The USA will inevitably break up, how will it look?

I don't think we will break up any time soon, but if we do it will be because of the fight over public money. Socialism is sold as a unifying Utopian paradise where no one has to worry about money. In reality it is corrosive force that divides people as they struggle to take money out of each others' wallet.

I would like to see the country split up because the hatred has grown beyond repair. If it did split, then there would have to be a population transfer of Liberals to one side and Conservatives to the other. That would be best. Who would the libertarians join?

i believe over $1 triilion per year moves from blue states to red states. if that is true, outcomes are obvious.

#5 Economy in the World wrote:

California is the 5th Largest Economy in the World and should become a sovereign nation 100% separate from Washington, D.C. and the unfortunate people stuck in the sorry 49 loser states.

Progressives should not be hamstrung by mental cases, Border Wall, and Zionist types. A free country for all is what California is all about.

Hitler was a Progressive.

if cali left (pun), they would try to out do their already out of control socialist programs. one thing i have seen over the years is how self righteous the left is and how they brag and proclaim and get media attention on it.

they would grant lots of illegals to come, they would have super high taxes to pay for all the programs and try to out do the Scandinavian countries. this would bankrupt them super fast, and then they would loath to call on the ol USA for help, and instead call out to china or iran. the strange thing about liberal america, is it is mostly steered and controlled by the left media...which is controlled by jews.....but the USA media jews hate their brethren in Israel....so strange

but yeah cali would fail hard in prob 3 yrs just like Venezuela. free handouts causes inflation, resentment and all around laziness. why should i have to work when these guys dont have to? why should i get taxed when these guys dont get taxed. soon there are riots and no one working, no one spending money, and prices skyrocketing.

you honestly think the big tech companies will stay in cali once it starts to fall apart? no they will move to china.

Jerry Maguire wrote:

Would be pretty awesome.

The South would turn into a 3rd world country very quickly. Truly the cancer of our nation.

Texas would go solo and be fine.

Western states + California??? SWEET.

Mid west.

Northeast.

Canada takes the Dakotas.

I'm a black southern born man, trust me the south will be OK, if they split up, with Financial centers like Atlanta, Charlotte, and Dallas we would rival any other places, plus we all know the most fertile soil resides in the south, so where will food come from for other regions, Tourism, would be a huge industry boom as well as all the oil in the country comes from Texas and the gulf. The Movie and Tv industry has moved to the south as well, So show me again where we will be a third world country

Not a likely scenario but if it did you'd have a northeast (PA, maybe MD and north) and south midwest, and west coast. A lot of states are politically divided geographically--e.g., eastern portions of California, Oregon, Washington are deeply red and would align with rural Arizona/Nevada/Idaho. Las Vegas would be a peninsula of southern California. Even though Colorado/New Mexico tend purple/blue they are isolated and perhaps not strong enough to fight off the right-winged red horde of the plains states and Utah. So the Rockies would be sacrificed--but maybe not, water is important and that's where the west's water comes from so maybe the blues would do what it takes to keep the screaming red horde out of the mountain states. Nevertheless, eastern Colorado and NM would go red.

Another tossup region would be the upper midwest, which could align and connect with the blue states. But considering recent electoral changes, these could also be taken up by the angry and bitter red horde. Alaska would align red, Hawaii with the west coast.

Think you’re all missing the elephant in the room, the USA may be divided by politics, but the real change must inevitably come when the USA begins its transition to becoming a white-minority country, which will occur in about 25 years time. What then? States still with a white majority form an alliance to preserve the traditional American way of life?

Thebigbang wrote:

the third world wrote:

Very racist statement. Take your racism elsewhere please.

Well historically the South is the most racist region in the USA and without the Feds to help I would see them progressing backwards

maybe It should break up along racial lines. Then we'd get some peace.

OR..... People could move wherever they want among designated territories until, like musical chairs, at a certain date, you have to stay where you are permanently.

We could sell Puerto Rico to the highest bidder at auction and, as we all know, Hawaii would just melt into the sea. ALASKA belongs to Canada anyway, so fuhgeddaboud it.

douglas burke wrote:

Back in the USSR, oops. wrote:

Ever heard of the USSR?

It could never happen to the USA, the people are more united than any people in history, we may squabble on politics and other things, but we are all one big happy family, when Pearl Harbor happened, the next day there was lines at the military stations that were miles long, of people wanting to come to the aid and fight for the USA, and we are FAR MORE UNITED in 2018 than we were in 1941.

Admittedly, media generated patriotism can be marginally effective but what happens When you look at facts is you see that up until recently the U.S has used conscription to fill its ranks. After Vietnam it becomes much more sophisticated.

People can and will turn a blind eye, unless of course freight trains full of literal feces begin to stockpile at stations across the country. Or if water becomes scarce.

The US isn't even close to being as politically divided as it has been in the past. The fact that so few of you realize this is frightening.

That being said, who knows how long our corporate welfare state can survive in the internet age. I suspect the next technological leap may put our country in great peril.

Thebigbang wrote:

Everyone knows

Great start!

The arguments here sound like Fox News vs Huffington Post. They both are sure that the other side is ignorant and evil. There is no room for in between moderation.

Rural vs Urban is really the divide. Those who live in a diverse environment and are typically better educated and paid (Urban) are more Liberal. Those who live in homogeneous culture and are less educated and poorer (Rural) are more likely to be Conservative.

Who hates welfare? People should understand that the US Government is giving welfare to corporations on a larger scale than to poor people. Those corporations are getting subsidies and tax breaks then underpaying their employees so those employees collect welfare. Then those at the top of the corporate structure complain about paying too much in taxes and lobby to lower them. So the most prosperous are paying less and less taxes and ensuring that the poor are collecting government services. Sounds like a good system doesn't it? It is called wealth concentration and it has accelerated. Dems and Reps are both in on it. That is the real "Deep State": Corporate people have invaded every part of government and are plundering the treasury and convincing everyone that the real problem is lazy people collecting welfare.

States leaving the union won't fix this. However, I'd give California the best chance by far of making it. CA pays far more to the Fed than it gets back. Yes there is a water need, but the upstream states with no viable industry would gladly sell their water. Plus there is more water in the Sierra mountains than the reservoirs can hold. A bunch of new reservoirs would cure that minor problem. Food growth year round, viable industry (Tech, industry, agriculture) and a large population (tax base) pretty much make CA an ideal candidate to survive on its own.

Anyone interested in this topicshould read John Michael Greer's book Retrotopia. It's fiction, of course, but tackles many issues facing us today and takes you to their possible outcomes, from a national perspective all the way down to the individual.

Would Californians be willing to build more reservoirs to capture the Sierra mountain water?

In the broader context of this discussion, are urbanites willing to make the choices required to survive without the rural populace? And if they would be forced to make those choices, would they end up making the same political choices that the rural populace sees as necessary? Is it possible that maybe, just maybe, the rural people actually understand how the whole system holds together better than the urbanites who are stuck in their artificial (concrete, metal, glass, plastic) bubble?

Just as an example of what I'm talking about; its so ironic that rural Americans understand that our whole system runs on oil, and yet the people in the city (where most of the oil is consumed) see oil as some malignant evil of the big corporations. With their robotic platitudes of "follow the money" they think they understand how the sausage gets made.

And ain't a lot moving to non-cities in flyover states. Hence: Gerrymandering.

malmo wrote:

irunfastXC wrote:

They'd have food. That's about it.

No federal aid to help with wildfires and earthquakes.

No energy resources (Hoover Dam can't power everything), no coal mines. I guess they do have tons of uranium underground, but no nuclear power stations to utilize it.

And Cali's insane debt would sink them pretty quick.

Out of all the areas to turn into a third world country the quickest, this would be it.

.

California wouldn't have water. Without the diversion of the Colorado River, California would cease to exist.

You make a fair point, but aren't they working on desalination or was that just their hope?

HRH wrote:

Think you’re all missing the elephant in the room, the USA may be divided by politics, but the real change must inevitably come when the USA begins its transition to becoming a white-minority country, which will occur in about 25 years time. What then? States still with a white majority form an alliance to preserve the traditional American way of life?

Yes, those from the Middle East are coming over or trying to come over in droves (believe it). It's not racism, it's reality.

I don't know about 25 years, but you may be right.

You look around Southern California recently?

Oregon? Washington?