Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (18007)	7/11/2001 6:50:31 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 82486

Dissolution does seem more than a bit extreme. But if it comes, I want to make sure I'm not in the parts that keep either D.C. or California. And DEFINITELY not Oklahoma. Hmmm. Can we break off the border states, except the industrialized ones? Washington, maybe Oregon, Idaho if necessary, Montana for sure, the Dakotas for sure, Minnesota, Wisconsin, then jump over to Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine. That's a pretty good set of states in my book. We'll keep Iowa, too. But we don't want Michigan, Ohio, or Pennsylvania. If we can get upstate New York without NYC we'll take it, but if the city comes with it, no thanks.

To: Lane3 who wrote (18007)	7/11/2001 7:12:22 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 82486

"Good grief, we're all too fat and lazy for that. If it happens, though, you can have the middle without a fight. Thanks. Us middlers would be happy to have the fat trimmed off the edges.