The United States and Britain should finally become one country...

I’d certainly rather the UK be in a union with the US rather than the EU

I would like after Brexit the UK to move closer again to the US and the commonwealth, 5 eyes etc

a reply to: EternalSolace

LOL , Not Another Bloody Welfare State ! Fook Off !

a reply to: EternalSolace

The United States and Britain should finally become one country

HELL NO.

You keep your country (Murica) in your pocket.

a reply to: EternalSolace

I'd be fine with that as it would make life a lot easier for me in my Industry of work. Just my passport and no VISA needed or over 50k in savings

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: LABTECH767
.. and in Scotland's case even there own currency though it is tied to sterling (and sterling is a place in Scotland remember).

Scotland don't have their own currency They use pound sterling. Some Scottish and Northern Ireland banks can print their own pound notes if backed by equivalent Bank of England notes, and this this is all regulated by the Bank of England.

Stirling is a place in Scotland and not connected with sterling, the currency. The word "sterling" differentiates the British currency with others that are also called pound. The pound goes back to the dawn of time.

Sorry but you are quite wrong, the Scottish pound is kept at the exact same value as the English pound and there Exchange rate is identical with other nation's, you can also legally use Scottish currency south of the border and English currency north of the border - the border only currently being an administrative border.
Here is a image of a Scottish pound £10 note.
i.pinimg.com...
Here is a image of an English £10 pound note.
www-personal.umich.edu...

Now they are both regulated by Sterling but one is issued by the bank of England and the other currency is issued by the bank of Scotland.

Now one thing that people in England have to watch out for in Retail is FAKE Scottish £20 notes because counterfeiters are aware that the English see far fewer genuine Scottish note's than the Scot's do English note's - this actually causes a bit of a problem were some shop's even refuse to accept Scottish currency despite it being legal tender.

But arguably they are BOTH the British Pound, however they are issued by separate parliament's and treasury's even if the Scot's treasury is essentially a sub department of the English Treasury and what we really have is something called a CURRENCY UNION which is not quite the same thing as the same currency, Scotland is the most independent of the British nation's remember and despite the uprising's of the highlanders and various other wars was never actually conquered by the English, it joined the union after the wealthy elite of Scotland bankrupted the nation by trying to colonize Panama - sending woolen blanket's and cold weather gear on board there ship's which were worse than useless in the tropic's because they had grown a little envious of the wealth there English business cousin's were making from the burgeoning English Empire and wanted to create a Scottish Empire to rival it (they shared the same monarch but that is down to there own internal hierarchy's as much as anything else but had retained there independence in most other way's as a king ruled by the consent of his aristocracy not his people back then - bit of a can of worm's Scottish politic's and English monarch's, one time the Campbell's fought against the English on the side of the Scottish claim to there throne AGAINST the Stuart's and Later more due to religion the Stuart's there Clan Rivals whom had a very long feud with them fought against the Campbell's AND against the English - with whom allegiance had changed sides - for the Scottish Claimant - well he had grown up in France and spoke french but you get my gist though you know legally Charles Stuart did have a stronger claim but not the consent of his aristocracy - meanwhile it was always the little guy that got stepped on and still is today eh!).

In fact in the case of Scot's Choosing independence at there next referendum on the matter the standing advice from the English Treasury is strongly against retaining the currency link and allowing the Scot's currency to also go completely independent which would actually harm the Scot's economy rather more than the Nationalists think it would, while the separation of Scotland and the resultant break up of the UK would also harm the value of the English currency on the international markets and likely also trigger an independence vote from Wales - though currently that is a distant pipe dream for the son's of Glyndwr (Glen Dower not sure if that is the correct pronunciation) et al, remember the welsh suffered generation's of ethnic cleansing at the hand's of the 'Norman' English (but while the Saxon's, Danes and Angles also invaded they actually married the local British woman so at least maternally are family to the welsh even if that goes quite a way's back nowaday's).

But technically as far as international currency exchange, rates and internally as far as Legal Tender is concerned as they are both set by - regulated by Sterling they currently may as well be the same currency.

originally posted by: peskyhumans
I could see offering the UK statehood. But I think they are too prideful to accept. I'm not sure they would appreciate some parts of our Constitution, or if they would want to give up the reigns so to speak. Ireland might want to be a separate state.

But I think if they did become a state or states, they would be welcome and would integrate well. The USA is a former colony, so we share the language and have a lot of common cultural heritage.

I think Canada would integrate well too, but they're so left-leaning and liberal I don't think they would want to either.

Mexico? Hell no. We have nothing in common with them. Trying to integrate with them opens the door to cartels, drugs, terrorism, and poverty. I would want the land, but not the people living on it. That's an ugly situation and we should just stay out.

Statehood is to much, they have to be a colony for a while first.

The languages are incompatible.

This would never work.

Yeah, we tried that once and it didn't work. Something about tea.

originally posted by: UKTruth
Given the complete mess you Americans have made of your country by letting communists run wild, I think the OP's suggestion is a good one. Let's go back to how it was - we'll take over and you can be a colony again.
You had your experiment and you messed it up.

I admit its not going very well lately. I never even thought I would see the day open socialists would even be running for office and making any kind of headway much less winning seats.

A question for the historians.

What is the legal standing of the Declaration of Independence?

We all hear about the American point of view, but was Independence actually granted by the Crown?

I am wondering if legally speaking, the Americans are still a colony.

originally posted by: Majic
The languages are incompatible.

This would never work.

Plus Americans would start running at the first sight of British hair styles and the state of our dental health.

a reply to: EternalSolace

I'm a monarchist at heart, but without a legitimate monarchy present, I prefer the American system of representative democracy.

That said, I will not accept the English crown, or the current UN-centered UK government.

Had a different path been forged by the UK I may have entertained the idea longer. They are a good bunch. It's just that they have been completely taken over and need to find their center again.

I would not accept this.

a reply to: EternalSolace

a reply to: EternalSolace

nawww yer awrite pal!

Neither country would accept subjugation or suzerainty. The only hope for this idea is by merger, but there would be a lot to come to agreement on regarding the differences. To me it seems akin to trying to unify the Catholic and Protestant church. Sure, they are more similar now than in the past, but the reasons for the division still exist.

I think many of us United Statesians are generally accepting of Britain but certainly would want to retain all constitutional and representative rights. That alone causes a plethora of complications.

Given Brexit, it's clear Britain (specifically England) is moving toward sovereign independence. Candidly I don't blame them and would want the same once this whole "International Court of Justice" was formed.

The U.S. doesn't receive the same favourable opinion from Britain, like we in the U.S. used to kick sand in Britian's eyes when we were kids or something. Yet, U.S. news was on all the time when I visited for a few weeks. Our U.S. is perceived like that train wreck where Britons don't want to see us yet can't look away. This is a general feel, I have to say I've made a number of friends in England and they've all been very kind once they knew we weren't haughty loudmouths who want to shoot everybody.

The World Wars opened up some communication, as did TV and the internet. I think internationally the countries are 'dating', but neither one have plans to pick out an engagement ring any time soon. We both like spending money on each other and having a good time, so probably best to not force the issue, but rather let love happen naturally.

originally posted by: EternalSolace
United under the US' constitutional declaration of independence. Solidified by Britain's law and freedom. Finally joining America and Britain in an epic solidarity of which the world has never known...

If we're gonna do this you guys need to start spelling Colour and Aluminium properly, and everything else.

Oh and Constantine, you're saying it wrong, I'll give you a clue, it ends with the same sound as Valentine...

originally posted by: djz3ro
If we're gonna do this you guys need to start spelling Colour and Aluminium properly, and everything else.

Oh and Constantine, you're saying it wrong, I'll give you a clue, it ends with the same sound as Valentine...

I don't think you'll have much objection here in the U.S. to the proper spellings and pronunciation used by scholarly sources. We butcher our own spelling/pronunciations rules constantly, so we'd have no problem butchering one more.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
Sorry but you are quite wrong, the Scottish pound is kept at the exact same value as the English pound and there Exchange rate is identical with other nation's, you can also legally use Scottish currency south of the border and English currency north of the border - the border only currently being an administrative border.

Actually, I am right. Some Scottish banks (and Northern Irish) can print notes, but this is regulated by the Bank of England and the notes are pounds Sterling. There is not a thing called the Scottish pound - it's Sterling.

The issue for Scotland at independence is that they could:

- Create their own currency, which is quite a reasonable thing to do
- Use Sterling which may include continuation if the current arrangement and print money on a one to one basis
- Join the Euro and see Germany benefit, but only when Scotland joins the EU
- Use some other currency, like the Malian franc, or Bitcoin.

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: EternalSolace
United under the US' constitutional declaration of independence. Solidified by Britain's law and freedom. Finally joining America and Britain in an epic solidarity of which the world has never known...

If we're gonna do this you guys need to start spelling Colour and Aluminium properly, and everything else.

Oh and Constantine, you're saying it wrong, I'll give you a clue, it ends with the same sound as Valentine...

I'll glady relearn how to spell colour and aluminium if you'd learn how to properly use, store, and defend your family with a firearm.

originally posted by: Whatsthisthen
A question for the historians.

What is the legal standing of the Declaration of Independence?

We all hear about the American point of view, but was Independence actually granted by the Crown?

I am wondering if legally speaking, the Americans are still a colony.

I'd guess that anything won on the battlefield carries infinitely more weight than what some lawyer can argue in a court.

Especially after almost 250 years. Any claim would have to have lapsed.