Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Agressive US investments.  (Read 5763 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Speelgoedmannetje

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2002
  • Posts: 9656
    • Show all replies
Re: Agressive US investments.
« on: October 01, 2004, 02:23:32 AM »
Quote

whabang wrote:
I'm no American, but the russian economy seems a good bet for stocks.
hm, naah, too much corruption and mafia.
I'd prefer Estonia, Latvia and lithuania to invest in.
These seem to be quite thriving.
China is also quite interesting atm.
And the canary said: \'chirp\'
 

Offline Speelgoedmannetje

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2002
  • Posts: 9656
    • Show all replies
Re: Agressive US investments.
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2004, 02:13:47 PM »
Quote

T_Bone wrote:
I wonder how that would work actually, if hypothetically, North Carolina removes itself from the Union, can we claim no responsibility for federal debt?

hmmmm....
No, since it's the UNITED States...
United means your state officially take part of it, AND is likewise any other state responsible for the debt.
And the canary said: \'chirp\'
 

Offline Speelgoedmannetje

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2002
  • Posts: 9656
    • Show all replies
Re: Agressive US investments.
« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2004, 06:10:04 PM »
Quote

T_Bone wrote:
Quote

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
Quote

T_Bone wrote:
I wonder how that would work actually, if hypothetically, North Carolina removes itself from the Union, can we claim no responsibility for federal debt?

hmmmm....
No, since it's the UNITED States...
United means your state officially take part of it, AND is likewise any other state responsible for the debt.


In case you missed it, the premise was that a state *removed* itself from the union.

The federal defecit is the responsibility of the federal government, not the states. The federal government doesn't collect revenue from the states, the federal government collects it's taxes directly, not touching the state tax at all.

The Constitution allows the federal government to tax it's citizens, but no provision has ever been made in the Constitution to tax *former* citizens above and beyond any taxes previously due. Currently the government has no athority to impose debt on former citizens assuming they owe no back taxes. I believe the Union would have to eat the loss.

:lol:
Iwantmymoneyback!

sorry sir, can't, you signed...
And the canary said: \'chirp\'
 

Offline Speelgoedmannetje

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2002
  • Posts: 9656
    • Show all replies
Re: Agressive US investments.
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2004, 06:13:29 PM »
Quote

redrumloa wrote:
Ooops this is becoming political.

 :whack:
Twas kinda already in the beginning of this thread.
And the canary said: \'chirp\'