has re-established itself as a colony of the Brits. Bloody well on the way to that! When the North American Union is established we'll all be wearing the Union Jack on our heads. You really didn't think the United Kingdom would be giving Canada to us did you?--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 20:54, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

So what exactly do you base your theory of this evil British plan on?

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::Current events that are facts and not evil theory. I guess you didn't know what happened at the Earth Summit I in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro? How about the 2002 Earth Summit II in Johannesburg, South Africa? Never heard of Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, public-private partnerships? Remember in 1972 when the first Earth Summit was held in Stockholm, Sweden? Ever heard of Earth Day? Ever read about Prince Charles beliefs in the Gaia hypothesis that are written into the UN's Earth Charter? How the EU came from the European Economic Community the same way the North American Union is coming from NAFTA and GATT. Right, just an evil theory old chap.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 13:01, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
:::[citation needed] Let's pretend your theories/facts are true. How is a united earth a bad thing? [[User:GordonF|GordonF]] 18:54, 15 March 2009

I'd hardly call a justified concern for the environment an attempt by the British to take over the world.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:Wow! Just another good citizen of the world. That's all that is, just a justified concern for the environment. That's a good one. I feel all warm and safe now. Thanks, and happy earth day!--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 14:43, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

Well yeah, that's all it is.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

If conservatives would only be half as thorough in scrutinizing conspiracy theories as they are with evolution, it would take them less than 5 minutes to see that this kind of right wing conspiracy is utter paranoid bullsh**.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::Alright then, you can live in your little world where conservatives only have conspiracy theories and liberals have their evolutionary theories. I'll just keep studying geo-politics as they happen in real time. I did mention those as real events that actually happened? They weren't conspiracy nor theory. Actual, documented events. History has taught us that governments are just working for the common good of us all as well as having a justified concern for the environment.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 16:12, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Maybe, you're right, maybe the liberal British do have a plan to take over America, you know what, I bet the communists are secretly involved in it too!

Doesn't matter though, if they try anything, America will just send its black helicopters in (if they're not too busy mutilating cows of course), maybe they could even use that flying saucer they stashed away in area 51 to nuke the British!
Nevertheless you should watch out for flanking movements by the communist [[Bigfoot]] army led by Elvis The Immortal.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:::"Vulgas vult decepi" :::"The people wish to be deceived." - Phaedrus 15BC-50AD--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 10:42, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

:::: This is why British people are almost always portrayed as evil villains by Hollywood...... Read on...
BRITAIN IS REPOSSESSING THE U.S.A. A Message from John Cleese to the citizens of the United States of America:

In light of your failure to elect a competent President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately. Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths, and territories (excepting Kansas, which she does not fancy). Your new prime minister, Tony Blair, will appoint a governor for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire may be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed. To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

(You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary)

Then look up aluminium, and check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it.

2. The letter 'U' will be reinstated in words such as 'favour' and 'neighbour.' Likewise, you will learn to spell 'doughnut' without skipping half the letters and the suffix -ize will be replaced by the suffix -ise. Generally, you will be expected to raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels (look up 'vocabulary').

3. Using the same twenty-seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. There is no such thing as US English. We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. The Microsoft spell-checker will be adjusted to take account of the reinstated letter 'u' and the elimination of '-ize'. You will relearn your original national anthem, God Save The Queen.

4. July 4th will no longer be celebrated as a holiday.

5. You will learn to resolve personal issues without using guns, lawyers, or therapists. The fact that you need so many lawyers and therapists shows that you're not adult enough to be independent.

6. Guns should only be handled by adults. If you're not adult enough to sort things out without suing someone or speaking to a therapist then you're not grown up enough to handle a gun. Therefore, you will no longer be allowed to own or carry anything more dangerous than a vegetable peeler. A permit will be required if you wish to carry a vegetable peeler in public.

7. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and this is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean.

8. All intersections will be replaced with roundabouts, and you will start driving on the left with immediate effect. At the same time, you will go metric with immediate effect and without the benefit of conversion tables. Both roundabouts and metrication will help you understand the British sense of humour.

9. The Former USA will adopt UK prices on petrol (which you have been calling gasoline) -- roughly $6/US gallon. Get used to it.

10. You will learn to make real chips. Those things you call French fries are not real chips, and those things you insist on calling potato chips are properly called crisps. Real chips are thick cut, fried in animal fat, and dressed not with catsup but with vinegar.

11. The cold tasteless stuff you insist on calling beer is not actually beer at all. Henceforth, only proper British Bitter will be referred to as Beer, and European brews of known and accepted provenance will be referred to as Lager. American brands will be referred to as Near-Frozen Gnat's Urine, so that all can be sold without risk of further confusion.

12. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as good guys. Hollywood will also be required to cast English actors to play English characters. Watching Andie Macdowell attempt English dialogue in Four Weddings and a Funeral was an experience akin to having one's ears removed with a cheese grater.

13. You will cease playing American football. There is only one kind of proper football; you call it soccer. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which has some similarities to American football, but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full Kevlar body armour like a bunch of nancies).

14. Further, you will stop playing baseball. It is not reasonable to host an event called the World Series for a game which is not played outside of America. Since only 2.1% of you are aware that there is a world beyond your borders, your error is understandable.

15. You must tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us mad.

16. An internal revenue agent (i.e. tax collector) from Her Majesty's Government will be with you shortly to ensure the acquisition of all monies due (backdated to 1776).

17. Daily Tea Time begins promptly at 4 pm with proper cups, never mugs, with high quality biscuits (cookies) and cakes; strawberries in season!
--[[User:Eyupdutch|Eyupdutch]] 04:04, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

::On October 24, 1945, the U.N. Charter was ratified and sovereign nations became nation-states under the United Nations. The consolidation of these mere states in economic trade regions is still ongoing. The EU model for europe is being followed by the NAU (North American Union). links: http://www.spp.gov/ http://www.nascocorridor.com/ The new north and south borders will be northern Canada and southern Mexico. So, that's a no on Britain to become the 51st State of the US.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 16:19, 30 April 2007 (EDT)

Europe has become stronger, both economically and politically, because of the EU, the EU also guarantees peace among its members.

The same would be true for an economic and political union between the U.S. and Canada, if they merge the best of the two countries.
But, I don't see what Canada and the U.S. would gain from an economic union with Mexico, in any case this has nothing to do with Britain.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:Regional economics for Europe and North America. Right you are right that once swallowed up there will be no longer a need to fight one another. You merely make them your subjects so that they are no longer a threat. Of which Britain is a part of all of these goings on. Apparently you've heard nothing about the little illegal immigration problem between Mexico and the U.S.A? The Queen was also just here recently also as part of the formalization of the US and EU economies. Just amuch ado about nothing then? I see.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 11:52, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

Roo, old bean, I'm a Brit and we don't all talk like that, don't ye know? EU, NAU, and whatever else means very little in the context of this discussion. What matters is that I can drink Coca-Cola, drive my Ford, eat some vague plasticky rubbish in McDonalds, pop into Starbucks, go home and watch CSI followed by Friends followed by whatever other tripe gets served up... The French call it ''Coco-Colonisation''. --[[User:Beanbag|Beanbag]] 18:58, 15 June 2007 (EDT)

==A British point of view==
Politically, successive British governments have found it hard to strike a balance between our "special relationship" with the US (as [[Winston Churchill]] termed it) and our allegiance to the [[European Union]]. Personally, as a British patriot I don't like to see our sovereignty compromised by either institution - but as a realist I recognise that we can't stand completely alone in the modern world, and that we need economic and political ties to other nations. However, I don't think this debate is asking the right question - we're in less danger of becoming a 51st US state than of becoming part of a monolithic United States of Europe. I don't want to be a scaremonger - the EU isn't an evil institution, and it has a valuable purpose in terms of our economic links to our neighbours - but we have to guard our national independence against encroachment. [[User:Palace1|Palace1]] 13:06, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

the reason for people calling britain wuld be that britain has in a way being going on the tracks of the unitited states or vaguely as people describe it '''''''''doing whatever us asks them to'''''''''. i'd say britain may be going on the tracks of the united states but it also has a reason for it because not only was united states a part of Britain at one time but it also has somewhat the the same culture and language. it is this which gives the influence to england to somewhat negotiate with the united states of america. another reason would be that united states and britain have been two allied contries for a very long time especially since united states of america became a very powerful state. these factors somewhat set the base for the reasons for britain negotiating with the united states but we call britain 51state because we don't understand the point that them so well allied it is obvious that they compromise have such a relationship between them, just like us and canada. i would call both of them brothers and good brothers always get along well each other. now if britain is called 51st state because britain is weak and is as also vaguely people say. "taking pro tection from the united states" then let me say that britain is also a first world country and also one of the strongest economies in the world. we might be forgeting that it has he strongest currency in the world. - kanishka(indian)

:::::::::I really hope that all Americans do not hold the views that either the British want you back as a colony, or that we are just going to do whatever you want. We are an independant country, not the 51st state of the US

The land that now is the US was first settled by England. In a way of speaking our influence on you has been greater than any other nation. Most of your presidents came from an Anglican background. The Queen heads this church. Liberalism is rife in it. Britain historically, even when superseded by America ran its own foreign policy. The special relationship has not been without tensions. Reagan invaded Grenada during his tenure. Nothing wrong with that, great powers like to throw their weight around, Spain and France were no different. Labour party was outraged, Grenada is in the Commonwealth. Equally America opposed Britain's defence of the Falkland Islands. That didn't stop Thatcher.

Debate:Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?

2012-04-22T13:54:05Z

JamesVq: /* A British point of view */

{{debate-politics}}
What the bloody… er, well, what kind of question is this? --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]])</code> 13:57, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

this may be the dumbest question ever[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

Um...no. --[[User:Sulgran|Sulgran]] 21:21, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

No. In fact, the [[United States]] only has 50 states. [[User:Embarkr|Embarkr]] 17:12, 1 August 2010 (EDT)

Some Americans might like to think so, but no it hasn't. Not in the opinion of this expat Brit anyway, and I've only been in the US for five years.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:23, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

::I say there old chum, it's more like the US has re-established itself as a colony of the Brits. Bloody well on the way to that! When the North American Union is established we'll all be wearing the Union Jack on our heads. You really didn't think the United Kingdom would be giving Canada to us did you?--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 20:54, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

So what exactly do you base your theory of this evil British plan on?

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::Current events that are facts and not evil theory. I guess you didn't know what happened at the Earth Summit I in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro? How about the 2002 Earth Summit II in Johannesburg, South Africa? Never heard of Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, public-private partnerships? Remember in 1972 when the first Earth Summit was held in Stockholm, Sweden? Ever heard of Earth Day? Ever read about Prince Charles beliefs in the Gaia hypothesis that are written into the UN's Earth Charter? How the EU came from the European Economic Community the same way the North American Union is coming from NAFTA and GATT. Right, just an evil theory old chap.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 13:01, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
:::[citation needed] Let's pretend your theories/facts are true. How is a united earth a bad thing? [[User:GordonF|GordonF]] 18:54, 15 March 2009

I'd hardly call a justified concern for the environment an attempt by the British to take over the world.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:Wow! Just another good citizen of the world. That's all that is, just a justified concern for the environment. That's a good one. I feel all warm and safe now. Thanks, and happy earth day!--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 14:43, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

Well yeah, that's all it is.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

If conservatives would only be half as thorough in scrutinizing conspiracy theories as they are with evolution, it would take them less than 5 minutes to see that this kind of right wing conspiracy is utter paranoid bullsh**.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

::Alright then, you can live in your little world where conservatives only have conspiracy theories and liberals have their evolutionary theories. I'll just keep studying geo-politics as they happen in real time. I did mention those as real events that actually happened? They weren't conspiracy nor theory. Actual, documented events. History has taught us that governments are just working for the common good of us all as well as having a justified concern for the environment.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 16:12, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Maybe, you're right, maybe the liberal British do have a plan to take over America, you know what, I bet the communists are secretly involved in it too!

Doesn't matter though, if they try anything, America will just send its black helicopters in (if they're not too busy mutilating cows of course), maybe they could even use that flying saucer they stashed away in area 51 to nuke the British!
Nevertheless you should watch out for flanking movements by the communist [[Bigfoot]] army led by Elvis The Immortal.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:::"Vulgas vult decepi" :::"The people wish to be deceived." - Phaedrus 15BC-50AD--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 10:42, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

:::: This is why British people are almost always portrayed as evil villains by Hollywood...... Read on...
BRITAIN IS REPOSSESSING THE U.S.A. A Message from John Cleese to the citizens of the United States of America:

In light of your failure to elect a competent President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately. Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths, and territories (excepting Kansas, which she does not fancy). Your new prime minister, Tony Blair, will appoint a governor for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire may be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed. To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

(You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary)

Then look up aluminium, and check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it.

2. The letter 'U' will be reinstated in words such as 'favour' and 'neighbour.' Likewise, you will learn to spell 'doughnut' without skipping half the letters and the suffix -ize will be replaced by the suffix -ise. Generally, you will be expected to raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels (look up 'vocabulary').

3. Using the same twenty-seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. There is no such thing as US English. We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. The Microsoft spell-checker will be adjusted to take account of the reinstated letter 'u' and the elimination of '-ize'. You will relearn your original national anthem, God Save The Queen.

4. July 4th will no longer be celebrated as a holiday.

5. You will learn to resolve personal issues without using guns, lawyers, or therapists. The fact that you need so many lawyers and therapists shows that you're not adult enough to be independent.

6. Guns should only be handled by adults. If you're not adult enough to sort things out without suing someone or speaking to a therapist then you're not grown up enough to handle a gun. Therefore, you will no longer be allowed to own or carry anything more dangerous than a vegetable peeler. A permit will be required if you wish to carry a vegetable peeler in public.

7. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and this is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean.

8. All intersections will be replaced with roundabouts, and you will start driving on the left with immediate effect. At the same time, you will go metric with immediate effect and without the benefit of conversion tables. Both roundabouts and metrication will help you understand the British sense of humour.

9. The Former USA will adopt UK prices on petrol (which you have been calling gasoline) -- roughly $6/US gallon. Get used to it.

10. You will learn to make real chips. Those things you call French fries are not real chips, and those things you insist on calling potato chips are properly called crisps. Real chips are thick cut, fried in animal fat, and dressed not with catsup but with vinegar.

11. The cold tasteless stuff you insist on calling beer is not actually beer at all. Henceforth, only proper British Bitter will be referred to as Beer, and European brews of known and accepted provenance will be referred to as Lager. American brands will be referred to as Near-Frozen Gnat's Urine, so that all can be sold without risk of further confusion.

12. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as good guys. Hollywood will also be required to cast English actors to play English characters. Watching Andie Macdowell attempt English dialogue in Four Weddings and a Funeral was an experience akin to having one's ears removed with a cheese grater.

13. You will cease playing American football. There is only one kind of proper football; you call it soccer. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which has some similarities to American football, but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full Kevlar body armour like a bunch of nancies).

14. Further, you will stop playing baseball. It is not reasonable to host an event called the World Series for a game which is not played outside of America. Since only 2.1% of you are aware that there is a world beyond your borders, your error is understandable.

15. You must tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us mad.

16. An internal revenue agent (i.e. tax collector) from Her Majesty's Government will be with you shortly to ensure the acquisition of all monies due (backdated to 1776).

17. Daily Tea Time begins promptly at 4 pm with proper cups, never mugs, with high quality biscuits (cookies) and cakes; strawberries in season!
--[[User:Eyupdutch|Eyupdutch]] 04:04, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

::On October 24, 1945, the U.N. Charter was ratified and sovereign nations became nation-states under the United Nations. The consolidation of these mere states in economic trade regions is still ongoing. The EU model for europe is being followed by the NAU (North American Union). links: http://www.spp.gov/ http://www.nascocorridor.com/ The new north and south borders will be northern Canada and southern Mexico. So, that's a no on Britain to become the 51st State of the US.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 16:19, 30 April 2007 (EDT)

Europe has become stronger, both economically and politically, because of the EU, the EU also guarantees peace among its members.

The same would be true for an economic and political union between the U.S. and Canada, if they merge the best of the two countries.
But, I don't see what Canada and the U.S. would gain from an economic union with Mexico, in any case this has nothing to do with Britain.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:Regional economics for Europe and North America. Right you are right that once swallowed up there will be no longer a need to fight one another. You merely make them your subjects so that they are no longer a threat. Of which Britain is a part of all of these goings on. Apparently you've heard nothing about the little illegal immigration problem between Mexico and the U.S.A? The Queen was also just here recently also as part of the formalization of the US and EU economies. Just amuch ado about nothing then? I see.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 11:52, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

Roo, old bean, I'm a Brit and we don't all talk like that, don't ye know? EU, NAU, and whatever else means very little in the context of this discussion. What matters is that I can drink Coca-Cola, drive my Ford, eat some vague plasticky rubbish in McDonalds, pop into Starbucks, go home and watch CSI followed by Friends followed by whatever other tripe gets served up... The French call it ''Coco-Colonisation''. --[[User:Beanbag|Beanbag]] 18:58, 15 June 2007 (EDT)

==A British point of view==
Politically, successive British governments have found it hard to strike a balance between our "special relationship" with the US (as [[Winston Churchill]] termed it) and our allegiance to the [[European Union]]. Personally, as a British patriot I don't like to see our sovereignty compromised by either institution - but as a realist I recognise that we can't stand completely alone in the modern world, and that we need economic and political ties to other nations. However, I don't think this debate is asking the right question - we're in less danger of becoming a 51st US state than of becoming part of a monolithic United States of Europe. I don't want to be a scaremonger - the EU isn't an evil institution, and it has a valuable purpose in terms of our economic links to our neighbours - but we have to guard our national independence against encroachment. [[User:Palace1|Palace1]] 13:06, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

the reason for people calling britain wuld be that britain has in a way being going on the tracks of the unitited states or vaguely as people describe it '''''''''doing whatever us asks them to'''''''''. i'd say britain may be going on the tracks of the united states but it also has a reason for it because not only was united states a part of Britain at one time but it also has somewhat the the same culture and language. it is this which gives the influence to england to somewhat negotiate with the united states of america. another reason would be that united states and britain have been two allied contries for a very long time especially since united states of america became a very powerful state. these factors somewhat set the base for the reasons for britain negotiating with the united states but we call britain 51state because we don't understand the point that them so well allied it is obvious that they compromise have such a relationship between them, just like us and canada. i would call both of them brothers and good brothers always get along well each other. now if britain is called 51st state because britain is weak and is as also vaguely people say. "taking pro tection from the united states" then let me say that britain is also a first world country and also one of the strongest economies in the world. we might be forgeting that it has he strongest currency in the world. - kanishka(indian)

:::::::::I really hope that all Americans do not hold the views that either the British want you back as a colony, or that we are just going to do whatever you want. We are an independant country, not the 51st state of the US

The land that now is the UK was first settled by England. In a way of speaking our influence on you has been greater than any other nation. Most of your presidents came from an Anglican background. The Queen heads this church.

National debt of the United States

2012-04-22T13:46:11Z

JamesVq: /* =Ronald Reagan */

[[File:Obama deficits 2009-2010.JPG|275px|right|thumb|Under President Obama, the National debt is approaching 100% of [[Gross Domestic Product]] (GDP). The Greek Debt Crisis of 2010 was preciptated when Greek debt reached 115% of GDP.<ref>http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/116xx/doc11659/07-27_Debt_FiscalCrisis_Brief.pdf</ref>]]
The '''National Debt''' is the amount of money the [[United States]] government owes various [[creditors]] due to [[deficit spending]]. The current national debt is approximately $13.7 trillion. <ref>http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np</ref>

==Debt of the US==
In January 20, 2001; the same year of George W. Bush's inauguration into office, the national debt of the United States was 5.7 trillion dollars and by the end of his run in office (January 19, 2009) it was at 10.6 trillion dollars. <ref>http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway</ref>

==Debt to GDP Ratio==
Instead of measuring an absolute number, the debt to GDP ratio is the measurement of the national debt as a percentage of the gross domestic product. It is a measure of the debt in relation to the economy and of our capacity to carry and repay debt.<ref>[http://www.optimist123.com/optimist/2005/01/national_debt_b.html National Debt burden: Full history] 29-Jan-05 </ref> The US Debt to GDP ''ratio'' is getting larger, as the US economy's debt is growing faster than the GDP.<ref>Steve McGourty [http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm United States National Debt (1938 to Present)]May 6, 2007 </ref> This has not always been the case: During the last 8 presidenial administrations(pre-Obama), the US Debt to GDP ratio was reduced under Johnson, Nixon, Carter, and Clinton; but increased under Ford, Reagan, George H W Bush, and George W Bush.

==Debt Ceiling==
:''Main Article: [[Debt Ceiling]]''

The debt ceiling is a limit imposed on the [[United States Department of the Treasury|Treasury]] by [[Congress]]. The Treasury may not issue debt in excess of this amount to fund government operations. As of the beginning of May 2011, the debt ceiling is $14.294 trillion and was last raised on February 12, 2010.<ref>"H. J. Res. 45:
Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010" http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hj111-45</ref> Raising the debt ceiling is not the same thing as spending more money, since spending is dictated by the Federal Budget, but it does allow the Federal Government to meet any existing financial obligations. It is not certain what would happen if the national debt reaches the debt ceiling without action by Congress. [[Liberal]] politicians and pundits, including Treasury Secretary [[Timothy Geithner]], claim that government would default on its obligations, causing global financial markets to collapse. Many financial market experts and [[conservatives]], especially [[TEA Party|TEA Partiers]] opposed to raising the debt ceiling, see no evidence that a default would occur in such a situation.<ref>Hurlbut, Terry A. "Debt Ceiling Reached, Sky Does Not Fall." May 16, 2011. Conservative News and Views. http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2011/05/16/news/debt-ceiling-reached-sky-does-not-fall/</ref> However, in 1983, when Congress was debating whether to raise the debt ceiling, [[Ronald Reagan]] said:
<blockquote>“The full consequences of a default — or even the serious prospect of default — by the United States are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate. Denigration of the full faith and credit of the United States would have substantial effects on the domestic financial markets and the value of the dollar in exchange markets. The Nation can ill afford to allow such a result. The risks, the costs, the disruptions, and the incalculable damage lead me to but one conclusion: the Senate must pass this legislation before the Congress adjourns.”<ref>"Ronald Reagan on Raising the Debt Ceiling." May 17, 2011. http://www.thepresidentialcandidates.us/ronald-reagan-on-raising-the-debt-ceiling/1520/</ref></blockquote>

=Ronald Reagan=

The first major debt was run under Reagan. A substantial part of this was due to heavy military spending and major tax cuts which crippled local governments.
==References==
7. Steve McGourty [http://home.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm]|United States National Debt (1938 to Present)May 6, 2007

<references/>

== Further reading ==
* [http://zfacts.com/p/318.html National Debt Graph (2007 Budget data)]
* [http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ National Debt Clock and links to current articles]
* [http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34712.pdf The Federal Debt: An Analysis of Movements from World War II to the Present,] Mindy R. Levit, Congressional Research Service, September 17, 2010.

[[Category: Economics]][[Category: Finance]]
[[Category: Obama Administration]][[Category: Reagan Era]]

National debt of the United States

2012-04-22T13:44:00Z

JamesVq: Reagan

[[File:Obama deficits 2009-2010.JPG|275px|right|thumb|Under President Obama, the National debt is approaching 100% of [[Gross Domestic Product]] (GDP). The Greek Debt Crisis of 2010 was preciptated when Greek debt reached 115% of GDP.<ref>http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/116xx/doc11659/07-27_Debt_FiscalCrisis_Brief.pdf</ref>]]
The '''National Debt''' is the amount of money the [[United States]] government owes various [[creditors]] due to [[deficit spending]]. The current national debt is approximately $13.7 trillion. <ref>http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np</ref>

==Debt of the US==
In January 20, 2001; the same year of George W. Bush's inauguration into office, the national debt of the United States was 5.7 trillion dollars and by the end of his run in office (January 19, 2009) it was at 10.6 trillion dollars. <ref>http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway</ref>

==Debt to GDP Ratio==
Instead of measuring an absolute number, the debt to GDP ratio is the measurement of the national debt as a percentage of the gross domestic product. It is a measure of the debt in relation to the economy and of our capacity to carry and repay debt.<ref>[http://www.optimist123.com/optimist/2005/01/national_debt_b.html National Debt burden: Full history] 29-Jan-05 </ref> The US Debt to GDP ''ratio'' is getting larger, as the US economy's debt is growing faster than the GDP.<ref>Steve McGourty [http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm United States National Debt (1938 to Present)]May 6, 2007 </ref> This has not always been the case: During the last 8 presidenial administrations(pre-Obama), the US Debt to GDP ratio was reduced under Johnson, Nixon, Carter, and Clinton; but increased under Ford, Reagan, George H W Bush, and George W Bush.

==Debt Ceiling==
:''Main Article: [[Debt Ceiling]]''

The debt ceiling is a limit imposed on the [[United States Department of the Treasury|Treasury]] by [[Congress]]. The Treasury may not issue debt in excess of this amount to fund government operations. As of the beginning of May 2011, the debt ceiling is $14.294 trillion and was last raised on February 12, 2010.<ref>"H. J. Res. 45:
Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010" http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hj111-45</ref> Raising the debt ceiling is not the same thing as spending more money, since spending is dictated by the Federal Budget, but it does allow the Federal Government to meet any existing financial obligations. It is not certain what would happen if the national debt reaches the debt ceiling without action by Congress. [[Liberal]] politicians and pundits, including Treasury Secretary [[Timothy Geithner]], claim that government would default on its obligations, causing global financial markets to collapse. Many financial market experts and [[conservatives]], especially [[TEA Party|TEA Partiers]] opposed to raising the debt ceiling, see no evidence that a default would occur in such a situation.<ref>Hurlbut, Terry A. "Debt Ceiling Reached, Sky Does Not Fall." May 16, 2011. Conservative News and Views. http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2011/05/16/news/debt-ceiling-reached-sky-does-not-fall/</ref> However, in 1983, when Congress was debating whether to raise the debt ceiling, [[Ronald Reagan]] said:
<blockquote>“The full consequences of a default — or even the serious prospect of default — by the United States are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate. Denigration of the full faith and credit of the United States would have substantial effects on the domestic financial markets and the value of the dollar in exchange markets. The Nation can ill afford to allow such a result. The risks, the costs, the disruptions, and the incalculable damage lead me to but one conclusion: the Senate must pass this legislation before the Congress adjourns.”<ref>"Ronald Reagan on Raising the Debt Ceiling." May 17, 2011. http://www.thepresidentialcandidates.us/ronald-reagan-on-raising-the-debt-ceiling/1520/</ref></blockquote>

==Ronald Reagan=

The first major debt was run under Reagan. A substantial part of this was due to heavy military spending and majot tax cuts which crippled local governments.
==References==
7. Steve McGourty [http://home.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm]|United States National Debt (1938 to Present)May 6, 2007

<references/>

== Further reading ==
* [http://zfacts.com/p/318.html National Debt Graph (2007 Budget data)]
* [http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ National Debt Clock and links to current articles]
* [http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34712.pdf The Federal Debt: An Analysis of Movements from World War II to the Present,] Mindy R. Levit, Congressional Research Service, September 17, 2010.

[[Category: Economics]][[Category: Finance]]
[[Category: Obama Administration]][[Category: Reagan Era]]