Re: CHAT: Merging contries and dropbears (was: Re: General Question)

Good grief...  :-)

OZ and NZ merging and all we get here in Canada is Quebec de-merging. (Which
I oppose BTW for what it's worth I'm as close to bi-lingual as one gets in
Alberta) We even have different football from those in the States.

Will the world EVER make sense?

Any one from Puerto Rico or Guam want to comment on the idea of Statehood?

Scott Hlad

P.S. Loved the dropbears. And while the Aussies are riding kangaroos
everywhere, we are watching a polar bear walk down the street from the
window of our igloo all the while chasing away the mosquitos which are
unchanged in size from and really descended from pteranadons.

===============================
Scott W. Hlad
Lacombe Alberta Canada

Ho teguho at ho so.

Teran, a Conlang
http://www.teran-conlang.org
mailto:scott@kohath.org


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Tristan McLeay
> Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2001 12:06 AM
> To: CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU
> Subject: Re: Chat: Merging contries and dropbears (was: Re: General
> Question)
>
>
> andrew wrote:
>
> > Am 03/24 13:25  Tristan McLeay yscrifef:
> >
> >> When they were discussing Federation, New Zealand was
> involved, but they
> >> wanted to be two states, and NSW and Vic wanted them as just one.
> >> Interestingly enough, though, WA made it even harder to be convinced to
> >> join then NZ, and yet the made some rather significant changes to the
> >> original plan for their benifit (for example, thats why each state has
> >> the same amount of senators - the original plan was based on population
> >> like the House of Reps)
> >>
> > most discussion of see about federation favours separate statehood for
> > the North and South Islands of NZ.  Basically my state capital will be
> > Christchurch rather than Wellington.
> >
> >> Oh... That would also make a merger with Oz difficult. Why should we
> >> choose the President? All they're going to do is be our president. The
> >> system works just fine now without us electing the Queen or GG.
> >>
> > In the recent referendum I understand that more Aussies prefered having
> > a hereditary monarch to a president elected by politicians.
>
> The referendum was badly questioned so that you'd seem like a traitor to
> choose Yes, and the problem the No party illustrated very well to
> convince the majority to vote No was not so much the president being
> elected, but the fact that the PM would be able to kick him out on a
> whim, and regardless of whether or not it was good, president couldn't
> come back in. The only revenge he could hope for would be if the PM's
> part decided that he shouldn't be the PM any more.
>
> >
> >> Ahh, but will all NZers agree? And anyway, wouldn't they be vehemently
> >> opposed to making one bigger country? It would mean that they
> would have
> >> even more trouble seperating themselves from us.
> >>
> > The majority of NZers don't support political federation.  I only know
> > maybe one other person to whom it makes sense.  If it did come about we
> > can still keep separate sports teams. :)
> >
> But we'd have to teach youse how to play football. Real football. Footy
> played on an oval with four goal posts, not some rugby or soccer or
> whatever it is you call football.
>
> Tristan
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Reply