Could you imagine:
Kentucky
Louisiana
Alabama
South Carolina
Arkansas
Oklahoma
Tennessee
.... on their own?
Virginia, North Carolina, Texas -- although these states would have a major issue with becoming "Southern" states as most of the industry / wealth is produced by blue cities.
SoCalism wrote:
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.
That's because moderation might lead to some sort of meaningful discourse.
People who feel the need to use the terms "liberal" and "conservative" when discussing global crises are perpetuators of corporate sponsored apocrypha. By doing so you are imposing an illusory paradigm of two factions at odds with each other. This scenario is implicit with the fallacy that of these two contending groups there is one that is good and right : one serving the truth, and the other serving fiction.
Urban and rural people are not geographic stereotypes because you want them to be or because it helps you make your case.
Reducing the world crises to an argument about economic inequality shows just how much television your watching.
In spite of the rest of your inane rambling I do agree about Cali be most viable for autonomy. A couple reservoirs and the minor problem of severe annual drought and increased wild fires should pretty much fix itself.
Blitzkrieg BLITZKRIEG wrote:
Alaska will probably either go back to Russia or Canada.
No they will be the new Norway.
Max Godwin wrote:
Hitler was a Progressive.
Trump is a Progressive.
https://www.mediaite.com/online/glenn-beck-donald-trump-is-a-progressive-hes-not-a-conservative/http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trump-progressive-championAs is Trump wrote:
Max Godwin wrote:
Hitler was a Progressive.
Trump is a Progressive.
https://www.mediaite.com/online/glenn-beck-donald-trump-is-a-progressive-hes-not-a-conservative/http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trump-progressive-champion
Ask a liberal if they'd rather vote for a progressive or a conservative.
Eh in A Handmaidens Tale kinda sense I really think the south would be the area they’d have problems surpressing. Pretty sure they had to disarm their citizens for the new regime to take place in the series. Not gonna happen down here. Plus, we do have our southern ways, but we really don’t like raping women and taking away free will. Not our thing. But whatevs. I just live here so what do I know.
I think you guys are over estimating california. Highest poverty rate in the nation after adjusting for cost of living. And I'd bet (but was too lazy to look up) that they're homeless rate is pretty high too.
Leftists can't indoctrinate gullible youngsters as quickly as they abort them. The optimist says give it a couple of generations and the U.S. goes back to being a normal place.
The pessimist says that we're so messed up as a country that it will take some huge disaster for people to finally come to their senses. The good people who remain will pick up the pieces and help rebuild Christian civilization.
The west coast states would split up and be highly prosperous.
Texas would love to split off on its own. I live in Texas now and its a weird place where people consider themselves so patriotic and yet much more than any other place in America they want to be their own country. They'd turn pretty backwards but they'd be fine as a nation because of all the oil.
The southern red states would turn into dumps. Their politics and lack of wealth without the federal government funding them would slide them back into third world countries. Judging by their politics it is clear the majority in these states already want to be third world. Within a generation a majority of the red states would be the dumps of the continent.
East coast would be fine as they would continue being centers of finance.
The midwest and west would be split up into some mix. Not very many people there. If they split into red and blue the red states like in the south would drift backwards.
Alaska would join Canada. Hawaii would become its own island nation, or maybe it'd join the west coast.
Basically the west coast and mid/upper Atlantic states would be centers of advancement and wealth, Texas would go all in on oil and do well but eventually become a relic as the world moves to clean energy. The red states, especially the south, would be a third world country. The mountain west would maybe stick together and be a tourist/recreation nation. Oh and Florida I think would be on its own and would be a tourist spot for all the rich north east coasters.
The nation-state system we have now started when Ghenghis Khan partitioned the world's largest empire in history into individual, discrete domains for each of his main generals. The mixed raced Mongol and indigenous Turks eventually became the Ottoman Empire which divided into domains.
I think you’re wrong wrote:
Plus, we do have our southern ways, but we really don’t like raping women and taking away free will. Not our thing.
That's why cook meth and bang your cousins. It's not rape if it stays in the family.
What will happen to the Malamute's. You won't be able to say there American anymore, but Norweigen or Canadian?
the third world wrote:
Jerry Maguire wrote:
The South would turn into a 3rd world country very quickly. Truly the cancer of our nation.
Very racist statement. Take your racism elsewhere please.
Dude, I don't think you mean racism..
California would be fine, especially if they don't have to deal with the drain of the red states suckling at their teat for their federal tax dollars. California is for winners.
California overrated wrote:
I think you guys are over estimating california. Highest poverty rate in the nation after adjusting for cost of living. And I'd bet (but was too lazy to look up) that they're homeless rate is pretty high too.
http://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2017/jan/20/chad-mayes/true-california-has-nations-highest-poverty-rate-w/
One thing I’m sure of: If the US breaks up, California becomes one of the advanced countries in the world. Maybe San Diego will become a separate state, too. Maybe then the rent won’t be so expensive. Find more about it https://costoflivingreports.com/united-states/san-diego-ca/ The thing about Alaska, I think Alaska will return to Russia. Mr Putin will not allow Alaska to go to anyone else or to exist as an independent state. There will be chaos in some states, drug trafficking, arms trafficking. America will lose its power if it breaks up. I don’t think renting in San Diego is worth the sacrifice. LOOL
DianaCornish wrote:
One thing I’m sure of: If the US breaks up, California becomes one of the advanced countries in the world. Maybe San Diego will become a separate state, too. Maybe then the rent won’t be so expensive. Find more about it
https://costoflivingreports.com/united-states/san-diego-ca/The thing about Alaska, I think Alaska will return to Russia. Mr Putin will not allow Alaska to go to anyone else or to exist as an independent state. There will be chaos in some states, drug trafficking, arms trafficking. America will lose its power if it breaks up. I don’t think renting in San Diego is worth the sacrifice. LOOL
Your point about Alaska is sound. The same logic applies to Arizona, California and New Mexico. Mexico, depending on who is analyzing the numbers is (12 to 15) largest g.d.p. in the world. Without mostly men from Midwest and southern states in U.S. military, what would stop Mexico from reclaiming Arizona, California and New Mexico? I am sure you know California could have been broken into five states. If U.S. breaks up, California breaks up too. Mexico would not necessarily prevail in taking the entire state, but Mexico surely would be able to take a lot of California.
Republican states generally rely on Democrat states for funding. Democrat state could funnel more money into their own needs.
The effect of the US breaking up would be devastating both nationally and internationally. As the Civil War showed, secession would not occur without violence that would be resisted federally, and were it to result in a nation that has fallen because of "a house divided against itself" - to paraphrase Lincoln - then liberal democracies everywhere will have lost a defining centre. The world will have become safer for autocrats - and more bellicose. So it often is with the end of great empires. China waits.
The future is uncertain but what is most concerning about the US today is that its political and cultural divisions are tearing at its ability to function as a unified nation. It may not dissolve into a collection of independent states, as has the former USSR and Yugoslavia, but may implode through the inability of its factions to live and work together. So it was with the Weimar Republic - a disturbing parallel.
two changes wrote:
I believe that Canada will become its own country in the not-so-distant future. Maybe Mexico too (just the old one). Those are the only two states I expect to break off from the mainland.
In practice the United States is already a federation of nation-states under the umbrella of the US government.
In reality, and we really see this during COVID, a state like Texas, Florida, California or New York has as almost as much autonomy as EU states like France, Netherlands, Italy or Greece do within the European Union framework.
Now, like the EU, this doesn’t mean the US federation won’t break up but I think most people outside of the US think the United States is just one big monolith when really, when asking where “an American” is from, it would probably be more appropriate and telling for the American to answer “I’m Texan” or “I’m from New England”, etc. Just like if you ask a “European” where they are from they would probably say “German” or “French”
One side will have guns and welcome all people, the other side will be unarmed racists.