Read Executive Order 12803 in which the assets of the US of America were sold off by a corporation called United States for the benefit of the private company the US.
READ!!! DAMMIT READ!!!!
Democratic Annexation of Canada into the United States
- Thread starter sombraa110
- Start date
READ!!! DAMMIT READ!!!!
Executive order 12803 of April 30, 1992
57 FR 19063 / May 4, 1992
TEXT: By the authority vested in me as president by the laws of the United States of America, end in order to ensure that the United States achieves the most beneficial economic use of its resources, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order: (a) “Privatization” means the disposition or transfer of an infrastructure asset, such as by sale or by long-term lease, from a State or local government to a private party.
(b) “infrastructure asset” means any asset financed in whole or in part by the Federal Government and needed for the functioning of the economy. Examples of such assets include, but are not limited to: roads, tunnels, bridges, electricity supply facilities. mass transit, rail transportation, airports, ports. waterways, water supply facilities, recycling and wastewater treatment facilities, solid waste disposal facilities, housing, schools, prisons, and hospitals.
(c) “Originally authorized purposes” means the general objectives of the original grant program; however, the term is not intended to include every condition requires for a grantee to have obtained the original grant.
(d) “Transfer price” means: (i) the amount paid or to be paid by a private party for an infrastructure asset, if the asset is transferred as a result of a competitive bidding; of (ii) the appraised value of an infrastructure asset, as determined by the head of the executive department or agency and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, if the asset is not transferred as a result of competitive bidding.
(e) “state and local governments” means the government of any state of the United States, the District of Columbia. any commonwealth. territory, or possession of the United States, and any country, municipality, city, town. township, local public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, regional or interstate governmental entity, council of governments, and any agency or instrumentality of a local government, and any federally recognized Indian Tribe.
Sec. 2. Fundamental Principles. Executive departments and agencies shall be guided by the following objectives and principles: (a) Adequate and well-maintained infrastructure is critical to economic growth. Consistent with the principles of federalism enumerated in Executive Order No. 12612, and in order to allow the private sector to Provide for infrastructure modernization and expansion, State and local governments should have greater freedom to privatize infrastructure assets.
(b) Private enterprise and competitively driven improvements are the foundation of our Nation’s economy and economic growth. Federal financing of infrastructure assets should not act as a barrier to the achievement of economic efficiencies through additional private market financing or competitive practices, or both.
(c) State and local governments are in the best position to assess and respond to local needs. States and local governments should, subject to assuring continued compliance with Federal requirements that public use be on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms, have maximum possible freedom to make decisions concerning the maintenance and disposition of their federally financed infrastructure assets.
(d) User fees are generally more efficient than general taxes as a means to support infrastructure assets. Privatization transactions should be structured so as not to result in unreasonable increases in charges to users.
Sec. 3. Privatization initiative. To the extent permitted by law, the head of each executive department and agency shall undertake the following actions: (a) Review those procedures affecting the management and disposition of federally financed infrastructure assets owned by State and local governments and modify those procedures to encourage appropriate privatization of such assets consistent: with this order;
(b) Assist State and Local governments in their efforts to advance the objectives of this order; and
(c) Approve State and local governments’ requests to Privatize infrastructure assets, consistent with the criteria in section 4 of this order and, where necessary, grant exceptions to the disposition requirements of the “Uniform Administration Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments” common rule, or other relevant rules or regulations for infrastructure assets; provided that the transfer price shall be distributed, as paid, in the following manner: (i) State and local governments shall first recoup in full the unadjusted dollar amount of their portion of total project costs (including any transaction and fix-up costs they incur) associated with the infrastructure assets involved; (ii) if proceeds remain, then the Federal Government shall recoup in full the amount of Federal grant awards, associated with the infrastructure assets, less the applicable share of accumulated depreciation on such asset (calculating using the Internal Revenue Service accelerated depreciation schedule far the categories of assets in question); and (iii) finally, the State and local governments shall keep any remaining proceeds,
Sec. 4. Criteria. To the extent permitted by law, the head of an executive department or agency shall approve a request in accordance with section 3(c) of this order only if the grantee: (a) Agrees to use the proceeds described in section 3 (e)(iii) of this order only far investment in additional infrastructure assets (after public notice of the proposed investment) or for debt or tax reduction; and
(b) Demonstrates that a market mechanism, legally enforceable agreement, or regulatory mechanism will ensure that: (i) the infrastructure asset or assets will continue to be used for their originally authorized purposes; and (ii) user charges will be consistent with any current Federal conditions that protect users and the public by limiting the charges.
Sec. 5. Government-wide coordination and Review. In implementing Executive Order Nos. 12291 and 12498 and OMB Circular No. A-19, the Office of Management and Budget, to the extent permitted by law and consistent with the provisions of those authorities, shall take action to ensure that the policies of the executive department and agencies are consistent with the principles, criteria. and requirements of this order. me Office of Management and Budget shall review the results of implementing this order and report thereon to the President one year after the date of this order.
Sec. 6. Preservation of Existing m Authority. Nothing in this order is in any way intended to limit any existing authority of the heads of executive departments and agencies to approve privatization proposals that are otherwise consistent with law.
Sec. 7. Judicial Review. This order is intended only to improve the internal management of the executive branch, and is not intended to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable by a party against the United States, its agencies or instrumentality’s, its officers or employees, or any other person.
/a/ George Bush
THE WHITE HOUSE
April 30, 1992.
the USA is long gone 18 years ago.
It makes my sides hurt from laughing to listen to proud "Americans" claiming they are the blah blah blah of the world even though they don't own a stitch of their own nation.
yeah, wouldn't the u.s. love to have our economy right now,
compared to theirs.
I am a proud canadian, and yes, earlier a british subject,
and proud of that too. as that was part of the development
of canada, so thanks to the brits for that.
We are not ever going to become part of the u.s., how absurd, after all we have become, with our 'own' identity,
so different from them, and similar at the same time.
I love who we are, and as much as the u.s. are mixed up in
other countries business, (which is welcomed by most of them), they do not meddle in our affairs or push their way
around our country, they have no power here, we have a border, a strong border, lets keep it there.
compared to theirs.
I am a proud canadian, and yes, earlier a british subject,
and proud of that too. as that was part of the development
of canada, so thanks to the brits for that.
We are not ever going to become part of the u.s., how absurd, after all we have become, with our 'own' identity,
so different from them, and similar at the same time.
I love who we are, and as much as the u.s. are mixed up in
other countries business, (which is welcomed by most of them), they do not meddle in our affairs or push their way
around our country, they have no power here, we have a border, a strong border, lets keep it there.
Not British Columbia, but USA probably will be happy with Alberta (or Alberta will be happy with USA). Alberta is the most conservative province in Canada, comparable to your Bible Belt.
If you read copy and pastes you'd be fully aware that USA no longer exists SJP.
Quite so, Cliffy. I remember reading a poll a few years ago, which said that support for gay marriage runs at 60% in BC. BC will be regarded as a Socialist or a Communist province by many Americans (I assume you know it doesn't take a lot to be called a Communist in USA, apparently Obama is a Communist). I don't see USA wanting to touch BC with a ten metre poll.
I never read copy and pastes, petros. If somebody provides a link and it looks like it may be relevant, I may read it. But when somebody thrusts something under my nose, pushes it in my face with a copy and paste, I know they are trying to promote a philosophy, usually an extremist one. Copy and paste hackers are like door to door salesmen. So I stay way from copy and paste.
Last edited:
Exactly what does democratic annexation mean anyway? Does that mean Canada democratically decides to join USA? By a referendum, by amending the Charter etc.? Then it can hardly be called annexation.
Or does Democratic annexation mean that USA makes an offer to Canada it cannot refuse? That Canada votes to join USA under gunpoint, with USA aircraft careers, tanks, missiles etc. pointed at Canada? Then it can hardly be called democratic.
Then will you read it and accept it as truth?
You'll find it here (Cornell law) :United States Code: Title 31,501. Office of Management and Budget | LII / Legal Information Institute
Scroll down and you'll find this :
I was told an amusing story by one of my Indian friends. It seems there is an ethnic group in India, called Sindhis (apparently Sindh is a province or a state in India). They evidently are very good at forging famous name brand products, selling them dirt cheap and still making substantial profits (since their goods are invariably shoddy, of poor quality and made very cheaply).
Anyway, most of their goods carry the proud stamp of ‘Made in USA’. USA stands for Ulhasnagar Sindhi Association.
Ulhasnagar, Maharashtra
Absolutely. The idea is not worth serious consideration. That is why I am having some fun with it.
Last edited:
Sure they are, they attacked Iraq, didn't they? And i understand Bush was considering attacking Iran (though he didn't do it, I assume against the advice of the likes of Darth Vader).
Anyway, how would attacking Canada be suicidal?
That's old news. I read about Japanese products bearing "Made in USA" stickers and stamps on them because there's a place in Japan called "Usa". http://www.welcomekyushu.com/map/pdf/map02.pdf
http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/usa.asp
(Notice I post a link to it rather than just claiming it).