Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should the US consolidate down from 50 states?
Yes 17 24.29%
No 53 75.71%
Voters: 70. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-07-2020, 08:28 PM
 
Location: Louisiana to Houston to Denver to NOVA
16,505 posts, read 26,083,316 times
Reputation: 13275
Quote:
Originally Posted by atadytic19 View Post
That works too. Just an observation that outside of the South West portion of Houston the rest of the city to me seems more in line with Louisiana and East Texas than Parts of Texas further west (SA, Austin, etc).
Even East of the Atchafalaya feels more similar to Houston than West of the Brazos. You can tell it gets drier, you see less southern magnolias and live oaks. Even the soil types are different.

The soils on the Eastern half of the country are more acid and conducive to growing plants sucks as Magnolias, Azaleas, dogwoods etc. Heading west the soil is more alkaline and none of these plants do well in that tire off soil. Azaleas are legendary in Alabama as well as Houston and East Texas.

Music too. Surprised by how popular zydeco is in Houston.
But the strongest point to your position is the food. You are right, that gulf coast flavor should not be separated.

I haven't spent enough time in the less cookie cutter areas of north Texas to judge but I would imagine it shares a lot of similarities to Shreveport. But because the metro doesn't butt up to the coast like Houston it would not feel like it belongs to one vibe like the gulf coast vibe. Houston is clearly southern on culture, DFW to me feels like everywhere. I can see why it's a testing ground for new things. Very representative of the modern US overall
By north Texas, are you referring to Dallas? I would say Shreveport and Dallas feel similar enough but I have very little experience in Dallas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-08-2020, 03:06 AM
 
482 posts, read 345,713 times
Reputation: 1362
Quote:
Originally Posted by bus man View Post
I could get behind this!

Yes, I know, this whole thing is an academic exercise. At least it is right now. In the future? Who knows? Even as little as 10 years ago, who would have predicted a mass wave of statues being toppled because they were deemed to be racist? Things change, and while I'm well aware of the sovereignty of each individual state, I'm also aware of an increasing popular mindset that says that states are nothing more than internal administrative units within a larger country. (See, for example, the bruhaha over the Electoral College because it slightly favors less-populous states.) So I don't see it at all far-fetched that popular sentiment might eventually translate into Constitutional changes and reworking of state boundaries. In fact, I would say that it's probably more likely than not.

What I've quoted here seems like a fairly workable plan. My own sense of states is that they ought to be similar in geographic size to each other. I've always thought that the Midwestern Plains states were sized about right. So if we take the completely arbitrary size of 80,000 square miles per state (a size that's in-between Kansas and Nebraska), this would give us 39 states of similar geographic size within the continental U.S. Divide Alaska into two parts (each of which would still be much larger than 80K sq. miles, but they're a special case), then add Hawaii, and we've got 42 states.

But really, the post I quoted above probably makes more sense than just making all the states be a similar geographic size.
Thanks. Some parts of the country are so much more densely populated than others so that would be impossible without gerrymandering.

I also did some other variants and had a good one with 38 states but at that level the population variance between that states gets so great that being able to have strong states with a similar scope of efficient and effective government becomes challenging. It also creates a situation where you basically get city states where rural areas get completely dominated by a single metro similar to what we see in Illinois today. In larger states with multiple power centers you get a different dynamic

BTW I found file with the population estimates I had made for this configuration. Some of the other details are a bit different as well.

State Capital other major cities Population estimate
Great Lakes Lansing Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Grand Rapids, Toledo, Fort Wayne 31,709,291
Montana Salt Lake City Phoenix, Denver, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, El Paso, Spokane 24,604,998
Northern California and Cascadia Sacramento San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, San Jose, Fresno, Bakersfield 25,840,853
Texas Austin Houston, Dallas, Fort Worth, San Antonio 26,595,881
Chesapeake and Delaware Harrisburg Philadelphia, Washington, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Allentown 26,057,182
Southern California Los Angeles San Diego, Las Vegas, Bakersfield 26,554,000
Carolina and Virginia Raleigh Charlotte, Richmond, Norfolk, Columbia, Greenville 21,972,317
Mississippi and Louisiana Baton Rouge Birmingham, New Orleans, Jackson, Little Rock, Memphis 21,713,355
New York New York Newark, New Haven, Bridgeport 21,632,190
Plains Lincoln Twin Cities, Kansas City, OKC, Tulsa, Omaha, Des Moines 20,846,116
Florida Orlando Miami, Tampa, Jacksonville, Fort Meyers 19,777,737
New England and Upstate NY Albany Boston, Hartford, Providence, Springfield, Portland ME 19,698,624
Indiana Indianapolis St. Louis, Columbus, Cincinnati, Dayton, Evansville, Peoria 19,600,568
Upland South Knoxville Atlanta, Louisville, Nashville, Chattanooga 19,488,994

Last edited by Pavlov's Dog; 07-08-2020 at 03:36 AM.. Reason: formatting
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 03:13 AM
 
482 posts, read 345,713 times
Reputation: 1362
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABQConvict View Post
No. Upstate New York is not, and never will be New England.

I actually argue the NY and New England are, combined, a region itself (the greater Northeast), but dividing New York itself and putting part of New York in with New England? No.

If New York were to split up, Upstate would remain autonomous and not subsidiary to another state. The last thing they want is to be a hockey puck, battered around by NYC and Boston.


~~~

Also, I feel if NY were to split, it wouldn't be NYC <-> everything north of the Bear Mountain Bridge.

I think it would be more of an <Upstate-Downstate> divide rather than a <NYC-everything else> divide.

Downstate would comprise NYC, Long Island, The Hudson Valley and the Delaware Watershed.

Upstate would start somewhere roughly south of Albany, and incorporate the Ontario, Susquehanna, Allegheny, and Mohawk watersheds.
New England was just a working name in my proposal. It could just as well been called New England and Upstate New York. I would have the capitol in Albany as well. With my proposal this new state would have 19.7 million people so Boston would not be dominant in any way. Culturally Upstate New York and inland New England are much more similar than dissimilar. Regarding the mid-Hudson River Valley, I did consider including them with New York metro but felt the region is much more rural and small city than highly connected to the city
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 03:30 AM
 
482 posts, read 345,713 times
Reputation: 1362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chevalier de Saint-George View Post
Good effort on this, however in my opinion, RVA and Hampton Roads should be Chesapeake no doubt.

Atlanta sticks out like a sore thumb in the Upland South/Appalachian South bracket. As a Piedmont city, it fits in better with The Carolina/Colonial South part.
Atlanta was a tricky one since it basically straddles the Colonial South, Upland South and Deep South and is clearly the predominant city in the South. I considered a number of different configurations but ended up with the one I did to balance populations.

Richmond and Hampton Roads to me are very clearly culturally Southern and very dissimilar from Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia and the rest of Pennsylvania. There are certainly a lot of cultural and geographical similarities to rural Maryland and the Delmarva peninsula but the gravity of the big cities weighed more heavily. Things are changing rapidly though and there are a lot of grays whereas the situation was a lot more black and white previously.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 03:47 AM
 
Location: Prepperland
18,822 posts, read 14,007,124 times
Reputation: 16478
Many Americans have no clue as to the nature of the government.

Unlike other nations, where the national government rules, via subdivisions, the United States, in Congress assembled, is an agent for the United States of America.
The former colonies were autonomous, at the time of the revolution. They were no longer subjects of the British crown. So once the dust settled, the states joined together, in a perpetual union (see: Articles of Confederation), to better secure the rights of their respective people.

With 50 unique states, one can "vote with their feet" to wherever the laws and customs suit them. The national government has limited authority (spelled out in Art. 1, Sec. 8, USCON) within the states themselves.
So each state was never a logical subdivision of a larger nation. It was to be a self governing entity, that pooled resources with other states for mutual self defense.

And as the Declaration of Independence reminds us, American governments were instituted to secure the endowed rights of the American people, and nothing more without consent of the governed. This is the foundation of the republican form of government, wherein the people are sovereign, and the government is their servant - not their master.
In all other nations, their people are subjects of their sovereign government. This is why Americans do not kneel nor bow to foreign monarchs - we are their social and legal equals.
“... at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves. . .â€
- - - Justice John Jay, Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 2 Dall. 419 419 (1793)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremec...CR_0002_0419_Z

That's another reason why Americans have guns. No servant government has the delegated power to disarm the master. And that is a very good thing.
  • An armed populace fears no government.
  • A disarmed populace fears all government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 04:03 AM
 
482 posts, read 345,713 times
Reputation: 1362
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
Many Americans have no clue as to the nature of the government.

Unlike other nations, where the national government rules, via subdivisions, the United States, in Congress assembled, is an agent for the United States of America.
The former colonies were autonomous, at the time of the revolution. They were no longer subjects of the British crown. So once the dust settled, the states joined together, in a perpetual union (see: Articles of Confederation), to better secure the rights of their respective people.

With 50 unique states, one can "vote with their feet" to wherever the laws and customs suit them. The national government has limited authority (spelled out in Art. 1, Sec. 8, USCON) within the states themselves.
So each state was never a logical subdivision of a larger nation. It was to be a self governing entity, that pooled resources with other states for mutual self defense.

And as the Declaration of Independence reminds us, American governments were instituted to secure the endowed rights of the American people, and nothing more without consent of the governed. This is the foundation of the republican form of government, wherein the people are sovereign, and the government is their servant - not their master.
In all other nations, their people are subjects of their sovereign government. This is why Americans do not kneel nor bow to foreign monarchs - we are their social and legal equals.
“... at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves. . .â€
- - - Justice John Jay, Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 2 Dall. 419 419 (1793)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremec...CR_0002_0419_Z

That's another reason why Americans have guns. No servant government has the delegated power to disarm the master. And that is a very good thing.
  • An armed populace fears no government.
  • A disarmed populace fears all government.
Except the states don't have the powered once envisioned and a majority of the people didn't have any rights.

The federation has become much more of a unitary government than was originally intended. The 14th amendment now takes precedence over Article 1, Section 8 and with Marbury v Madison the US Supreme Court made a major centralized power grab over the states

I think women, the slaves and Indians would disagree with a couple of your statements regarding rights. What you state is all correct and that is the ideal but we have never lived up to it. Rights and freedom were always qualified to white, property owning men until the 20th century.

Today's republic is, for good and bad, very different from the one created with the declaration of independence in 1776. Pretending otherwise is delusional.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 07:22 AM
 
Location: New York City
9,333 posts, read 9,185,202 times
Reputation: 6408
Pennsylvania and Delaware should unite as one. There down to 49, at least until DC becomes a state...

But in all seriousness, that to me would be the easiest transition for either state and a good pair. New England states make for relatively easy transitions too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 09:00 AM
 
2,323 posts, read 1,537,724 times
Reputation: 2311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov's Dog View Post
Atlanta was a tricky one since it basically straddles the Colonial South, Upland South and Deep South and is clearly the predominant city in the South. I considered a number of different configurations but ended up with the one I did to balance populations.

Richmond and Hampton Roads to me are very clearly culturally Southern and very dissimilar from Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia and the rest of Pennsylvania. There are certainly a lot of cultural and geographical similarities to rural Maryland and the Delmarva peninsula but the gravity of the big cities weighed more heavily. Things are changing rapidly though and there are a lot of grays whereas the situation was a lot more black and white previously.
Atlanta does indeed stradale however the metro has traits more similar to Piedmont SC and NC over Appalachia. One could say that Nashville would probably be kosher with metro ATL (far away L'Ville too) but the rest of Appalachia won't care for ATL.

Regarding those VA cities, they are either on the Chesapeake (7 Cities) or has close ties with it like Richmond. Richmond goals are to be a greater Washington DC type of city. There was an article on how the leaders of Baltimore, DC, NoVa, Richmond, etc will work together more on projects to strengthen their connectivity between these cities. People in Richmond aren't connected with GA and SC like that. Again, good effort with compiling these new states, it is fun topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 09:03 AM
 
2,323 posts, read 1,537,724 times
Reputation: 2311
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpomp View Post
Pennsylvania and Delaware should unite as one. There down to 49, at least until DC becomes a state...

But in all seriousness, that to me would be the easiest transition for either state and a good pair. New England states make for relatively easy transitions too.
Pennsylvanians would be like "Welcome home Delaware." DE is PA Jr and Wilmington is Philadelphia Jr.

Out West, combine N/S Dakota and maybe Oregon into Washington (this may be controversial) and call it Cascadia since folks in the PNW like that name.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 09:17 AM
 
Location: Alabama
13,365 posts, read 7,666,489 times
Reputation: 6935
The United States doesn't *need* 50 states.

The question we should really be asking is: Why does my state need the United States?

The United States is much too big, the national government is much too centralized and all-encompassing, and it's past time to split.

If this continent were divided into dozens of smaller Republics, everyone would be much better off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top