Would people move to Texas if it were an independent nation? (Houston: mover, unemployment)

[aceplace]

Originally Posted by jdm2008

Also what would be the advantage of letting Texas into NATO, for anybody but Texas? Maybe they'd let them, since they let everyone in this days.

Why allow Texas to join NATO? Why, to prevent Texas from a military alliance with China.

[mm4]

Originally Posted by getmeoutofhere

You do realize that, due to the influx of people from other states, many parts of Texas are actually more Blue than Red?

It was actually blue for decades since the New Deal until into the early 1980s when Ohioans, Pennsylvanians, Michiganders, and New Yorkers descended into the state and turned it red.

[mm4]

Also unique to enabling TX under the discussed scenario to be able to go it alone is the fact that the state's electricity grid is entirely separate, self contained, from both the eastern and western interconnections shared by the rest of the 48 contiguous states.

[Korel]

Originally Posted by **NoodLes**

Doesn't make a difference to me, I'll be moving back in a few years anyway. Only suggestion, ban Louisiana from joining!

I thought we were an Independant Nation! You mean we're not?

We'll have to set up border crossings to keep the Okies out.

[Lakewooder]

LOL you know the old joke about why Texas doesn't slip into the gulf?

[LostMover]

Interesting thread. Who'd have thunk 50 years ago the nation would become divided and growing movements for leaving would be popular again.

Well for my money I suspect it's more likely a dictator comes to America before states go. There's too much to lose in state leaving for nations of the world. China may not agree with a state leaving, or perhaps the wealthy oil nations.

Now that I've said that, look at the consequences. Who is leading who?

If you look closely what Bush was doing looks a lot like laying groundwork for this to happen. Dictatorship may not happen in 5 years, but it sure seems likely sometime in the future here. So Texas probably will not leave nor any other state.

[WillysB]

Originally Posted by mm4

It was actually blue for decades since the New Deal until into the early 1980s when Ohioans, Pennsylvanians, Michiganders, and New Yorkers descended into the state and turned it red.

C'mon, don't be telling people stuff like that. It's really offensive for someone to learn they don't know as much as they thought they did.

And it kills my amusement at their rants.

[getmeoutofhere]

Originally Posted by mm4

It was actually blue for decades since the New Deal until into the early 1980s when Ohioans, Pennsylvanians, Michiganders, and New Yorkers descended into the state and turned it red.

Yes, I know, and now it's swung back towards blue again. But for the better part of 3 decades, it's been a red state, albeit almost evenly divided.

I simply get tired of the assertion that Texas is a conservative bastion.

[aceplace]

Originally Posted by mm4

Also unique to enabling TX under the discussed scenario to be able to go it alone is the fact that the state's electricity grid is entirely separate, self contained, from both the eastern and western interconnections shared by the rest of the 48 contiguous states.

That's a good point... although parts of the Texas Panhandle are outside of the Texas ERCOT grid, that's not a major problem for the scenario.

Interestingly enough, the Texas grid generates about 63 gigawatts of electric power, for approximately 23 million people, giving about 2700 watts per person. In the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, No Ireland), they generate about 57 gigawatts for 61 million people, about 930 watts per person, much poorer than Texas.

There may be an alternate scenario for an independent Texas. Instead of full independence, Texas would become autonomous, something like Puerto Rico is to the USA, or Scotland is to the United Kingdom. Texans would remain United States citizens, but would have no role in the Washington government, nor would they pay Federal income taxes. Texas would have its own Congress, its own administration, and maybe an independent judiciary. In terms of military matters, foreign policy and monetary policy, it would be subject to Federal jurisdiction, but the laws passed by the US congress would not apply to Texas, the US president could not issue executive orders regarding Texas, and the US Supreme Court would have no jurisdiction.

Texas would not have its own currency, but would retain the US Dollar. This preserves the great advantage in increased purchasing power for people who sell their houses in New York and buy another one in Houston or DFW.

The greatest advantage, and the biggest reason to migrate to Texas, would be the lack of a Federal income tax. For people in New York in a 67% state and federal tax bracket, that would be an enormous incentive. As I've mentioned before, Texas' replacement for the income tax would be a sales tax or value added tax, and the cost of replacing Federal programs would be far, far cheaper than Texas current IRS levies.

The enormous tax advantage would quickly increase the base population of Texas to the size of a major European country such as Germany or the UK, and would vastly improve its position in the world. In addition, it would provide a haven for people who do not wish to live under the laws of the United States, but who are not willing to become expatriates in a foreign culture.

[mm4]

Originally Posted by aceplace

That's a good point... although parts of the Texas Panhandle are outside of the Texas ERCOT grid, that's not a major problem for the scenario.

Possibly, but where does the corn come from then?