lets also bear in mind that all these words
states
commonwealths
territories
etc
etc
have a different meaning from country to country
& possibly even differences within a country
so generalizations about them are risky to say the least
m
>From: "Brendan Whyte" <brwhyte@...>
>Reply-To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: US counties, unincorprated territories
>Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 11:20:50 +1100
>
>Territories are self-governing, but less sovereign than the states. This
>has
> implications for tax and federal funding mainly, and presumably legal
>implications with regard to court systems/police.
>Eg Fireworks are legal in the ACT but not Vic, and probably not NSW.
>I believe there is no speed limit in the NT but that is more a case of low
>population density, and even a state govt there would probably not change
>it.
>The territories developed AFTER federation. NT was part of SA until
>federation, and ACT was part of NSW. Like Washington DC, the ACT was carved
>out to make the federal capital free of interference from any state.
>SA gave the NT to the Commonwealth probably because it didn't have the
>ability to develop or administer it properly then. The only real connection
>with Darwin was the overland telegraph line to Adelaide at the time. The
>place was REALLY remote.
>Only now are they finally completing the railways from Alice springs to
>Darwin.
>Offshore island territories allow central govt management etc, and for
>Christmas and Cocos islands, greater autonomy for their unique communities.
>Cocos Is is full of Malay muslims, for example.
>BW
>
> >From: "Peter Smaardijk" <smaardijk@...>
> >Reply-To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> >To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: US counties, unincorprated territories
> >Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 18:24:19 -0000
> >
> >--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., PitHokie <pithokie@y...> wrote:
> > > The difference is in name only. Governmentally, there
> > > is no difference between a state and a commonwealth.
> >
> >I know that in Germany, two "Laender" have the official designation
> >of "Freistaat": Bavaria and Saxony. I don't know whether this has any
> >implications. Does someone know?
> >
> >And I remember vaguely that the position of Texas is fundamentally
> >different from all other states in the US (because it used to be an
> >independent republic). Can someone say something about that?
> >
> >What about the difference between territories in countries like
> >Canada, Australia, and Russia (=krai) and the regular subdivisions?
> >Why is it like this and what are the practical implications?
> >
> >Peter S.
> >
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp