HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 6:17 PM
mwadswor's Avatar
mwadswor mwadswor is offline
The Man
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 1,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fusey View Post
Military outposts? Ceuta and Melilla are more similar to Gibraltar than Guantanamo. They are considered autonomous cities under Spanish law.
If they're autonomous, is it really a land border between Spain and Morocco? I don't think we have any autonomous cities or areas in the US, so I don't know how it works.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 6:21 PM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 6,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by salaverryo View Post
Ceuta and Melilla are Spanish military outposts in Moroccan territory. This is like saying that Cuba and the USA share a border because of the presence of Guantanamo Base on the island.
That's different; Ceuta and Melilla are autonomous Spanish cities that are considered by Spain to be integrated parts of the nation of Spain, like Hawaii and Alaska are to the United States.

Guantanamo Naval Base is just that, a naval base. The US has been leasing it from Cuba since 1903. The US has complete jurisdiction within the naval base but must also recognize Cuban sovereignty over the entire area.
__________________
"I guess the only time people think about injustice is when it happens to them."

~ Charles Bukowski
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 6:23 PM
Bootstrap Bill Bootstrap Bill is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
That's different; Ceuta and Melilla are autonomous Spanish cities that are considered by Spain to be integrated parts of the nation of Spain, like Hawaii and Alaska are to the United States.

Guantanamo Naval Base is just that, a naval base. The US has been leasing it from Cuba since 1903. The US has complete jurisdiction within the naval base but must also recognize Cuban sovereignty over the entire area.
When does the lease expire?

Does the U.S. have the right to convert the base into a civilian town if it wanted to?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 6:24 PM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 6,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fusey View Post
Military outposts? Ceuta and Melilla are more similar to Gibraltar than Guantanamo. They are considered autonomous cities under Spanish law.
Actually that's a little different too. Gibraltar has always been considered a British overseas territory, it's never been technically part of the UK, whereas Ceuta and Melilla are fully integrated parts of Spain with full sovereignty as such, again, like my example of the American states of Hawaii and Alaska. Though they're not contiguous with the rest of the US, they have full status as American states and obviously are considered part of the US.
__________________
"I guess the only time people think about injustice is when it happens to them."

~ Charles Bukowski
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 6:27 PM
R@ptor's Avatar
R@ptor R@ptor is offline
Global Citizen
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,726
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwadswor View Post
If they're autonomous, is it really a land border between Spain and Morocco?
Not just that, but arguably the most fortified 'peaceful' land border beside the US-Mexican one.


http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,524370,00.jpg


http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/20...b__200x314.jpg
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 6:28 PM
Fusey's Avatar
Fusey Fusey is offline
Repeat!
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 5,496
I know, I was thinking of the first thing in the region I could compare it with (Perejil is uninhabited and wouldn't work).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 6:31 PM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 6,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bootstrap Bill View Post
When does the lease expire?

Does the U.S. have the right to convert the base into a civilian town if it wanted to?
I actually don't know when it expires; my understanding was that the US can lease it indefinitely, but I could be wrong. But, according to the terms of the 1903 lease, the US can only use it as a naval base and fueling station. Cuba has wanted the US out of Guantanamo for a while now, and has brought up many claims that the US has violated the terms of that lease which should be cause for them to leave. In fact the whole Gitmo prisoner thing has pissed Cuba off; they use the fact that the US built a prison there as another example of the US violating the lease terms that Guantanamo can only be used as a naval base and fueling station.
__________________
"I guess the only time people think about injustice is when it happens to them."

~ Charles Bukowski
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 6:57 PM
mwadswor's Avatar
mwadswor mwadswor is offline
The Man
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 1,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
I actually don't know when it expires; my understanding was that the US can lease it indefinitely, but I could be wrong. But, according to the terms of the 1903 lease, the US can only use it as a naval base and fueling station. Cuba has wanted the US out of Guantanamo for a while now, and has brought up many claims that the US has violated the terms of that lease which should be cause for them to leave. In fact the whole Gitmo prisoner thing has pissed Cuba off; they use the fact that the US built a prison there as another example of the US violating the lease terms that Guantanamo can only be used as a naval base and fueling station.
I'm pretty sure that it's indefinite for use as a naval base and fueling station. The Cubans have wanted the US out for a while and they have used the Gitmo prison as evidence of the US violating the treaty, but at a point there's very little a country like Cuba can do to strong-arm a country like the US out. It may not be the most politically correct thing around, but let's be honest, if the US wants to stay (and we do) then Cuba has very few options.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 6:59 PM
Fusey's Avatar
Fusey Fusey is offline
Repeat!
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 5,496
I googled 'us canada border' and this image came up. The fence looks so intimidating.


http://www.uwec.edu/Geography/Ivogeler/w188/manitoba/border5.jpg
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 7:04 PM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,480
/\

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ajs View Post
last while i have found the canada boarder people to be worse then the amaricans and getting worse by the year the amaricans have become more friendly in the last couple yrs
Yes I notice that too. Coming back into Canada they seem to give you a harder time, even though you're a citizen and can prove it. The Americans are more friendly and casual I find, this is both in actual borders and airports.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 8:17 PM
Bootstrap Bill Bootstrap Bill is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fusey View Post
I googled 'us canada border' and this image came up. The fence looks so intimidating.


http://www.uwec.edu/Geography/Ivogeler/w188/manitoba/border5.jpg
This is crazy!

If Europe can have open borders, why can't we?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 8:47 PM
brian_b brian_b is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bootstrap Bill View Post
This is crazy!

If Europe can have open borders, why can't we?
Congress.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 8:57 PM
mwadswor's Avatar
mwadswor mwadswor is offline
The Man
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 1,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bootstrap Bill View Post
This is crazy!

If Europe can have open borders, why can't we?
Rednecks
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 9:02 PM
Bootstrap Bill Bootstrap Bill is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian_b View Post
Congress.
Can you think of anything negative that would come as a result of an open border between the U.S. and Canada? One that would allow free movement of people and goods - like you see in Europe.

The economy on both sides is very similar. I don't see millions of Canadians rushing the border (or vice versa). I think it could work here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 10:30 PM
Trantor's Avatar
Trantor Trantor is offline
FUS RO DAH!
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Ecumenopolis
Posts: 16,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by rousseau View Post
And that's a patois. See here.

Portuguese and Spanish are similar enough that it makes you think that, as an erstwhile Spanish speaker, maybe you can pick up Portuguese and become survivalist conversant in a short time, but no...for the life of me, I just cannot understand what Portuguese-speakers are saying. Funny, I've actually heard that Portuguese speakers have an easier time with Spanish than Spanish-speakers have with Portuguese. I wonder if there's some truth to that?
maybe some truth, I am not sure. Portuguese has more vowel sounds, dont know if that makes it more difficult for spanish speakers.

the real pain to speak spanish is that at the same time we can understand some stuff and completely NOT understand the rest

like in this ad for a spanish course in Brazil
Video Link
__________________
________________________________________
Easy, Tychus. This ain´t science fiction
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 11:55 PM
WonderlandPark's Avatar
WonderlandPark WonderlandPark is offline
Pacific Wonderland
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bi-Situational, Portland & L.A.
Posts: 4,129
Crossing into & out of arguably the most dangerous city in North America: Ciudad Juarez (my pics)




(anyone who has said the L.A. river is pathetic hasn't seen the Rio Grande. Yep, you are looking at the mighty Rio Grande River.





looking back towards US:



Look, ma! no traffic! Speaks volumes as to what the drug war in Juarez has done to the border economy...
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away"

travel, architecture & photos of the textured world at http://www.pixelmap.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2009, 11:57 PM
BnaBreaker's Avatar
BnaBreaker BnaBreaker is offline
Future God
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago/Nashville
Posts: 19,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bootstrap Bill View Post
This is crazy!

If Europe can have open borders, why can't we?
TERRORISTS!!!!! ILLEGALS!!!! AHHHHHH!!
__________________
"Emancipate yourself from mental slavery. None but ourselves can free our minds."

-Bob Marley
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2009, 10:00 AM
jodelli's Avatar
jodelli jodelli is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Windsor, ON
Posts: 1,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by BnaBreaker View Post
TERRORISTS!!!!! ILLEGALS!!!! AHHHHHH!!
Yeah, we need to keep threatening Americans such as Mujahid Abdullah and Yassir Ali Khan out of Canada.
__________________
No NIMBYs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2009, 4:09 PM
brian_b brian_b is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bootstrap Bill View Post
Can you think of anything negative that would come as a result of an open border between the U.S. and Canada? One that would allow free movement of people and goods - like you see in Europe.

The economy on both sides is very similar. I don't see millions of Canadians rushing the border (or vice versa). I think it could work here.
The important part of the free movement policies in Europe is that the countries have agreed to allow any citizen of a member country to live and (most importantly) work in any other member country.

Until the US and Canada come to an agreement that allows this, the border will never be as open as it was pre-9/11 (I still remember crossing between the US and Canada in the late 1990s where the border "guard" barely glanced up from his newspaper to look at you before waving you past).

The US and Canada have different policies on immigration and work permits for immigrants/visitors. We have different policies on taxation. And of course there is the healthcare difference as well.

I don't think the US is concerned about Canada's ability to keep terrorists out, although I doubt the US State Department is happy that Canada will happily provide cover to any US citizen that boards a flight from Toronto to Havana (IE, don't mark the person as having left Canada).

This is why I say blame Congress. We have come to hundreds of agreements between the two countries. There is no reason why we can't make this agreement, especially since the two economies are so similar.


Of course, if such an agreement happened, you would get a lot of protests claiming discrimination against Mexico.


EDIT - it seems like the easiest way to do this is to set up a system where any employer that wishes to employ a citizen of the other country withholds taxes related to retirement and healthcare (optional) that correspond to the country of citizenship. An American working in Canada would have SSA/Medicare withheld and sent to the US. A Canadian working in the US would have the equivalent withheld and sent to Canada. The employer gets the option of covering the worker's healthcare as if they were a citizen and then that employee must deal with it (IE the Canadian can't go back to Canada for a "free" operation) or if the employer does not offer such a thing then they can withhold cost of a policy in the other country and send the money there. Income taxes would only apply in the country in which the person worked.

The key is to streamline the process so it is not a burden to the employer. I am a household employer (I have a nanny) and the IRS and the state of Illinois both have streamlined the taxation process so much that I question why people take the risk and pay under the table. If they can streamline it for this they can streamline it for cross-border employment.

Under a system like this, the social safety net of both countries is not burdened.

Those that worry that a flood of Canadians would come to the US and take away our jobs are not seeing the big picture. If the conditions were such that there is a max exodus, the Canadian business owners would simply move their businesses here to avoid shutting down. Frankly, I can't imagine a scenario that doesn't strengthen the economies of both countries.

Last edited by brian_b; Nov 10, 2009 at 4:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2009, 6:45 PM
Mister F Mister F is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bootstrap Bill View Post
Can you think of anything negative that would come as a result of an open border between the U.S. and Canada? One that would allow free movement of people and goods - like you see in Europe.

The economy on both sides is very similar. I don't see millions of Canadians rushing the border (or vice versa). I think it could work here.
To satisfy American concerns about security and terrorism, the two countries would have to harmonize security, immigration, foreign policy, taxation, drug policy, etc. Some of these things are approached very differently in each country. Since the United States has ten times the population of Canada, it would be the one calling the shots. It would essentially mean Canada giving up huge amounts of sovereignty to the United States. Totally not worth whatever economic benefits we might get. And those benefits would be insignificant anyway, IMO. Let's keep in mind that the main reason our economy didn't fall into recession as hard as the Americans is because our financial system is so different.

In short, North America is dominated by a single huge country. Europe isn't.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:28 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.