Should the states secede from the Union?

If you haven't known from the Pool Room or any other news, states are making petitions to secede from the US. Now this is out right stupid in my opinion. Even if you do manage to secede are you sure you have the basic supplies for your country to succeed?

Now the smallest country in the world today is Vatican which is the size of a city. But even still, would a state succeed in being a country?

I would have to say no, but many people think otherwise (4 states passed the 25,000 signatures)

Now lets talk politics, mainly on Texas. Would they have a strong leader (Rick Perry) for them? A leader who will provide a well rounded army to defend from US forces and Mexican forces? Well I would feel bad for them. Would they have a strong Parliament/Congress that would make efficient laws for their people?

Finicially speaking, would they have enough money to keep up? Having enough money within the government for military, etc. while keeping a strong economy (Citizens making a nice profit) like China or Turkey?

So basically, should the states secede from the Union?

The Vatican is a lot smaller than a city, and only remains to exist due to its high number of visitors.

Well you have to remember that Texas has a population of 25,674,681 out of 100,000. Barely makes a dent if you ask me .

It surprises me how many times it's the military aspect that americans seems to be worried most about. How come?

This already happened:

http://www.thenation.com/article/blue-state-secession#

http://www.salon.com/2004/11/17/states_2/

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2004/11/could_the_blue_states_secede.html

Those are all articles about liberals considering secession after Bush won reelection in 2004. Nothing happened then. Nothing will happen now. People get stupid after elections, then they come to their senses and life goes on.

Secede and you're gonna get replaced by Puerto Rico

On a more serious note, this is just people always overreacting. Could be a tactic from one guy to use the feelings of the election to stir people up for his cause.

If states secede, they won't last, because where would they get money? Certainly not the U.S. government or the U.S.'s economy. They'll either crash and burn, return to being a U.S. state, or both.

Sol Diviner said:

If states secede, they won't last, because where would they get money? Certainly not the U.S. government or the U.S.'s economy. They'll either crash and burn, return to being a U.S. state, or both.

Click to expand...

And maybe the southern states may join Mexico *cough Texas cough*

It's sad how they think they can secede like that.

I say we boot out Texas and bring Puerto Rico. People who WANT to be apart o the US.

Right?

Gheb_01 said:

It surprises me how many times it's the military aspect that americans seems to be worried most about. How come?

Click to expand...

That's probably because if these state do secede, unless there's been a difference in attitude that I've completely missed, we'd probably go to war with them to get them back into the Union.

So assuming that a majority of Texans want their state to secede from the USA the Union would react with military force ... to a democratic resolution? That doesn't sound like what a democratic country would do. It sounds like the reaction of an authoritarian re- ...

Oh, wait...

It's an inane response to a democratically elected president. I didn't hear the GOP complaining about big government when Bush signed the Patriot Act. The secession that resulted in the Civil War was meaningful; contemporary talk of secession is asinine.

Gheb, the reason military response is the predominant worry is because that was the response when states seceded in the 19th century. We had a big, messy war because of it. The Supreme Court even ruled that being part of the Union is permanent:

When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.

Click to expand...

You can see more on Texas v. White on Cornell's law site.

It was more a rhetorical thing although your answers are definitely interesting. I realize that states seceding from the union would inevitably draw parallels to the Civil War but I find it equally alarming that people assume the mindset of the 19th century and think that a war will be the logical consequence.

Regarding fiscal matters.

Once Texas becomes independent, it should immediately begin producing plants to amass munitions, cattle, and cowboy hats. Texas should export these products to Mexico, Cuba, and the United States to initially accrue initial funds to secure the well being of the nation.

The next step of investment is Operation Walled Street. Texas will negotiate with neighboring states along the Mexico border to buy out land bordering between them and Mexico. After these purchases are made, Texans should begin construction of a large cement wall on the southern border so that no one can pass over by foot from Mexico. After completion of the wall, Texas can now monopolize the sale of passage over the wall to Mexicans who want to make it to the states.

Finally, Texas will need to increase some revenues by tourism. Some ways it can do this is by erecting a large cross that is higher than any man-mad structure in existence and to require that all Christians must make pilgrimage to the site once a year to partake in the Holy Spirit. The harder it is to get to the pilgrimage site, the more allure it has and Christians everywhere should come pouring in.

With these three actions passed within the first year of Texas's independence, it will start on the path of becoming a strong nation for many years to come.

The states should not and will never secede from the Union. ~100,000 signatures will not be enough for the Obama administration to be stupid enough to consider letting the states leave.

Last time this was done, we entered a four year bloody war that cost 700,000+ lives.

Let them, they're dumb for trying it anyway. They reap the benefits of America and really offer nothing. We won't lose out with them gone.

Considering that it's the blue states who basically financially support/prop up every red state except Texas, they're boned.

This succession talks are similar to the same reason the Confederacy formed in the late 1800s: Racism

White Mage said:

I think the secede movement is more about Obamacare taking away the freedom from the people to choose what they want, instead of being forced to get it or pay a fine. That's not right.

Click to expand...

No, it's all about racism.

I remember a while back of an interview on the news with Rick Perry mentioning something about seceding if Obama got re-elected, but I haven't been able to find it again, and he seems to have changed his mind atm.

Click to expand...

It wasn't Perry. It was just some yahoo.

It's true that Red States, with the exceptions of Texas, Nebraska and Arkansas, receive more money than they put in. Here is an article on the amount of federal funding received for every tax dollar paid. But about the same number of Blue States do as well. The difference is that there is also a good number of Blue States that do not receive more than they give.

However, this secession nonsense isn't about racism. It's about ignorance (of which racism is certainly a factor, of course). People should really read up on what Obamacare actually does. And maybe go research what developed nations have universal healthcare. For the lazy:



courtesy of http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...-health-care-americas-still-not-on-it/259153/.

It's plainly absurd to think Obamacare is cause for a secession.

The states shouldn't secede. It really would serve no purpose, and it isn't going to happen anyway. Let's say a state did though, could it survive on its own. I think a major key would be to have a good port. I believe there is quite some room to undercut the US in the boating area. Also international trade will be a huge boom for your country. A good metropolitan area would be another most have. You want to have an economy that has room to grow especially now that you have the power to tax, license, and incentives. A good strategy for a seceding country would be to try to get as many companies to incorporate in your country. Next thing to do would be to join NAFTA. The last must have I would say is a reasonable land mass. You want to give your citizens and immigrants options as far as landscape and population density.

So if you have those three things, you should be able to secede just fine. You will want to change your tax structure. Think of all those federal taxes you get to charge now. Not to mention those T-bonds. You will want to make some allies. You will also want to reorganize your government a bit. Make sure you have your citizens change over their paper work. A good strategy may be to advertise to your neighboring countries on how much better of a country you are. We all know Americans are looking for a fresh start, but aren't willing to go to far out of their comfort zone. Processing those immigrants is going to be rough though.

Again, I don't think any state secede, but I think people are missing how much more financial leeway they would have as their own country. I also don't understand all the talk about Texas. I thought Texas didn't have a secession plan in its state constitution. Not to mention that Texans like being the biggest mainland state. I guess all the talk is because Texas would be the best off it became its own country?

I don't see what's so interesting about it. What happens to a limb when you cut it off from the body? It becomes dysfunctional until it becomes part of the body again. The body itself is hurt but ultimately can operate without the limb if needed be. I think the anology fits.

Lol

I mean I know the debate hall is about theoretical arguments, but on the real you guys

We settled this 150 years ago

They don't get to do that

any nation so conceived and dedicated blah blah blah etc etc