Narz
keeping it real
That's what'll inevitable happen when the modern industrial world empire collapses anyway.
I do think the NorthEast would do better independent of the rest of the US.
Should the Northeastern and Western states secede from the Union?
- Thread starter Karalysia
- Start date
I do think the NorthEast would do better independent of the rest of the US.
Mango Elephant
Deity
So in other words it's you seceding from us this time around, not us seceding from you 
but for what it's worth, I feel that you seceding from us would be like leaving your brother poor, barley able to pay his bills, and struggling every month but because your tired of giving him financial aid you just abandon him and don't give him a second thought.
It should also be said that before the Civil War we had one of the largest economy's in the world, but since your great general Sherman tore us up, then the reconstruction left us bleeding out of every pore of our body and in a terrible financial situation that we still haven't completely recovered from and leaves us in quite a predicament, so not only did you leave us in this situation but you want to abandon us as well. Also I would like to add that the South provides a lot of produce and unless you want to pay a lot more for it then I would suggest you don't secede.
but for what it's worth, I feel that you seceding from us would be like leaving your brother poor, barley able to pay his bills, and struggling every month but because your tired of giving him financial aid you just abandon him and don't give him a second thought. It should also be said that before the Civil War we had one of the largest economy's in the world, but since your great general Sherman tore us up, then the reconstruction left us bleeding out of every pore of our body and in a terrible financial situation that we still haven't completely recovered from and leaves us in quite a predicament, so not only did you leave us in this situation but you want to abandon us as well. Also I would like to add that the South provides a lot of produce and unless you want to pay a lot more for it then I would suggest you don't secede.
While I do find the inconsistencies of conservatism funny,
We've given plenty of help to the South. FDR's New Deal provided power and electrification of the South with the Tennesee Valley Authrotithy, Southern farmers recieved large amounts of assistance and susbudies, and market controls to increase the price of their produce, infastructure was improved and so forth. LBJ's Great Society greatly diminished poverty levels improved education, healthcare and other things.
Now if the South still can't get its act together after all that clearly its the South's own fault. They've become welfare bums, and welfare queens. What we need to do is cut out the support we give them so the South will be motivated to find a job and support themselves. As long as we provide this safety net to the South they will never work and continue being lazy.
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
I bet that is largely due to your lack of Senate support. It is just wrong that 12% of the population of the US is only represented by 2 senators.
And the list is actually even worse. It has Florida labelled as a red state and we voted for Obama in 2008.
Glad to see people finally coming around to my POV about how the federalies have usurped state powers. We would not be having this conversation if they didn't stick their nose in where it doesn't belong.
But hey, it's you liberal States that want the social safety net at the federal level. Well you forced it down our red state throats, so yeah, we'll suck ya dry til you leave. Thanks
@Forma: I'm gonna paraphrase and twist your words here a bit. It is just right that 1/50 of the equal members of this grand union get 1/50th of the representation in the Senate.
But hey, it's you liberal States that want the social safety net at the federal level. Well you forced it down our red state throats, so yeah, we'll suck ya dry til you leave. Thanks
@Forma: I'm gonna paraphrase and twist your words here a bit. It is just right that 1/50 of the equal members of this grand union get 1/50th of the representation in the Senate.
_random_
Jewel Runner
To be fair, the second one is probably just because librulz are smart enough to get decent-quality pr0n for free.
California does indeed have a thriving economy, I'd actually push for more autonomy instead of succession
Most common explanation: Those [black people] are the reason, also the liberals steal their porn instead of being honorable and buying it
yes, I actually have seen that as the explanation, pretty pathetic
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
Go ahead and wreck your own country, but must you ruin ours in the process?
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
Isn't this sort of thing more defensible in the states where there is a smaller population? If Wyoming receives $2.00 per $1.00 paid in federal taxes, that doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot, because what does Wyoming receive in funding? They probably just get federal highway funds and defense installations. Is it really going to boost the economies of San Diego and Newark to have an early-warning radar system outside of the city?
As for highway funds, it's pretty obvious that even though the funds are spent in Arizona or wherever, that the economies of California and Texas benefit... good luck getting your products manufactured in Texas to a store in California if there's no road between the two states.
The more populated states are less defensible, and yes, it's true that they are receiving what basically amount to welfare payments from the federal government. I don't see a reason to support that, but why are those arguing for wealth transfer payments complaining? It makes it sound like their side only wants their goals accomplished if they get power from it.
As for highway funds, it's pretty obvious that even though the funds are spent in Arizona or wherever, that the economies of California and Texas benefit... good luck getting your products manufactured in Texas to a store in California if there's no road between the two states.
The more populated states are less defensible, and yes, it's true that they are receiving what basically amount to welfare payments from the federal government. I don't see a reason to support that, but why are those arguing for wealth transfer payments complaining? It makes it sound like their side only wants their goals accomplished if they get power from it.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
Are you implying any of the states manufacture things?
We aren't complaining about that. We're complaining that the welfare recipients are the ones who are always saying what a bad deal welfare is. The hypocrisy gets old.
What this patriot said.
BasketCase
Username sez it all
Try this possibility: red states are full of older Americans.
http://www.censusscope.org/us/map_65plus.html
The correlation isn't precise--Florida being a notable exception--but there's a huge swath of retired people smack in the middle of the Red States. And guess what--retirees not only don't work and therefore don't pay (as much) taxes, but they're receiving Medicare and Social Security.
Berzerker
Deity
senate wasn't supposed to represent the people
Ulyaoth
Emperor
Clearly the solution is to stop federal welfare. Any federal tax dollars go to the military and the military only.
Similar threads
