very easy

Arysexy:

So says d biggest bigot in dis forum. Yorubas are d greatest enemy of ndigbo, I used to doubt it bt since I joned this forum, I began to see it displayed in comments. When igbos are killed in d north, NL yoruba bigots pop champagne and taunt d igbos, they lament and wish d igbos leave lagos yet claim one nigeria.

U wish igbo mods are not here so dat ur yoruba mods will be banning them as they use to do before seun balanced things. Keep whinning. Nkita!

Can u see how foolish you are now? "Yorubas are the greatest enemy of ndigbo" and yet Seun who is an NDIGBO balanced things.

0monnakoda:
Well war is possible and even likely but such is life. The Soviet Union did split up though without war but in the case of Nigeria I think war is very likely particularly as there are likely to be different foreign powers at play. That is why I say the North need to think deeply. I don't think force can hold us together for ever and so we need to either find genuine unity or split and face the pangs that that will bring. After a war you can focus on development. Our present "No war No peace" condition is a lot worse than war.

Ehn Ehn.

Thats why I said a new sysytem of regionalism can go a long way in easing so many piling tensions that exists among so many of these groups, sincerely. !

Let me take the 1st republic as an example. If such form of governmental structure were not been truncated as a result of the greed of these easterners, dont you agree that the unrest/disagreements raging today would be effectively mitigated by a very substantial margin ?......I mean Omonnakoda, lets analyse this without sentiments. If the North can compromise on that, I bet you there will be a limit to which we Southerners have to hold them to ransome !

.....but since they prefer status quo, then I agree they are not entitled to the 'sincere' unity that should exist from us (the Southerners) .!

My 2 cents though.

St_Black:

Ehn Ehn.

Thats why I said a new sysytem of regionalism can go a long way in easing so many piling tensions that exists among so many of these groups, sincerely. !

Let me take the 1st republic as an example. If such form of governmental structure were not been truncated as a result of the greed of these easterners, dont you agree that the unrest/disagreements raging today would be effectively mitigated by a[b]very substantial margin[/b] ?......I mean Omonnakoda, lets analyse this without sentiments. If the North can compromise on that, I bet you there will be a limit to which we Southerners have to hold them to ransome !

.....but since they prefer status quo, then I agree they are not entitled to the 'sincere' unity that should exist from us (the Southerners) .!

My 2 cents though.

I am sorry to repeat myself but we already have regionalism according to YOUR DEFINITION

With hindsight there is always perfect vision. The reasons the system was truncated are complex. We must not forget that elections were rigged and the Federal or central power was subverted politically (operation wet e etc)we have been through that and hopefully learnt from it. The reason why a split in Nigeria is problematic is more stategic.Compare to other African countries we are in probably the most densely populated space on the continent and boundaries are likely to be disputed as are other resources too e.g rivers. In such a scenario any new nations in Nigerian space will spend a significant part of their earnings on defence and conflict will be likely for the foreseeable future.There will be no shortage of foreign interventionists both local e.g Cameroun and international. The idea that we can split up and live happily ever after is a pipe dream. The space is too small and the people too many( More than half the population of West Africa)
The reason the EU was formed was,partly, to curtail the historical tendency of Europeans to fight destructive wars and to engeage their energies cooperatively.
If Nigeria splits what you will have is a space full of warlords and not peaceful new prosperous nations.

0monnakoda:
Lol
That is funny but that is why there should be devolution of powers and resource control. Is it right to go swanning about with a duckling's resources.
The key issue is that I don't think there can be true negotiation if there is no secession option. Though I don't think secession should be immediate. If a group are not able to reach a compromise then they should be allowed to conduct a plebiscite on secession with perhaps a ten year timetable.This would have to be UN sanctioned.
A situation where minorities are terrorized by majorities is not ideal and I don't think minorities should hold the majority to ransom but people should have a right to opt in or out. I am not opposed e.g to Biafra but the use of force was a mistake. It is most likely that if the North does not make significant compromise Nigeria will split. For one we have to scrap all forms of Sharia in the political space and resource transfer schemes from South to North. Again resource control can be phased so we increase from 13 to 14 to 15 ,16,17 etc year by year or a similar formula till we reach an agreed level and the rest shoul go to the FG I don't support the idea of oil revenue from Rivers forming the basis for the budget of Oyo State or Kebbi State. Any State that cannot fund itself should be merged with others

You really are carried away in your argument not unlike a child with a new toy. It was Sheik Ahmad Zaki Yamani, the then exceptionally powerful Saudi Oil Minister who said " The Stone Age did not end for lack of stones and the oil age will end long before the world runs out of oil". You keep forgetting that what makes the world is LAND. The land harbors a lot of resources ( including oil). Have you ever thought of land as a resource ? If you do you will see how resourceless you guys are. I don't have enough time or space to go into details but you know that more wars have been fought and are being fought worldwide over LAND than over oil , which is a single resource. Kebbi and Oyo that you mention as example have more land and more opportunities than Rivers and my advice to them is to let you secceed and go in peace.

nagoma:

You really are carried away in your argument not unlike a child with a new toy. It was Sheik Ahmad Zaki Yamani, the then exceptionally powerful Saudi Oil Minister who said " The Stone Age did not end for lack of stones and the oil age will end long before the world runs out of oil". You keep forgetting that what makes the world is LAND. The land harbors a lot of resources ( including oil). Have you ever thought of land as a resource ? If you do you will see how resourceless you guys are. I don't have enough time or space to go into details but you know that more wars have been fought and are being fought worldwide over LAND than over oil , which is a single resource. Kebbi and Oyo that you mention as example have more land and more opportunities than Rivers and my advice to them is to let you secceed and go in peace.

If the objective is to distract my attention by rudeness you have failed.There really is no prospect of intellectual commerce between us so let us ignore each other ok. I don't think the stone age has ended in your neck of the woods

nagoma:

You really are carried away in your argument not unlike a child with a new toy. It was Sheik Ahmad Zaki Yamani, the then exceptionally powerful Saudi Oil Minister who said " The Stone Age did not end for lack of stones and the oil age will end long before the world runs out of oil". You keep forgetting that what makes the world is LAND. The land harbors a lot of resources ( including oil). Have you ever thought of land as a resource ? If you do you will see how resourceless you guys are. I don't have enough time or space to go into details but you know that more wars have been fought and are being fought worldwide over LAND than over oil , which is a single resource. Kebbi and Oyo that you mention as example have more land and more opportunities than Rivers and my advice to them is to let you secceed and go in peace.

So according to your disposition, its implicit to also allude to the fact that humans are not the greatest resourses of a nation, right?

Beg ur pardon, PLS say sometin' better bro. So how has evidences of Singapore, Switzerland, S/Korea, etc whose economies far outpaces Nigeria but with relatively tiny lands & very little natural resourses been able to deflate this big fallacy of yours?...

pls explain how.

This is not the thread for that.

Singing "one way or another, I'm gonna get you get you"

Till then, adios!

Arysexy:

So says d biggest bigot in dis forum. Yorubas are d greatest enemy of ndigbo, I used to doubt it bt since I joned this forum, I began to see it displayed in comments. When igbos are killed in d north, NL yoruba bigots pop champagne and taunt d igbos, they lament and wish d igbos leave lagos yet claim one nigeria.

U wish igbo mods are not here so dat ur yoruba mods will be banning them as they use to do before seun balanced things. Keep whinning. Nkita!

0monnakoda:
I am sorry to repeat myself but we already have regionalism according to YOUR DEFINITION

With hindsight there is always perfect vision. The reasons the system was truncated are complex. We must not forget that elections were rigged and the Federal or central power was subverted politically (operation wet e etc)we have been through that and hopefully learnt from it. The reason why a split in Nigeria is problematic is more stategic.Compare to other African countries we are in probably the most densely populated space on the continent and boundaries are likely to be disputed as are other resources too e.g rivers. In such a scenario any new nations in Nigerian space will spend a significant part of their earnings on defence and conflict will be likely for the foreseeable future.There will be no shortage of foreign interventionists both local e.g Cameroun and international. The idea that we can split up and live happily ever after is a pipe dream. The space is too small and the people too many( More than half the population of West Africa)
The reason the EU was formed was,partly, to curtail the historical tendency of Europeans to fight destructive wars and to engeage their energies cooperatively.
If Nigeria splits what you will have is a space full of warlords and not peaceful new prosperous nations.

OK, for the sake of our flowing discourse, Let me respect your position on regionalism has its imperative for me to do so in this case.

But come to think of it, if our current system is 'likened' to a form of regionalism (with your presumption as states been regarded as the regions if im right) , my question now is:

-Should there be any further need for the SW, SE, NW, etc geo-regional zones been assigned to the states (regions to you) whilst the regions you presumed as 'states' still exist in a double layer?

Dont you see it somehow conflicting with fundermental regionalism?

St_Black:

So according to your disposition, its implicit to also allude to the fact that humans are not the greatest resourses of a nation, right?

Beg ur pardon, PLS say sometin' better bro. So how has evidences of Singapore, Switzerland, S/Korea, etc whose economies far outpaces Nigeria but with relatively tiny lands & very little natural resourses been able to deflate this big fallacy of yours?...

pls explain how.

Correct.

If you look at GDP per capita, the top ten is dominated by countries with little or no natural resources.

Arysexy:

Very unfortunate dat dogs have been leading men in this thread ryt from page 1. Thats wia water enterd opi ugbogiri.

Hope the dogs take back seat and allow men discuss, otherwise there will be greater chaos here.

No, leave them to rejoice over antiquated devt.
Aside Lagos, which awolowo didn't contribute even a bridge to; which western state are they all running up and down for?
Don't bother looking into their villages, their capitals are dry and crappy.
Or is it human capital devt?
The IGR some of them are talking about is generated mostly by non indigenes.
Even mere agro industries there are owned by mostly foreigners.
The wealth distribution is like what u have in uncivilized climes .
Most times when they talk, u know these ppl are untravelled.

geeez:

The man responsible for the developments in today's Western Nigeria

The man is the reason why you see a visit to Lagos the same way we treat a trip to New York

Why are Yoruba holding claims to Lagos and not Kwara, Ibadan and Abeokuta? Why riding on people's glory?

The present in Nigeria can not be said to be regionalism.

I don't understand how anyone can argue it to be so.

South Westerners claim to be educated yet they know nothing about competitive advantage (Lagos). Infrastructures used in Lagos and Abuja by most Nigerians are own by federal and private entities. I use third mainland bridge to Lekki and Victoria Island straight from the federal International Airport.

Katsumoto: The present in Nigeria can not be said to be regionalism.

I don't understand how anyone can argue it to be so.

Katz, thats what I'm trying to convince Omonaakoda of.

I actually understand his position & where he is coming from on this matter , but what I'm just finding it difficult to do is a way of breaking down my evidences. !

....hence, why I still have to respect his opinion for the now. !

bootlegaz: South Westerners claim to be educated yet they know nothing about competitive advantage (Lagos). Infrastructures used in Lagos and Abuja by most Nigerians are own by federal and private entities. I use third mainland bridge to Lekki and Victoria Island straight from the federal International Airport.

Mr Educated

Please define competitive advantage.

St_Black:

Katz, thats what I'm trying to convince Omonaakoda of.

I actually understand his position & where he is coming from on this matter , but what I'm just finding it difficult to do is a way of breaking down my evidences. !

....hence, why I still have to respect his opinion for the now. !

The government at the center takes all the revenue and distributes.

The FG makes the laws, controls the Police and everything else.

What do the States control?

Can the States and Local governments exist without the FG in the current structure?

St_Black:

OK, for the sake of our flowing discourse, Let me respect your position on regionalism has its imperative for me to do so in this case.

But come to think of it, if our current system is 'likened' to a form of regionalism (with your presumption as states been regarded as the regions if im right) , my question now is:

-Should there be any further need for the SW, SE, NW, etc geo-regional zones been assigned to the states (regions to you) whilst the regions you presumed as 'states' still exist in a double layer?

Dont you see it somehow conflicting with fundermental regionalism?

Let us remember that you supplied the definition of "regionalism" namely geographically distinct spaces with autonomy. To that extent our states conform to regions. They have legislative powers, they have tax raising powers and profound control over land allocation. Whether or not there is need for NW SE etc is a legitimate question but not a question about whether we have regionalism or not but a question of the CONFIGURATION of regions. In other words are the current "regions" generally acceptable,are they fair and functional. We must remember that states were created arbitrarily without transparency and there is a perception that some were disadvantaged over others so that is a debate about the details of regionalism in practice. The other detail is the amount of power concentrated in the centre e.g who should control the police and other instruments of coercion.
My personal opinion is that debate should take place between a smaller number of entities e.g SW SE NE NW and other groups I don't think SS and NC has any meaning and so there will be many more groups from these two. At the end of it all There should be no requirement that everyone follow the same system. The NE can go and create 20 states if they want and 1000 LGAs as long as it does not change the proportion of representation in federal legislatures and it does not translate into more money from other places. The real discussion would be what are the entities to engage in that debate and how is equivalence to be determined and minorities protected.

Katsumoto:

Mr Educated

Please define competitive advantage.

Let me stoop to your level to explain it in pigin English. E mean say wen a company for lagos fit produce goods cheaper than a company in Aba wen dey produce same goods. The company for lagos get easy access to imported materials to produce e goods while the company for Aba go transport e goods from lagos which cost much and then add the operation cost on finish goods. I hope you dig?

Katsumoto: The present in Nigeria can not be said to be regionalism.

I don't understand how anyone can argue it to be so.

Well I asked him to DEFINE regionalism( I don't know book) which he did and my argument is based on his definition. Perhaps you can provide another definition

bootlegaz:
Let me stoop to your level to explain it in pigin English. E mean say wen a company for lagos fit produce goods cheaper than a company in Aba wen dey produce same goods. The company for lagos get easy access to imported materials to produce e goods while the company for Aba go transport e goods from lagos which cost much and then add the operation cost on finish goods. I hope you dig?

Really
I doubtrrit

sounds like another kind of advantage

bootlegaz:
Let me stoop to your level to explain it in pigin English. E mean say wen a company for lagos fit produce goods cheaper than a company in Aba wen dey produce same goods. The company for lagos get easy access to imported materials to produce e goods while the company for Aba go transport e goods from lagos which cost much and then add the operation cost on finish goods. I hope you dig?

Where did you go to school you doofus?

Let me give you small education for free.

A competitive advantage is an advantage that can't be replicated by your rivals even if they tried it.

What you described can not be a competitive advantage because there are several ports close to Aba. So the cost of transportation can't be an advantage. Even if there were no ports close to Aba, the advantage of a port in Lagos can easily be replicated.

Second, it is unclear whether you mean Lagos has the competitive advantage of the port or companies in Lagos. Make the distinction and lets discuss that.

Katsumoto:

Where did you go to school you doofus?

Let me give you small education for free.

A competitive advantage is an advantage that can't be replicated by your rivals even if they tried it.

What you described can not be a competitive advantage because there are several ports close to Aba. So the cost of transportation can't be an advantage. Even if there were no ports close to Aba, the advantage of a port in Lagos can easily be replicated.

Second, it is clear whether you mean Lagos has the competitive advantage of the port or companies in Lagos. Make the distinction and lets discuss that.

I think he means comparative advantage half knowledge is a dangerous thing vainglorious but vacuous. He knoweth not and knoweth not that he knoweth not but thinketh he knoweth all. A profound tragedy indeed. Back to topic

Katsumoto:

Where did you go to school you doofus?

Let me give you small education for free.

A competitive advantage is an advantage that can't be replicated by your rivals even if they tried it.

What you described can not be a competitive advantage because there are several ports close to Aba. So the cost of transportation can't be an advantage. Even if there were no ports close to Aba, the advantage of a port in Lagos can easily be replicated.

Second, it is clear whether you mean Lagos has the competitive advantage of the port or companies in Lagos. Make the distinction and lets discuss that.

I believe your education was obtained for free. I didn't attend one of those your universities that uses books published in 1972. If you are not too lazy, google will be of help to you

0monnakoda:
Let us remember that you supplied the definition of "regionalism" namely geographically distinct spaces with autonomy. To that extent our states conform to regions. They have legislative powers, they have tax raising powers and profound control over land allocation. Whether or not there is need for NW SE etc is a legitimate question but not a question about whether we have regionalism or not but a question of the CONFIGURATION of regions. In other words are the current "regions" generally acceptable,are they fair and functional. We must remember that states were created arbitrarily without transparency and there is a perception that some were disadvantaged over others so that is a debate about the details of regionalism in practice. The other detail is the amount of power concentrated in the centre e.g who should control the police and other instruments of coercion.
My personal opinion is that debate should take place between a smaller number of entities e.g SW SE NE NW and other groups I don't think SS and NC has any meaning and so there will be many more groups from these two. At the end of it all There should be no requirement that everyone follow the same system. The NE can go and create 20 states if they want and 1000 LGAs as long as it does not change the proportion of representation in federal legislatures and it does not translate into more money from other places. The real discussion would be what are the entities to engage in that debate and how is equivalence to be determined and minorities protected.

Good.

Then, you should remember that I asked you whether the grounds of autonomy exercised by those states (i.e region) is exclusive to the authority from the center. I think you said NO.

In Regionalism, the autonomies of the region is EXCLUSIVE of the center. I remember citing Canada as an example. It has provinces (regions) & this provinces act independent of the center's decusion as defined by the constitution.

Now my question IS,

Are the automies of Nigerian states (regions to you) exclusive to the FG's authority?

PLS BE SINCERE OOOO.

bootlegaz:
I believe your education was obtained for free. I didn't attend one of those your universities that uses books published in 1972. If you are not too lazy, google will be of help to you

My Friend Asuquo has a problem pronouncinh J . At this Yuncture he would say "Jou are making Yest of Jourself"
Please be quiet and let us debate seriously

0monnakoda: I think he means comparative advantage half knowledge is a dangerous thing vainglorious but vacuous. He knoweth not and knoweth not that he knoweth not but thinketh he knoweth all. A profound tragedy indeed. Back to topic

Too many clowns on NL.

0monnakoda: I think he means comparative advantage half knowledge is a dangerous thing vainglorious but vacuous. He knoweth not and knoweth not that he knoweth not but thinketh he knoweth all. A profound tragedy indeed. Back to topic

An advantage that a firm has over its competitors, allowing it to generate greater sales or margins and/or retain more customers than its competition. There can be many types of competitive advantages including the firm's cost structure, product offerings, distribution network and customer support

Katz & Omonaakoda, PLS lets ignore that troll. Lets put him in d right place like an animal before he derails the whole thing.

Im learning things here . Ejoooo .

0monnakoda:
My Friend Asuquo has a problem pronouncinh J . At this Yuncture he would say "Jou are making Yest of Jourself"
Please be quiet and let us debate seriously

My friend bunmi can not say sunlight and calls it chunlight....

St_Black: Katz & Omonaakoda, PLS lets ignore that troll. Lets put him in d right place like an animal before he derails the whole thing.

Im learning things here . Ejoooo .

I will; so I won't expose his ignorance any further.

St_Black:

Good.

Then, you should remember that I asked you whether the grounds of autonomy exercised by those states (i.e region) is exclusive to the authority from the center. I think you said NO.

In Regionalism, the autonomies of the region is EXCLUSIVE of the center. I remember citing Canada as an example. It has provinces (regions) & this provinces act independent of the center's decusion as defined by the constitution.

Now my question IS,

Are the automies of Nigerian states (regions to you) exclusive to the FG's authority?

PLS BE SINCERE OOOO.

I m still struggling with that syntax pehaps you could use plainer English . I only guessed at what you mean. If you mean total autonomy are you not talking of a different country?. If a governing entity has total autonomy does that not make it a Sovereign state? . I cannot think of a better example than the United States. It was for this reason that I was careful in asking YOU to DEFINE REGIONALISM . You will find that according to your definition the US is practising Regionalism.
Have you been to Canada or are you just writing based on Wikipedia. I am sure that if we are to talk of "regionalism" there must be several varieties. Rather than getting stuck on words like regionalism which have nebulous meanings let us talk about practical things to do