Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register. Please log in or create an account.
Public: Country: Changing Borders
Sell North Dakota   (+4, -6)  [vote for, against]
Well, just the northern half of it, to Canada

To most people in the USA, North Dakota is cold, boring, cold, dreary, cold, flat and cold, somewhere up near Alaska, but without those cute moose. To people in Canada, however, North Dakota is a warm southland, not useless at all. So let's sell it. Well, only half of it. We may need somewhere to, to . . . well, we don't want to change the stars on all the flags, okay?

The western part of the dividing line, and the new border, will run through the middle of Lake Sakakawea, the Army Corp's impoundment of the Missouri River. Canada will therefore get waterfront, and the lake may actually get some use.

The eastern part of the split will run along the county lines that follows the north edge of Kidder county and others. The US keeps Interstate 94, of course. Decisions must be made about such treasures as the 2,063 foot tall TV tower that may be the world's tallest structure, but who watches broadcast TV any more? North Dakotans, that's who! We must expunge this stain from . . . sorry.

The transfer will allow for several stages of changing ownership. First, American citizens can buy and sell homes and land in the area. Second, Canadian citizens can buy property in the area from Americans, privately. Third, the Canadian government can buy land within the area from American citizens, privately. Fourth, the Canadian government buys sovereignty over the area from the US government, granting Canadian citizenship to all who now reside therein. Fifth, the US government buys everyone in both countries a fifth of Canadian whisky.

This project allows disaffected Americans to move to Canada (without having to endure those Canadian winters). Rich Canadians get all the good private land, with the profits going to American citizens. The Canadian government gets to buy private land, again from American citizens. After that, who cares? We get whiskey! Well, Canadian whisky. Without an "e".
-- baconbrain, Jun 25 2006

Splitting North and South Dakota sounds about as sensible as splitting East and West Bengal. Fat lot of good that did everyone.
-- DrCurry, Jun 25 2006


Except the 2 extra senators. Which is a reminder that in practical terms, the structure of the Senate, while having been created for much the same reasons as the Electoral College, has in fact much more profound effects on the American people session after legislative session.
-- theircompetitor, Jun 25 2006


Unless you count that whole Bush-Gore thing.
-- DrCurry, Jun 25 2006


Maybe if we threw in Michigan's upper peninsula, they would trade Vancouver... well, it doesnt hurt to ask.
-- bungston, Jun 25 2006


Non US - switch off here.

reached my boredom threshold.
-- po, Jun 25 2006


What we need to do is to give them someplace like New Orleans to spruce up and clean up in that quintessentially Canadian way, (compare Detroit to Windsor and you'll understand). They get a southern port, we get a tax writeoff. Heck, it's basically French anyway.
-- RayfordSteele, Jun 26 2006


what about moving the whole of the United States unto Mars?

It would be hard, but it would be worth it. Think of the advantages - no more global warming, Fox tv, GM crops, junk food chains... and since most of them don't even realise that rest of the world exists, or where it is, they would barely notice - in fact the "born agains" would think it was "the rapture".

I could go on - rant rant rant
-- xenzag, Jun 26 2006


Though most of us are ignorant, we do know that Rupert Murdoch is from Australia. Some of us also realize that humans have been genetically modifying food since we started farming.

The one thing we do have is plenty of idiots. But then again, i hear they have them everywhere.
-- theircompetitor, Jun 26 2006


I'll start the bidding at fifty bucks...Canadian, so make that twenty nine ninety five US.
-- 2 fries shy of a happy meal, Jun 26 2006


Feh. I don't see why this principle should be applied solely to North Dakota (is that near Reno Dakota?). Apply it on a larger and more laissez faire basis to, say, the whole USA, by which means the country - its land, its governance, its *soul* - would be sacrified, given up to the its god The Market, to the Invisible Hand that guides and co-erces it already, so that the country can fragment, break up and pass from hand-to-hand, from Japanese conglomerate to Indian steel tycoon, maybe trickling down to gun-toting minimum wage shack-dwellers, piecemeal or in tranches until such time as the Market dictates that oligopoly (or monopoly, indeed) should emerge, with a new country or countries - Californistan, the People's Republic of Rods Tiger's Back Garden, whatever - to enter play on the world stage and have their dinner money stolen by scraggly, vindictive old France and Germany.
-- calum, Jun 26 2006


I thought France was busy rebuilding the line given the high level of flag sales in Germany?

The market gods, through their representatives on Earth, the monopolists, btw, have now commited close to $100Billion US to charity, are trying to get the world's poor clean water and every child a laptop. I think they've done pretty much better than any other set of gods in history, don't you agree?
-- theircompetitor, Jun 26 2006


[po], I'm sorry you didn't like this. I put whisky in it just for you.

//Did you fail highschool geography?// No, but a lot of Americans did.

Hmm, yeah, I left out the power of the market and giant corporations.

//they've done pretty much better than any other set of gods // If they've done anything at all, they have done better. Good point.
-- baconbrain, Jun 27 2006


I gotta throw some fish in here... Even as satire, this one falls flat. What am I missing? Is there buried humor that I can't find? Is there something clever hidden within this idea and it's associated annos? I'm looking... I'm reading... I'm clicking... onto an idea that's somehow stimulating.

Then again, I just got back from North Dakota, and I rather like the place. The western half is stunningly beautiful, and I'd rather keep it in the US than let the Canadians get their grubby paws on it.
-- zigness, Jun 27 2006


Eh, I wasn't commenting on the merit of the market as guiding principle, I was commenting on the lack of ambition in the idea as stated.
-- calum, Jun 27 2006


iPod, maybe, UB. Sorry, calum, must be seasonal :)
-- theircompetitor, Jun 27 2006


//Is there something clever hidden within this idea ?//

No, not really. I just had the odd thought one day that North Dakota is cold and northern to most Americans, but to Canadians it's kinda like Miami Beach, warm and south. Not very accurate or very profound, just an odd thought that probably should have been expressed as "One country's meat is another country's poison."

I didn't know what do with that realization, but I gave it some thought, attempted to wrap some humor around it, and posted it on the Halfbakery. It could work, really, Canada could buy North Dakota from the US, with both sides considering it a good deal. So I figured it was about halfbaked. Not likely to happen, but hey, we bought land from Mexico, France and Russia. We might sell to Canada. George knows we need the money.

There was no attempt at satire, except spoofing the attitudes of many Americans. But satire wasn't the point, no. I especially wasn't scoffing at North Dakota. I've bicycled and hitchhiked across there, and liked it.

//Is there buried humor that I can't find?//

Um, cute moose?
-- baconbrain, Jun 28 2006


This whole chat makes me yearn for the day Missouri will be swept clean and not so much as a yellow dog will be left! Then turn it back to it's rightful owners.
-- wowmom, Oct 13 2006



random, halfbakery