Statehood for Puerto Rico - yes or no?

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
What's in it for us and why are they a US territory anyway? They're in debt up to their ass, so I'm guessing now they want to be a US state so we'll bail them out. They'll be voting here in a few months whether they want to remain a territory or make us change our flag.

If they become a state can we send all of our illegal immigrants there?
 

glhs837

Power with Control
Yep, been a divisive issue for decades. With the pro-independence group always winning the votes. But, as noted, now they are billions in debt, even though we send billions there a year to prop them up.
 

philibusters

Active Member
What's in it for us and why are they a US territory anyway?
They are a U.S. territory because we took them from Spain in the aftermath of the Spanish-American War of 1898. Up until that point they had always been a colony of Spain, which is why they Spanish as their primary language. We also took Cuba, the Philippines, and Guam from Spain, but they put up large resistance movements. We were never able to put the resistance in Cuba and gave up. We put down the resistance in the Philippines and Guam after the loss of a lot of American lives and Filipino and Guam lives only to give the Philippines their independence anyway.

What is in it for us? Probably not a lot now, but it gives a foothold in South American which could be useful down the line. Just like Hawaii was really useful in World War II against Japan (and the Philippines would have been really useful), as South America modernizes it would be useful to have a state down there so we can get make money from the increased trade and have a base to launch from for military purposes. Puerto Rico does not give us a lot of benefit now, but having a foothold in South American can prove useful in the future, it is just impossible to say how or when. Its like holding a stock option. It could prove useful but no guarantees.

On the same token you could ask how much we lose if Puerto Rico becomes a state. Their residents are already U.S. citizens and for purposes of trade they have free trade with us (we don't place tariffs on products from our territories.). So in the short term, there is not a lot of economic gain or loss. The biggest impact may be political and cultural. Politically you are probably giving 7 electoral votes to Democrats. Culturally the U.S. may absorb more Spanish culture.


They're in debt up to their ass, so I'm guessing now they want to be a US state so we'll bail them out. They'll be voting here in a few months whether they want to remain a territory or make us change our flag.

Generally the U.S. does not bail out state governments, though the exact terms of their statehood are up for negotiations. From their standpoint, I think they are better off as a state. With 3.5 million people they are right between Conn and Iowa in terms of population (they would be 30/51 in state population). As an independent country they are too small to be a powerhouse in the South American economic orbit, but as a part of the U.S. they could become a bigger player down there, extracting resources from other developing South American economies and producing high end finished products. By themselves, the opposite is more likely to happen, they become part of some South American power (Brazil or Argentina) economic system or they just stay small time.

For what its worth even though I am speaking of Puerto Rico as being part of South America, but they are not geographically part of South America, they are an island due north of South America about parallel to the very bottom of Mexico. That said to the extent they are part of an economic system and cultural system, its South America.


If they become a state can we send all of our illegal immigrants there?
No

See my comments in bold.
 

black dog

Free America
I believe there is 4 million people there and that would be 9 electoral votes and we now give then about 22 billion a year and if they become a State they would only add about 2 billion to the Federal coffer's each year.
I would hope NO for them being a state, all it adds to us is nothing but more poverty and dispare for us to pay for.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
They want to be hanging. They've voted in the past to keep things the way they are and neither become a state nor go independent.



IIRC - Staying a Territory gives PR all the benefits of being a State, with none of the responsibilities


https://greengarageblog.org/17-big-pros-and-cons-of-puerto-rico-becoming-a-state

6. It makes Puerto Rico obliged to pay federal income tax.
If Puerto Rico were to become a state, it citizens would no longer be exempt from the federal income tax, forcing more people into the public dole due to the effects of increased taxes on a struggling economy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-arguments-for-and-against-Puerto-Rico-becoming-the-51st-state

Anyhow, aside from the fact that the people living on this island are being treated as 2nd class citizens, there are Pros and Cons for PR to become a state (as seen from an nonemotional point of view):

Cons:
- Large crime would now be counted as part of the USA statistics
- Shift of power in Congress towards the Democratic party (Con for Republicans)
- 51 states is an odd number and would have to change sooo many flags
- Perhaps some of the charm of visiting this island would be lost if this were merely a state
- No Olympic team for the island
- No Miss Universe for the island
- the first Spanish speaking state
- more regulation of environmental issues (big pharma we're lookin at you on this one)


Pros:
- Shift in power in Congress towards the Democratic party (Pro for Democrats)
- More talent for Olympic teams
- More talent for Miss Universe
- the idea that the USA has done right by a minority island (think of the largest growing minority, Hispanics, saying, "Wow, they accepted PR as a real part of the USA")
- easy access for business (looking at you Apple)
- increase in tax revenue
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
I'm for breaking up California and Texas and New York and any of the high population states whereby you effectively have no representation in large parts of the state.

West Virginia used to be part of Virginia. yes, it was broken up during war but it was two very distinctive regions.
 

philibusters

Active Member
I'm for breaking up California and Texas and New York and any of the high population states whereby you effectively have no representation in large parts of the state.

West Virginia used to be part of Virginia. yes, it was broken up during war but it was two very distinctive regions.

It would be interesting to figure out who that benefits and harms.

For example lets say you break California into 4 states. The 3 biggest go Democrat, but the smallest goes Republican. Who does that help. It clearly helps the Republicans in the House, the Democrats in the Senate (a 6-2 advantage is more meaningful than a 2-0 advantage) and could go either way depending on the exact numbers for the electoral college.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
It would be interesting to figure out who that benefits and harms.

For example lets say you break California into 4 states. The 3 biggest go Democrat, but the smallest goes Republican. Who does that help. It clearly helps the Republicans in the House, the Democrats in the Senate (a 6-2 advantage is more meaningful than a 2-0 advantage) and could go either way depending on the exact numbers for the electoral college.

I included Texas because my honest view is for the good of the people. Not parties.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
I'm for breaking up California and Texas and New York and any of the high population states whereby you effectively have no representation in large parts of the state.

West Virginia used to be part of Virginia. yes, it was broken up during war but it was two very distinctive regions.



I am for exploding Congress into 15,000 members
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
I'm for breaking up California and Texas and New York and any of the high population states whereby you effectively have no representation in large parts of the state.

West Virginia used to be part of Virginia. yes, it was broken up during war but it was two very distinctive regions.

Why should states be the only ones to be gerrymandered, lets let the Feds in on it too.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
My first DAY at my current job back in the 90's, I was invited to lunch with some co-workers, one of whom was Puerto Rican. The subject of statehood came up and at the time, the issue was if the official language was *English*, it might proceed.

I agreed - it didn't make sense that the entire country operated in English - except ONE. Other nations have similar requirements EVEN when most of the residents don't speak the language as their first language.

My Puerto Rican host blew up at me, to the utter embarrassment of the others with me. He kept hammering at me while I stayed silent.

So it's a hot issue. I gathered from that however that despite its U.S. territory status, Puerto Rico likes to think of itself as a sovereign nation - with none of the responsibilities.

Since that time, I've visited there and learned a few things, some of which may have changed over time.
One is - it's freaking nearly impossible to keep fresh water on the island for so many people.
So many things are expensive - because they have to import almost everything.

And lastly - because of its territory status - I don't know if it's lower taxes or subsidies or what have you - they enjoy an advantage over other states,
and several companies are located there because of it. When I was there last, a man told us that statehood might be the worst thing for them financially,
but they couldn't handle independence either.
 

black dog

Free America
Very proud people there, it's been 35+ years since I have traveled through PR, the last time my ex and I were there we were on our way to St Thomas and we had to take a hop from PR to St Thomas on Prinair. That truly was the biggest pos airplane I have ever flown in. It was a vintage Connair 240 .. we had a flight ceiling of 2,000 ft. In what I saw of PR it was nothing but dirt, neighborhood baseball fields and slums.
I have no idea of what it is now.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Very proud people there, it's been 35+ years since I have traveled through PR, the last time my ex and I were there we were on our way to St Thomas and we had to take a hop from PR to St Thomas on Prinair. That truly was the biggest pos airplane I have ever flown in. It was a vintage Connair 240 .. we had a flight ceiling of 2,000 ft. In what I saw of PR it was nothing but dirt, neighborhood baseball fields and slums.
I have no idea of what it is now.

My understanding is that PR is third-world.

In my opinion, they are a liability, not an asset. But if there are legitimate reasons to make them a state, and valid assets they bring to the table, I'm willing to change my mind.
 

Restitution

New Member
They won't be a state. Too much to lose and not enough to gain for the PR people.

As long as we keep bailing them out... they will keep voting NO.
 
Top