YOu guys should get a laugh out of this

http://online.wsj.co...0709638419.html


I am going to move to NM so i can be part of mexico ...better looking women

he obviously doesnt understand american demographics...mexico wants california!!!

plus nobody would claim New jersey!

Edited by iron cross, 29 December 2008 - 09:47 PM.

see this thread -
http://www.traders-t...showtopic=99588

"Mr. Panarin posits, in brief, that mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall...."

This seems to be the "cause" leading to the breakup, according to his amazing theory- but he doesn't bother to give any clue as to who will be fighting whom, or over what. And aren't most wars fought over the aquisition of land and political power- not over who can run off and join a foreign culture the quickest?

Just in case, tho....it's a good thing that I like rice.

it's a good thing that I like rice.

Don (Ho Chi Minh)

Hard to believe people are paying any attention to this nut, much less giving him space in the WSJ.

"Mr. Panarin posits, in brief, that mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall...."

This seems to be the "cause" leading to the breakup, according to his amazing theory- but he doesn't bother to give any clue as to who will be fighting whom, or over what. And aren't most wars fought over the aquisition of land and political power- not over who can run off and join a foreign culture the quickest?

Just in case, tho....it's a good thing that I like rice.

LOL!!!!!!

and egg rolls!!!!!

I want cookies!

Each Fourth Turning has echos of ones past. Our currently unfolding 4Th certainly has lots of folks referring to the last - 1929 - 1945. But it shouldn't be surprising that we will hear more and more references to the one before that - 1860-1864. As states and municipalities become more insolvent and turn to the Federal govt for bailout, much will depend on how those bailouts are perceived. If seen as a huge impact on the future (hyper-inflation), the crisis might elicit an inter-generational conflict that will have younger generations trying to limit the claims of older people on financial resources (e.g. Social Security). However, if the costs are more immediate and born by the more solvent states, the crisis could engender conflict amongst the States. By the way, New Jersey has the highest negative net balance sheet with the federal government, i.e., it pays more into federal coffers for the least amount of returned federal dollars. As belt-tightening becomes more pronounce, NJ and similar 'net-negative' states may grow resentful of their dollars going to the fed so as to pass onto the other states. Also, while Panarin's vision seems just a little far-fetched, there is the somewhat analogous situation of larger financial institutions buying smaller banks to gain access to capital - the recent Capital One buying of Chevy Chase Bank comes to mind. As a cash cow, New Jersey might be very appealing to the EU; whereas California, Florida and even Hawaii (sorry, IYB) would be highly shunned. Interesting times, no?

Edited by salsabob, 30 December 2008 - 10:13 AM.