Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Richard Hakluyt]

How many congressmen do we get?

[Berkut]

Really? I thought our gun laws would definitely be unconstitutional in the US.

Agree with this piece:
https://next.ft.com/content/643fb2f6-39e6-11e6-9a05-82a9b15a8ee7

That depends on whose opinion of the 2nd you subscribe to...for most NRA types, the current laws in the US are mostly not Constitutional.

[Habbaku]

How many congressmen do we get?

Britain as a whole would currently get around 68-70 representatives if they were added and nothing else changed.  The tricky part would be how many Senators we'd let you have.  I'm okay with 2 each for NI, England, Scotland, and Wales. 

[Duque de Bragança]

So England could be our 51st State?

You mean it was not already?   

[Berkut]

Yeah, England would really need to be 3 or 4 more states.

[Barrister]

Yeah, England would really need to be 3 or 4 more states.

Why?  California has 38 million, having England with 53 wouldn't be all that far out of line.

But why stop there?  Unite the Anglosphere in a grand US-UK-Canada-Aus-NZ union!

Quebec might not be keen on it though.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Really? I thought our gun laws would definitely be unconstitutional in the US.

Agree with this piece:
https://next.ft.com/content/643fb2f6-39e6-11e6-9a05-82a9b15a8ee7

The only thing the Supreme Court has ruled you cannot do is a "blanket gun ban." Which Britain doesn't have.

[lustindarkness]

Yeah, England would really need to be 3 or 4 more states.

Why?  California has 38 million, having England with 53 wouldn't be all that far out of line.

But why stop there?  Unite the Anglosphere in a grand US-UK-Canada-Aus-NZ union!

Quebec might not be keen on it though.

One step at a time, we'll get to you at some point.

[Valmy]

Yeah, England would really need to be 3 or 4 more states.

Why?  California has 38 million, having England with 53 wouldn't be all that far out of line.

But why stop there?  Unite the Anglosphere in a grand US-UK-Canada-Aus-NZ union!

Quebec might not be keen on it though.

[Berkut]

Yeah, England would really need to be 3 or 4 more states.

Why?  California has 38 million, having England with 53 wouldn't be all that far out of line.

Because it is pretty dumb that California is that large, so making another one even larger is a pretty bad idea.

If you want to talk about the desire to break up California into 2-3 states, I am down with that as well.

But why stop there?  Unite the Anglosphere in a grand US-UK-Canada-Aus-NZ union!

Quebec might not be keen on it though.

Pass on Quebec, and Australia seems to be doing just fine as is.

[Valmy]

Pass on Quebec, and Australia seems to be doing just fine as is.

What? We can only take the dysfunctional Anglosphere countries?

[Berkut]

Pass on Quebec, and Australia seems to be doing just fine as is.

What? We can only take the dysfunctional Anglosphere countries?

Of course, we are here to save them from themselves. Why would we save the ones who don't need saving (Australia, New Zealand) or the ones that deserve to be destroyed for their arrogance and intolerance (Quebec)?

[garbon]

Yeah, England would really need to be 3 or 4 more states.

Why?  California has 38 million, having England with 53 wouldn't be all that far out of line.

Because it is pretty dumb that California is that large, so making another one even larger is a pretty bad idea.

If you want to talk about the desire to break up California into 2-3 states, I am down with that as well.

[lustindarkness]

Now now, lets not derail this thread. How do we call the English Statehood process? Brentry does not sound as cool as Brexit.

[Sheilbh]

What's the German idea of 'associate partner status'?

Rumours in the City that South Korea's already offered an FTA on the same terms As the EU one.