User talk:Ahnoneemoos/Archives/2017/December

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Ahnoneemoos. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Puerto Rico imports/exports

Hi there, you seem to be confusing US tax law with international financial terms. It doesn't matter if PR is taxed or not, or if mainland trade is seen in the same light as interstate trade. All that matters is if they are the same country or not. The infobox line refers to foreign trade, not domestic trade. Cheers. --Ned Scott 19:57, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

• @Ned Scott: your argument is based on one big assumption: "all that matters is if they are the same country or not." SCOTUS ruled a long time ago that Puerto Rico belongs to the United States but is not part of the United States. Source: Time: "[Puerto Rico] is classified as an “unincorporated territory,” meaning the island is controlled by the U.S. government but is separate from the mainland." Based on that, and on SCOTUS ruling on Downes v. Bidwell, Puerto Rico imports from and exports to the United States because they are not "the same country." —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 20:47, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

SCOTUS ruled on tax law and nothing more. They do not decide who is and is not part of the United States. They simply ruled how the laws apply to PR as opposed to a traditional state. Your claim that PR is somehow not apart of the US is beyond absurd and not backed by fact. -- Ned Scott 03:30, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Also, the only cited source for that section of the infobox doesn't seem to contain a per-country export ranking/percentage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Puerto_Rico#cite_note-cia.gov-11 . If you can find a source for it, please let me know so that we can take this to the talk page of the article and get a consensus on the matter of what country Puerto Rico is in. -- Ned Scott 03:42, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

@Ned Scott: False. Please familiarize yourself with the Insular Cases and with Balzac v. Porto Rico in regards to the fact that the Supreme Court ruled that Puerto Rico belongs to, but is not part of, the United States. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 06:21, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

I don't have time to debate this, but I'll leave you with this final though: You're not getting my point. We're not debating how PR is taxed but how imports/exports for PR should be noted in an infobox. The Supreme Court ruled about the legality of import/export fees between a US territory and a US state. That doesn't make them different countries, even if the law is applied differently because of their lack of statehood. In this context the words "importing" and "exporting" are referring to trade between two foreign entities. PR is not foreign in that context. If you could find a source that says that this is simply the common/accepted way to note PR's imports/exports, then that would be fine. We're not trying to declare the legal status of PR. We're just throwing some stats in a box.

Do whatever you want, but you're not doing the readers any favors by keeping it the way it is. -- Ned Scott 03:52, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

@Ned Scott: your logic is faulty because it's based on a premise with an incorrect definition for which you have not provided any sources. So, here are some reliable sources that counterargue your flawed logic:

1. OECD definition of 'import of goods and services': goods which add to the stock of material resources of a country by entering its economic territory.
2. OECD definition of 'country': Countries comprise both territorial entities that are states, as understood by international law and practice, and territorial entities that are not states (such as Hong Kong) but for which statistical data are maintained and provided internationally on a separate and independent basis.
3. Provision by the U.S. Census Bureau of 'statistical data maintained and provided internationally on a separate and independent basis' on Puerto Rico imports and exports: Statistics are separately published covering shipments (1) between the United States and Puerto Rico, (2) between the United States, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and (3) from other U.S. possessions to the United States.
4. Provision by the Puerto Rico Trade and Export Company of 'statistical data maintained and provided internationally on a separate and independent basis' on Puerto Rico imports and exports to the United States: you can even query the database here.

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 17:44, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

You're pathetic and an example of what's wrong with Wikipedia. You'll go to great lengths to try to back up a faulty opinion, and apparently zero effort to add sources to the data in the article itself. Don't bother me with your inane nonsense again. -- Ned Scott 05:18, 9 December 2017 (UTC)