Gilbakka posted:

Check NEW YORKER magazine for the surprise.

Great  piece of writing.

Nice Pic with J.J.

PPP girls rock!!!  Hard to believe that Janet had bigger ballzzzz than Hillary, but it's true!!

So, the PPP was way ahead of it's time.

Yes.  And when Bharrat Jagdeo was President in 1999, he was the second youngest Head of State in the world. 

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Yes.  And when Bharrat Jagdeo was President in 1999, he was the second youngest Head of State in the world. 

Oww your hero was up there ,unfortunately an opportunity was lost to unite the people,he became the second "Odo" that ruled the land,he made my hand fall.

Django posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Yes.  And when Bharrat Jagdeo was President in 1999, he was the second youngest Head of State in the world. 

Oww your hero was up there ,unfortunately an opportunity was lost to unite the people,he became the second "Odo" that ruled the land,he made my hand fall.

Odo ran the economy of Guyana into the ground.  No other president in Guyana's history has grown the economy of Guyana more than Jagdeo.  To compare Odo to BJ is like comparing cassava flour to the Marriott!!

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Django posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Yes.  And when Bharrat Jagdeo was President in 1999, he was the second youngest Head of State in the world. 

Oww your hero was up there ,unfortunately an opportunity was lost to unite the people,he became the second "Odo" that ruled the land,he made my hand fall.

Odo ran the economy of Guyana into the ground.  No other president in Guyana's history has grown the economy of Guyana more than Jagdeo. To compare Odo to BJ is like comparing cassava flour to the Marriott!!

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Django posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Yes.  And when Bharrat Jagdeo was President in 1999, he was the second youngest Head of State in the world. 

Oww your hero was up there ,unfortunately an opportunity was lost to unite the people,he became the second "Odo" that ruled the land,he made my hand fall.

Odo ran the economy of Guyana into the ground.  No other president in Guyana's history has grown the economy of Guyana more than Jagdeo.  To compare Odo to BJ is like comparing cassava flour to the Marriott!!

How did he manage this, was he involved in some sort of export business?

He did it by establishing and reinforcing a debt forgiveness program. Followed By constructive and feasible micro and macro economic models that created wealth.  He made sure that government spending did not exceed income that was generated by the economy and he negotiated with outside businesses, investors, and countries to make sure that Guyana's best interest was always at stake.

The coalition government is doing the exact opposite.

I thought the PPP was against black people 

Not all black people.  Only Django and Gilbakka!!!

Bibi Haniffa posted:

He did it by establishing and reinforcing a debt forgiveness program. Followed By constructive and feasible micro and macro economic models that created wealth.  He made sure that government spending did not exceed income that was generated by the economy and he negotiated with outside businesses, investors, and countries to make sure that Guyana's best interest was always at stake.

The coalition government is doing the exact opposite.

Source

By Avinash Pulchan, MFM, FQF

(Reprinted from Caribbean News Now)
According to World Bank data, Guyana’s external debt has risen over 117%, US$850,393,000 in 2008 to US$1,845,561,000 in 2012. During that same time period gross national income per capita (purchasing power parity) has increased only 25% from US$2,720 to US$3,400. Furthermore, personal remittances have increased a whopping 34% from US$278,436,000 to US$373,096,197 during the last four years.
A common problem that lesser developed countries (LDCs) face, which Guyana falls into, is that of too much dependence on foreign nations and foreign entities. Guyana’s debt to GDP ratio increased from 44% (US$850,393,000/US$1,922,597,807) to 64.7% (US$1,845,561,000/US$2,850,572,407). A country’s debt-to-GDP ratio compares what a country owes to what it produces and is an indicator of the country’s ability to pay back its debt. Currently Guyana’s debt-to-GDP ratio of 64.7% is very unhealthy.
Now some people are going to argue that other more developed nations have higher ratios but they must take into consideration that these countries are industrialized nations, where a large part of their debt is carried by their citizens and not foreign entities. Secondly, these nations are economies unto themselves and global macroeconomic stress is mitigated through their diverse economic systems.
Guyana’s external debt leaves it at the mercy of its debtors and it definitely doesn’t have a diverse economy; Guyana has shifted to an ill-advised import-based economy, which I will discuss in a moment.
In light of Guyana’s indebtedness it would be a travesty to Guyanese of epic proportions to raise the debt ceiling. Foremost is the fact that, despite the much hyped years of economic growth as measured by GDP, Guyana is still running a budget deficit, meaning the Guyanese government is spending more money than it generates in revenues. As of 2012, the budget deficit is -5.9% of GDP.
Guyanese citizens need to realize that the country’s debt is their debt. They need to ask the government how they plan on repaying the debt; what percent of GDP will be used towards debt repayment? What are the interest rates on loans? Are these rates fixed, variable, capped? Are the loans hedged to the US dollar or Guyanese dollar? How will the government combat inflation in face of a growing external debt?
The opposition should also critically analyze the balance of payments account for Guyana and see why is there a budget deficit? They should do a trend analysis on the balance of payments account to see if there are common factors affecting the current account, capital account, and cash reserve account over the past years. This would lead to better allocations of funds over the long term and curtailment of inefficient macroeconomic policies.
Guyanese should keep in mind that Guyana’s debt has increased 117% (US$995,168,000 = US$1,845,561,000 – US$850,393,000) over the last four years and what has this increase translated to for the development of Guyana?
If the national debt ceiling is increased to allow the Amaila Hydro Power development initiative, how long will it take for the benefits to reach all Guyanese people? Has an independent-neutral party done a cost-benefit analysis on the feasibility of this undertaking? If differences arise from various feasibility studies of this project can they be reconciled? What are the terms of the financing of such a project? What are the positive/negative externalities of the Amaila Project? Will it create jobs for Guyanese? What are the environmental impacts?
Much has been harped on about the economic progress Guyana has made in recent years such as “Guyana on course to record eight consecutive years of positive economic growth: New ECLAC report says Guyana expected to surpass CARICOM partners in economic growth this year” as reported in the Chronicle.
Retired professor at New York University and author of the foremost textbook on Economic Development, Michael Todaro noted, “Economic development cannot be measured solely in terms of the level and growth of overall income or income per capita; one must also look at how that income is distributed among the population – at who benefits from employment and why.”
GDP growth rate is not a true reflection of the economic health of a nation. That is why the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) developed the Human Development Index (HDI), which is used as a holistic measure of living levels. Upon examining the components of GDP and the HDI, one can then decide whether a country is achieving sustainable economic growth.
Gross domestic product (GDP) is calculated as the sum of consumption (C), investment (I), government purchases (G), and net exports (NX), which is exports minus imports. I will focus on all C, I, and NX but only briefly on G because it will require an article unto itself.
Guyana’s GDP growth (annual %) has increased from 2.0% in 2008 to 4.8% in 2012, GDP (current US$) increased from US$1,922,597,807 to US$2,850,572,407, a 48.2% increase. During this same time period its GDP per capita (measured in current US$) increased from US$2,478 to $3,584, a 44.6% increase.
Personal remittances (measured in current US$) increased from US$278,436,000 to US$373,096,197, a 34% increase. Now an observer will say those numbers are great, but if he/she delves deeper, the numbers tell a sad tale. Personal remittances as a percentage of GDP were 13.09% in 2012. What happens to personal remittances? Well, these remittances are pumped into in economy via consumption (C) and investment (I) and these artificially inflate GDP growth rate. Thus the government of Guyana should not take too much credit for the GDP growth rate since some of it is due to remittances.
Many studies, including a study on the impact of remittances on poverty in developing countries conducted by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Economic Development in 2011, corroborate this claim.
An alarming statistic is that of the Guyana’s general government final consumption expenditure (as a % of GDP), which is the G component in the calculation of GDP. Per data from the World Bank, Guyana’s general government final consumption expenditure (as a % of GDP) stayed at 15% from 2008 to the present but during this same time Guyana’s debt increased 117%, from 44% of GDP to 64.7% of GDP.
Where is all of Guyana’s debt going? It is definitely not used to finance government purchases because that has remained at a constant 15% for the last five years.
Finally, the examination of the net export (NX) component of GDP tells an ominous tale of what developmental economists term “growth without development”. Guyana is running a trade deficit, that is, imports exceed exports. In 2011 Guyana exported US$1.18 billion compared to imports of US$1.46 billion (deficit of US$0.28 billion) and in 2012 the deficit increased to US$0.75 billion (exports US$1.311 billion minus imports US$2.065 billion).
In order for less developed countries such as Guyana to sustainably develop and wean dependence on foreign economic entities, they need to foster growth in a local subsistence economy that will actively engage citizens so that they can shoulder some of the development responsibilities. However, the Guyanese government has increasingly increased imports at a higher rate than exports. Thus, more goods and services are being imported to Guyana that can actually be produced locally at a comparative advantage. This type of policy leads to an abhorrent unemployment rate of 21% over the last four years and expounding this statistic will lead to a positive correlation between the increase in crimes and other social problems.
For those detractors of my points above, please let me use a couple of statistics so that irrational arguments and overgeneralizations do not come into play. Ethiopia and Niger experienced GDP growth (annual %) of 8.5% and 11.2% respectively in 2012 while the United States and Germany experienced 2.2% and 0.7% respectively.
Now you don’t see people migrating from the United States and Germany to Ethiopia and Niger to live because the African nations have such high GDP growth rates; the world GDP growth rate was 4.9% in 2010 and 3.7% in 2011 so the world on average has experienced economic growth.
My point is that Guyana’s 4.8% GDP growth rate is misleading and it hides the social and macroeconomic problems plaguing the country.
The government is not implementing development initiatives that will foster a robust local economy that will complement the increase in foreign investments. Their focus on large infrastructure development will not create jobs in the long run or short run because the labour force in Guyana is not being equipped with the tools needed to maximize the potential benefits of these infrastructures.
The opposition should ask the government how many engineers and skilled technicians will be needed to run the Amaila Hydro Power Facility; how many Guyanese possess these skills? Are there training programs, study abroad programs to educate Guyanese in these areas? For instance, educating a couple of miners on operating new mining equipment is different than educating them on how to fix the equipment in the case of a breakdown.
The government needs to focus on local development strategies to promote sustainable economic growth and well-being locally. They should use information from all the different case studies by development economists that point out the pitfalls of LDCs and how to avoid them.
The Guyanese government should look at the work of Nobel Laureate and economist Muhammad Yunus of Bangladesh, who pioneered microcredit lending, and the Grameen Bank, which did wonders for that country, and something along those lines will be instrumental for economic progress in Guyana. Now there is a big difference with naming an institution microcredit and having it perform the duties of a microcredit institution. The reason I point that out is because I’ve already investigated microcredit lending in Guyana and it is very different from what microcredit lending needs to be.
Therefore in order for Guyanese to achieve what Mahatma Gandhi called “the realization of the human potential”, they must demand changes to inefficient policies of trade, micro and macroeconomics, fiscal and monetary that foster “underdevelopment” in Guyana.
The Land of Many Waters currently has a budget deficit, trade deficit, a malfunctioning, barely existent local economy, unemployment in excess of 21.00% and a GDP growth rate that is misleading due to the impact of remittances.
The following analogy sums up the pervading mindset of the Guyanese government: what is the use of an economics textbook to an illiterate person? Sure that textbook can be purchased for US$100 but is it worth US$100 to an illiterate person? Definitely not. It could be worth that of toilet paper or fuel for a stove.
The point is why build a bridge over a river, expand an airport, harness a waterfall, when at this moment Guyanese people don’t need them? The enormous amount of funds used for these projects can be used to improve the lives of Guyanese by creating a sustainable local economy that will generate earnings for Guyanese and tax earnings for the government in both the short and long-run?
The government in Guyana needs to stop copying what they see happening in industrialized nations because Guyana is still a developing economy that has different initial conditions of modern economic growth than those experienced by already developed nations. Guyana is unique in its physical and human capital and resources, population size, distribution, and growth rate, etc. Therefore, responsible fiscal, monetary, and macroeconomic policies need to be tailored and implemented for the economic condition of Guyana.
Guyanese who visit Guyana always say that Guyana has changed for the better, everybody has a car now, there are dishwashers and microwaves, and even cane cutters have cell phones. Well, is it really development? I want these same people to Google search cell phones in Africa, or televisions in the Philippines and they will see that people in those places have technology too. In an increasingly global economy, technology transcends borders and Guyanese would’ve experienced these technological innovations regardless of which political party is in power.
The Guyanese people need to know that they will have to shoulder the burgeoning debt of Guyana and should always examine and scrutinize any government projects that require more national debt because a continuous budget deficit, trade deficit, barely existent local economy, an unskilled labour force, high unemployment rate resulting in social ills, etc. are all ingredients of a concoction that will result in a vicious, self-perpetuating cycle of “growth without development” in Guyana where those in power will continue to enjoy a decadent lifestyle while the common Guyanese will continue to languish in mediocrity without achieving their full potential.

Suh what this chap saying here Bibs.

In a nutshell, because me nah gat time to respond to the whole Bible, there were years when the debt ceiling rose.  This was a direct result of external market conditions and other factors such as, Use of funds for Investing, like building Marriott, Berbice bridge, etc.  When money is invested, current account balances are depleted and this shows as debt.  Economists call it good debt because they expect a ROI (Return on Investment) at some point.

Bibi Haniffa posted:

In a nutshell, because me nah gat time to respond to the whole Bible, there were years when the debt ceiling rose.  This was a direct result of external market conditions and other factors such as, Use of funds for Investing, like building Marriott, Berbice bridge, etc.  When money is invested, current account balances are depleted and this shows as debt.  Economists call it good debt because they expect a ROI (Return on Investment) at some point.

"According to World Bank data, Guyana’s external debt has risen over 117%, US$850,393,000 in 2008 to US$1,845,561,000 in 2012. During that same time period gross national income per capita (purchasing power parity) has increased only 25% from US$2,720 to US$3,400. Furthermore, personal remittances have increased a whopping 34% from US$278,436,000 to US$373,096,197 during the last four years.

A common problem that lesser developed countries (LDCs) face, which Guyana falls into, is that of too much dependence on foreign nations and foreign entities. Guyana’s debt to GDP ratio increased from 44% (US$850,393,000/US$1,922,597,807) to 64.7% (US$1,845,561,000/US$2,850,572,407).

A country’s debt-to-GDP ratio compares what a country owes to what it produces and is an indicator of the country’s ability to pay back its debt. Currently Guyana’s debt-to-GDP ratio of 64.7% is very unhealthy.

Finally, the examination of the net export (NX) component of GDP tells an ominous tale of what developmental economists term “growth without development”. Guyana is running a trade deficit, that is, imports exceed exports. In 2011 Guyana exported US$1.18 billion compared to imports of US$1.46 billion (deficit of US$0.28 billion) and in 2012 the deficit increased to US$0.75 billion (exports US$1.311 billion minus imports US$2.065 billion).

In order for less developed countries such as Guyana to sustainably develop and wean dependence on foreign economic entities, they need to foster growth in a local subsistence economy that will actively engage citizens so that they can shoulder some of the development responsibilities.

However, the Guyanese government has increasingly increased imports at a higher rate than exports. Thus, more goods and services are being imported to Guyana that can actually be produced locally at a comparative advantage. This type of policy leads to an abhorrent unemployment rate of 21% over the last four years and expounding this statistic will lead to a positive correlation between the increase in crimes and other social problems.

Arright me break down the whole bible,me highlight some info please read last two paragraph,your hero was not too great,i will tell you why too much dependence on foreign stuff some which can be produced in the country,also when i was there i was shocked to see 4 minor food items my niece paid US$40.00,there used to be 3 bakeries in a 15 mile stretch on the WCD there is none now.

Janet Jagan; unfortunately due to a deliberate focused action of the American government; lost her American citizenship in the 1940's.

Demerara_Guy posted:

Janet Jagan; unfortunately due to a deliberate focused action of the American government; lost her American citizenship in the 1940's.

Janet was born American,how can she lost her citizenship??

Never heard of this.

Again Janet Jagan, based on the actions of the American government, was deprived of (lost ) her American citizenship in the 1940"s. =PERIOD=

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Not all black people.  Only Django and Gilbakka!!!

Wishful thinking on your part to deny Django and Gilbakka our non-racial Indianness. And if we come down to brass tacks, I can claim more Indian rights than you. I read the Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana and Upanishads more often than you. I read more Indian novels than you. I read more non-fiction books on India and by Indians than you. On top of that, occasionally I read THE TIMES OF INDIA and THE HINDU online newspapers. Cumulatively, that's a lot of my precious and finite time devoted to India. Just show me ONE of your PPP Indians here on GNI who can match my level of interest in Indian matters. As for Django, last time I heard he is 100 percent Indian by ethnic categorization. But he can respond to you himself.

Demerara_Guy posted:

Again Janet Jagan, based on the actions of the American government, was deprived of (lost ) her American citizenship in the 1940"s. =PERIOD=

Would you mind provide some documents or some info under what circumstances an American Born can lost their Citizenship.

=PERIOD= does this means we have to believe you ?

Do your own research to find the information that Janet Jagan lost her American citizenship in the 1940's.

Of note ... I am aware of this information since the early 1960's from published information plus personal discussions with Janet Jagan.

OK, the fact checker is here. Demerara_Guy is CORRECT. One SOURCE

Django, you just lost the argument. Hand over your trousers to D_G. 

Gilbakka posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Not all black people.  Only Django and Gilbakka!!!

Wishful thinking on your part to deny Django and Gilbakka our non-racial Indianness. And if we come down to brass tacks, I can claim more Indian rights than you. I read the Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana and Upanishads more often than you. I read more Indian novels than you. I read more non-fiction books on India and by Indians than you. On top of that, occasionally I read THE TIMES OF INDIA and THE HINDU online newspapers. Cumulatively, that's a lot of my precious and finite time devoted to India. Just show me ONE of your PPP Indians here on GNI who can match my level of interest in Indian matters. As for Django, last time I heard he is 100 percent Indian by ethnic categorization. But he can respond to you himself.

Bhai Gilly,i don't worry with Bibi,I am pure Indian to the bone,Kshatriya [father] and Sudra [mother]  blood run in my veins.

Gilbakka posted:

OK, the fact checker is here. Demerara_Guy is CORRECT. One SOURCE

Django, you just lost the argument. Hand over your trousers to D_G. 

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/12....html?pagewanted=all

''When most Guyanese were longing to get out of here and go to America,she gave up her American citizenship to become a Guyanese national and fight for this country,'' her son, Cheddi Jr., 48, a dentist who is running for Parliament, said in a recent campaign speech"

 http://immigration.findlaw.com...u-s-citizenship.html

The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) governs the ability of a United States citizen to renounce his or her U.S. citizenship. The law provides for the loss of nationality by voluntarily performing the following act with the intent to relinquish his or her U.S. nationality:

"(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United Statesin a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State" (emphasis added).

Elements of Renunciation

A person wishing to renounce his or her U.S. citizenship must voluntarily and with intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship:

1. appear in person before a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer,
2. in a foreign country (normally at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate); and
3. sign an oath of renunciation

Renunciations that do not meet the conditions described above have no legal effect. Americans cannot effectively renounce their citizenship by mail, through an agent, or while in the United States.

No trousers for DG,the above stated she renounced her US citizenship.

The US Government didn't take it away.

Janet officially became a citizen of Guyana in 1966, having been stripped of her U.S. citizenship more than 20 years earlier because of her Marxist political views.

Article --- Encyclopaedia Britannica

Source -- https://www.britannica.com/biography/Janet-Jagan

=======================

One of the numerous sources about Janet Jagan, which has reference to the American system stripping her of her US_of_A citizenship.

Django posted:

Gilbakka posted:

OK, the fact checker is here. Demerara_Guy is CORRECT. One SOURCE

Django, you just lost the argument. Hand over your trousers to D_G. 

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/12....html?pagewanted=all

''When most Guyanese were longing to get out of here and go to America,she gave up her American citizenship to become a Guyanese national and fight for this country,'' her son, Cheddi Jr., 48, a dentist who is running for Parliament, said in a recent campaign speech"

 

 

---

 

Django, that was the way Joey worded it. This is what the article says:"During the cold war, Mrs. Jagan lost her American citizenship, and even had difficulty getting a visa to visit her relatives in the United States."

Demerara_Guy posted:

Janet officially became a citizen of Guyana in 1966, having been stripped of her U.S. citizenship more than 20 years earlier because of her Marxist political views.

Article --- Encyclopaedia Britannica

Source -- https://www.britannica.com/biography/Janet-Jagan

=======================

One of the numerous sources about Janet Jagan, which has reference to the American system stripping her of her US_of_A citizenship.

I rest my case the US Immigration Law doesn't state a US born Citizenship can be taken away.

Gilbakka posted:

Django posted:

Gilbakka posted:

OK, the fact checker is here. Demerara_Guy is CORRECT. One SOURCE

Django, you just lost the argument. Hand over your trousers to D_G. 

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/12....html?pagewanted=all

''When most Guyanese were longing to get out of here and go to America,she gave up her American citizenship to become a Guyanese national and fight for this country,'' her son, Cheddi Jr., 48, a dentist who is running for Parliament, said in a recent campaign speech"

 

 

---

 

Django, that was the way Joey worded it. This is what the article says:"During the cold war, Mrs. Jagan lost her American citizenship, and even had difficulty getting a visa to visit her relatives in the United States."

Gilly,looking at the Immigration law she Renounce her Citizenship and became Guyanese.

One more piece of Info from the PPP to blame the [Imperialist] ole USA.

Gilbakka posted:

This is what the article says:"During the cold war, Mrs. Jagan lost her American citizenship, and even had difficulty getting a visa to visit her relatives in the United States."

Correct.

This discussion is interesting and enlightening. I am learning new things. This FindLaw article states: " Natural-born U.S. citizens may not have their citizenship revoked against their will, but may choose to renounce their citizenship on their own."

That and other articles are current/updated views on the issue.

However, in a number of specific issues, one need to review the historical evolution to know what existed and what are the current status.

The specific issue on the American government stripping Janet Jagan's citizenship since the 1940's is well documented on numerous sources.

Gilbakka posted:

 If elected, Hillary won't be 1st female American president

Check NEW YORKER magazine for the surprise.

So, based on the specific issues on being an American ....

1. While Janet Jagan was indeed born in the US_of_A, the US government revoked her citizenship. Hence, she no longer enjoys the benefits of being an American citizen.

2. Janet Jagan became a resident of Guyana and consequently obtained Guyanese citizenship in 1966.

So, is Janet Jagan a Guyanese or an American President??

D_G  you have the benefit of the doubt,I found in the book below,Janet Jagan US Citizenship was revoked twice during the  anticommunist hysteria of the 1950s and 1960s,the Clinton administration offered to restore her Citizenship.

U.S. Intervention in British Guiana: A Cold War Story

By Stephen G. Rabe

Here is some other Info i found.

In the case where naturalization was obtained fraudulently, including where if the person lied during the immigration or naturalization process or took the oath without meaning what it said, the naturalization would be declared invalid and thus the person is not a US citizen. This is part of the reason why they ask questions for immigration that nobody would answer yes to like "Did you commit genocide?"; it's so they can use it to deport people for fraud if it is later found to be true. Technically this is not a revocation of citizenship, since the person was found to have never validly been a citizen at all, but the outward appearance is that citizenship was taken away. A similar thing exists in most countries for fraud in the naturalization process.

Other than that, the citizenship of a person who was born or naturalized in the United States is protected by the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled in Afroyim v. Rusk in 1967 that it is unconstitutional for a US citizen who was born or naturalized in the US to lose US citizenship in any case unless the person intended to relinquish citizenship.

The current statute on loss of citizenship (8 USC 1481) provide for loss of citizenship when one of a number of "potentially expatriating acts" is performed, combined with intention to relinquish US citizenship. The potentially expatriating acts include things like making an application to renounce US citizenship to a US consular official outside the US, voluntarily acquiring a foreign nationality, taking an oath to a foreign state, serving in the military of a foreign state, serving in a foreign government, committing treason, etc. In all cases, it also requires, separately, the person's intention to relinquish US citizenship. This intent must be proven by preponderance of evidence, and, per the Supreme Court decision in Vance v. Terrazas (1980), cannot simply be presumed from performance of a potentially expatriating act.

To answer your question, I assume that "revoke" means you are excluding cases where the person voluntarily makes an application for renunciation of citizenship, or makes a voluntary statement to the government stating intention to relinquish citizenship. So excluding that, the person must have done one of the other "potentially expatriating acts" listed above, AND the government needs to prove the person's intent to relinquish citizenship while the person denies it. Usually it is very difficult to prove a person's intention if they do not openly admit it. Maybe it's possible to dig up past statements that the person has made to various people or on the Internet or other media. But in practice, contested revocation is very rare.

(Note that the Constitutional protection only extends to people who were born or naturalized in the US. US citizens who were not born or naturalized in the US (e.g. people who were born outside the US and who were US citizens at birth; also people who were born or naturalized in unincorporated US territories) are not protected, and Congress has passed laws in the past taking away some of these people's US citizenship in certain cases without their intent (specifically, the "retention requirements" for people born abroad to only one US citizen parent), and the Supreme Court ruled this to be constitutional in Rogers v. Bellei in 1971. However, those requirements were repealed in 1978 and there are currently no laws for taking away citizenship without the person's intent fromany US citizens. In any case, you only asked about those born or naturalized in the US.)

Demerara_Guy posted:

So, based on the specific issues on being an American ....

1. While Janet Jagan was indeed born in the US_of_A, the US government revoked her citizenship. Hence, she no longer enjoys the benefits of being an American citizen. [True]

2. Janet Jagan became a resident of Guyana and consequently obtained Guyanese citizenship in 1966. [With the compliments of Papa Burnham, Joey's godfather.]

So, is Janet Jagan a Guyanese or an American President?? [American-born Guyanese president.]

 Just like a true Muslim, Janet told Uncle Sam: "I renounce you. I renounce you. I renounce you." And BAM!!! she tied the knot with Burnham's Guyana. 

Django posted:

D_G  you have the benefit of the doubt,I found in the book below,Janet Jagan US Citizenship was revoked twice during the  anticommunist hysteria of the 1950s and 1960s,the Clinton administration offered to restore her Citizenship.

U.S. Intervention in British Guiana: A Cold War Story

By Stephen G. Rabe

---

 

You all see dat? We so-called 'black' APNU+AFC supporters graciously admit our errors. We ent wrang and strang like allyuh PPPites. 

Django posted:

D_G  you have the benefit of the doubt,I found in the book below,Janet Jagan US Citizenship was revoked twice during the  anticommunist hysteria of the 1950s and 1960s,the Clinton administration offered to restore her Citizenship.

U.S. Intervention in British Guiana: A Cold War Story

By Stephen G. Rabe

---

Here is some other Info i found.

While informative, the additional information in unrelated to the specific issues of the US_of_A revoking Janet Jagan's citizenship in the 1940's.

Gilbakka posted:

Demerara_Guy posted:

So, based on the specific issues on being an American ....

1. While Janet Jagan was indeed born in the US_of_A, the US government revoked her citizenship. Hence, she no longer enjoys the benefits of being an American citizen. [True]

2. Janet Jagan became a resident of Guyana and consequently obtained Guyanese citizenship in 1966. [With the compliments of Papa Burnham, Joey's godfather.]

So, is Janet Jagan a Guyanese or an American President?? [American-born Guyanese president.]

Janet Jagan is indeed an American born, but the specific item is that the US_of_A revoked her citizenship.

As a note, if one were to consider the whole continent of America; North, Central and South; there are current and past female Presidents in various countries.

Demerara_Guy posted:

Gilbakka posted:

Demerara_Guy posted:

So, based on the specific issues on being an American ....

1. While Janet Jagan was indeed born in the US_of_A, the US government revoked her citizenship. Hence, she no longer enjoys the benefits of being an American citizen. [True]

2. Janet Jagan became a resident of Guyana and consequently obtained Guyanese citizenship in 1966. [With the compliments of Papa Burnham, Joey's godfather.]

So, is Janet Jagan a Guyanese or an American President?? [American-born Guyanese president.]

Janet Jagan is indeed an American born, but the specific item is that the US_of_A revoked her citizenship.

No problem. I know you're a stickler for "specific issues." Most posters here use broad brushes that paint overlapping issues. Gilbakka caught their virus.

Noted Gilbakka.  

Of note on female Presidential candidates in the US_of_A ...

1. Hillary Clinton is the first female to be nominated as a presidential candidate for a major political party -- Democratic Party.

2. Shirley Anita St. Hill Chisholm is the first female to have an organized campaign for a political party in 1972 -- Democratic Party. Of note, Shirley Chisholm's father is from Guyana.

Shirley Chisholm