Would Greece do better as a state or territory of the US?

[robert_columbia]

With all of Greece's troubles, I got to thinking about the differences between the EU and the US, another federation of sorts, though without the same level of sovereignty among its members.

1) Would Greece do better fiscally if it were to join the US as a State or Territory?
2) What effect would it have on the US? Would the US be able to lift Greece back up to normalcy, or at least up to the level of California or another fiscally challenged but not circling the toilet jurisdiction?
3) What are the chances, politically, that such a thing could go through?

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by robert_columbia

3) What are the chances, politically, that such a thing could go through?

Pretty much zero. They aren't going to want to be absorbed by another culture, and I doubt that they agree with much of American politics; little of the world does. And America has no reason to want to add an economic disaster like Greece is at the moment to itself.

[robert_columbia]

Originally Posted by Der Trihs

Pretty much zero. They aren't going to want to be absorbed by another culture, and I doubt that they agree with much of American politics; little of the world does. And America has no reason to want to add an economic disaster like Greece is at the moment to itself.

Makes a lot of sense. Over here Puerto Rico (which is already a territory) has not been terribly eager for Statehood partly because of cultural and language reasons - they feel that full integration would mean Anglicization.

I could see the US potentially wanting Greece for its closeness to the Middle East. Right now, the US has to stay on good terms with various countries that "let" us operate military bases there and transport troops across the territory. If the Pentagon could just slap missile silos on Crete and station dozens of aircraft carriers at the new Athens Naval Base, it could give the US more forward power.

[shiftless]

The US is still digesting Iraq and Afghanistan. Another country at this point would give us heartburn. We might have room for an after dinner mint country, like Lichtenstein or maybe a Greek Island or two, in a few years.

[Oakminster]

Originally Posted by robert_columbia

station dozens of aircraft carriers at the new Athens Naval Base,

The U.S. does not have "dozens of aircraft carriers" to station anywhere. At the moment, we don't even have a full dozen active in the entire navy.

[Voyager]

Originally Posted by robert_columbia

If the Pentagon could just slap missile silos on Crete and station dozens of aircraft carriers at the new Athens Naval Base, it could give the US more forward power.

Aircraft carriers are a lot more useful in the Persian Gulf these days than in the Mediterranean. Unless that pesky Roman pirate problem starts up again.

[FlikTheBlue]

I think it makes little sense for Greece to join the USA. I think a more interesting question is what are the chances of Greece being absorbed into Germany? Germany has to deal with the Greek debt either way. If Greece ceded some sovereignty to Germany, would that help with the overall problems the euro is facing? Is this option even being considered by anyone?

[HoboStew]

Lets do a trial run with Santorini and work from there.

[dba Fred]

It could be the break the Dukakis campaign has been waiting for.

[Rodgers01]

Originally Posted by robert_columbia

I could see the US potentially wanting Greece for its closeness to the Middle East. Right now, the US has to stay on good terms with various countries that "let" us operate military bases there and transport troops across the territory. If the Pentagon could just slap missile silos on Crete and station dozens of aircraft carriers at the new Athens Naval Base, it could give the US more forward power.

We already have a Navy base on Crete.

[RickJay]

Originally Posted by robert_columbia

3) What are the chances, politically, that such a thing could go through?

Are you actually asking about the chances that one of the world's oldest continuously existing nations and cultures will voluntarily give up its existence as a nation-state to be absorbed by a country that doesn't even speak its language? Seriously? I can't believe someone would even ask this question.

[Ramira]

How is Greece "one of the world's oldest continuously existing nations"? There was no single Greek nation before the 19e century and the last Greek state before that called itself Romanoi?

[smiling bandit]

Originally Posted by Ramira

How is Greece "one of the world's oldest continuously existing nations"? There was no single Greek nation before the 19e century and the last Greek state before that called itself Romanoi?

The word "nation" does not mean the same thing as the word "state". They are frequently combined because they mean two distinct things.

[Ramira]

I know the meanings in English. For both of them these are not true statements.

[RickJay]

Originally Posted by Ramira

How is Greece "one of the world's oldest continuously existing nations"? There was no single Greek nation before the 19e century and the last Greek state before that called itself Romanoi?

I would submit to you that the Greeks would assert their existence as a distinct nation dates back thousands of years. They believe, with absolute and total sincerity, that their civilization not only dates back to antiquity, but is the founding heart of all Western civilization. And it's thier opinion that would drive the issue.

The idea of them joining the United States is insane. It is about as likely as the people of the United States voting to become a state of India.

[Ramira]

Yes that is true, I do not disagree with that.

[Boyo Jim]

Originally Posted by RickJay

... It is about as likely as the people of the United States voting to become a state of India.

Even the people of Indiana?

[Reno Nevada]

The idea of Greece joining the U.S. as the 51st state is of course insane in a lot of ways; neither side would want it.

However, I thought the OP would be asking a slightly different question, how does Greece as a element of Europe differ from the status of various states in the U.S. And since I had an answer to that, I wanted to share it.

From this article:

The euro zone has Greece. The United States has Mississippi. Or Missouri.

The difference between the U.S. and Europe is that when the Greek economy "pulls a Mississippi" (or perhaps I should say, when Mississippi "pulls a Greece"), the EU and the U.S. have 180-degree opposite reactions. Over here, we calmly write checks to Mississippi in the form of Medicaid and unemployment insurance, no questions asked. Europe has no comparable "Peripheraid" for its weak peripheral states. Instead, it has chaos.

In brief, the U.S. routinely transfers money from "have" states like California and New York to "have not" states like Mississippi and Missouri. So far, Europe has been unable/unwilling to have similar fiscal transfers.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by robert_columbia

Makes a lot of sense. Over here Puerto Rico (which is already a territory) has not been terribly eager for Statehood partly because of cultural and language reasons - they feel that full integration would mean Anglicization.

While mainland Americans are afraid that it wouldn't, and that view is probably correct.

[smiling bandit]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

While mainland Americans are afraid that it wouldn't, and that view is probably correct.

I can honestly say I've never met anyone who gave a damn either way.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by smiling bandit

I can honestly say I've never met anyone who gave a damn either way.

You will, a lot, if the question of PR statehood ever comes up for serious discussion in the mainland U.S. (It is always a subject of serious discussion in PR, their three main political parties are defined by being pro-statehood, pro-independence, or pro-status-quo.)

[dragonflyher]

Not too sure about Greece becoming a US territory, or state; but I think annexing, or even outright buying Baja Sur, and Baja Norte is something that everyone involved would benefit from. Especially those of us who live in any of the states that border Mexico.

All that beach front real estate and the military command it would afford us strategically would itself make the deal worthwhile. Lots of other reasons but not to take this thread too far off topic I'll save it for the appropriate debate but had to throw it in here because I'm so pro Baja annex.

Visiting Greece for first time this summer to visit a cousin and Aunt who live in Athens and have a winter flat on Corfu. It is a beautiful and ancient place I can't wait to explore.

Why would we consider taking on such debt from any country witout resources to compensate our dollars spent to salvage such a mess. Several of our own states are in as bad of shape and no help for their poor business practices so why Greece?

[smiling bandit]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

You will, a lot, if the question of PR statehood ever comes up for serious discussion in the mainland U.S. (It is always a subject of serious discussion in PR, their three main political parties are defined by being pro-statehood, pro-independence, or pro-status-quo.)

*blinks*

At the risk of further hijack, I don't get this:

(1) You claim that people int he US are afraid that Puero Rico will not anglicize, although given that English seems to be pretty common there anyway, I'm not sure what else would really be needed anyway.

(2) I respond saying that, to my experience, I've never met anyone, anywhere, on any occaision when it's been dicussed, who brought this up, or frankly had any problem with Puerto Rico applying for statehood. I can't claim this is a scientific survey, but at least I've given my experience, probably with a couple hundred people counting old school assignments/roundtables/etc, and have never once heard the opinion you describe. The closest thing I've heard was a mild annoyance with Puerto Rico fence-sitting on the issue indefinitely.

(3) You then reply with, "Oh, it might possibly perhaps one day BECOME an issue!"

(4) I go "WTF?" and write this.

Please, explain: who is saying this and where? Does this respresent a viewpoint of any significance, or just some pundit I've never heard of (pretty much all of them)? Does this, in your opinion, represent the views of an identifiable class or group? The only related question I've ever heard was wondering if P.R. would go officially dual-language, or not, to which nobody could recall or cared to look up whether it was or wasn't already.

[Rune]

Originally Posted by Reno Nevada

In brief, the U.S. routinely transfers money from "have" states like California and New York to "have not" states like Mississippi and Missouri. So far, Europe has been unable/unwilling to have similar fiscal transfers.

The EU has structural development funds, which Greece (& Spain, Ireland, etc.) has benefitted immensely from. Greece receives about 4 billion euro a year. In addition there are the farm subsidies which the older EU nations are also unfairly receiving a lion’s share of.