South Florida Potentially Becoming its Own State... Thoughts?

[Travelassie]

Originally Posted by CityScape0322

How has this not yet been posted here?

South Miami commissioners propose seceding from Florida - CNN.com

I'm sure everyone has heard the story of how the city of South Miami commissioners have proposed (re-proposed?) that the state of Florida be split along the I-4 just above Orlando creating a new State named South Florida. Obviously, I doubt this will happen just like all over attempts for a states region to break away and form a new one. This hasn't successfully occurred since the creation of West Virginia during the Civil War.

However I think it would be interesting/cool if this did pick up some traction.

What are your thoughts on this topic?

It's not a new idea by any stretch, it's been brought up any number of times in the 40 years I have lived in Florida. My thoughts are, from having lived in the state so long, worked for the state and seen the operation and (lack of) regard the powers that be in Tallahassee have towards S. Florida, that while Tallahassee and the powers that be there would like nothing better than to rid themselves of the headache and issues unique to S. Florida ( which they have never understood), they know that most of the money to run the state comes from S. Florida, and they will never let that go.

[StarfishKey]

Originally Posted by 11KAP

Nobody has time to replace new flags for the whole country based off this, and that's why things of this nature almost never happen anymore. The country is settled with 50 states.

That's it until further notice.

That is not a problem. We will keep 50 states - two of the others just have to merge. Perhaps North and South Dakota, since North Dakota has very few people? Or maybe Delaware can merge with somebody since they're so small?

That could be the new rule - for every section of a state that wants to split off and form a new one, they have to convince another pair to merge.

For that matter, North Florida could merge with Georgia or Alabama maybe? Or maybe SFL could merge with NY, VT, MA, and SoCA and form some kind of super state? Maybe we should work on having fewer states rather than more... just merge into a Blue State, a Red State, and an Independent State?

Maybe another solution is to split off A LOT - I'm pretty sure nearly everyone in the country, and probably the world, would think it was awesome if we had 100 states! We could decide to only split everything off when we have 50 clear new candidates - and my vote is for some of them to be our territory islands if they would like statehood. We all benefit on the mainland if we have Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam, etc. to even more easily vacation and live in. The United 100 States of America would be so cool! We could call it "The US 2.0" [Terrible, isn't it? ]

Let's not be limited by the old ways of thinking. States may not need to physically touch each other since we have airplanes and other modes of fast transport now...

#WhyNot?

jk...

In reality, I'm not sure the people who have the big money in the Southern half of the state really care about global warming or sea level rise. If they want to stick their heads in the sand too (so to speak), then splitting off won't accomplish anything beyond what we already have now.

[ElGuito]

To me is a philosophical discussion, akin to Texas becoming its own Nation.
Global warming and sea level rising determining the political structure and boundaries? Seems pretty obvious that the climate cycles have been going on for millions of years; plain arrogance that we think Humans are capable of changing the Global Climate.
Maybe this proponents should approach it from the other side, try to convince everyone in a straight East-West lone, from Orlando and North to become their own state, see how that goes.

Although not a direct comparison, just look at what happened with Scotland. It would be awfully nice to be our own State/Country, but from where, exactly, is the income is going to come?

[StarfishKey]

Originally Posted by ElGuito

To me is a philosophical discussion, akin to Texas becoming its own Nation.
Global warming and sea level rising determining the political structure and boundaries? Seems pretty obvious that the climate cycles have been going on for millions of years; plain arrogance that we think Humans are capable of changing the Global Climate.
Maybe this proponents should approach it from the other side, try to convince everyone in a straight East-West lone, from Orlando and North to become their own state, see how that goes.

Although not a direct comparison, just look at what happened with Scotland. It would be awfully nice to be our own State/Country, but from where, exactly, is the income is going to come?

Creating a new state is not REMOTELY like creating a new country. Our nation has created new states numerous times - it is a major part of our history and how our nation works - and our economy has always worked as individual parts of a whole, just like our government does. It scares me to think there are people who don't know the difference between going to another country, and traveling to another state. One is part of our economy and culture, one is not. New York:Georgia is NOT as Montana:China. I don't know why so many people keep talking about different nations, and secession, etc. This is not even close to what that means.

Also, is it "plain arrogance" to note that humans as a species have radically altered the physical landscape of the world, have almost completely polluted its contents, and forced many species into extinction on our planet? Or are all those real occurrences myths too? If we travel into space, dominate the entire planet, force all other species out of every dwelling we set up, coat the oceans in oil and deplete the ozone with our gases (the ozone was supposed to be a myth too - except that in fact the sun is far more cancerous in those areas and the change and location has been a measurable thing), wipe entire species off the face of the planet due to our desire for hides or feathers or bones etc., cut down the forests so much we actually change weather patterns and have caused desertification in multiple areas around the world, change landscape as we dig for minerals, remove mountain ranges entirely - if we do all that, it is not much of a leap to understand that we are in fact capable of slowly changing our climate with all that activity. Yes, it was arrogance that caused us to nearly make the buffalo extinct. But we still did it, humans absolutely were the cause of it. Humans caused the weather and topography in Haiti to be dramatically different from that of the Dominican Republic on the same island. Humans caused mass deforestation of South America's rainforest, and are much of the reason for Africa's growing Sahara Desert.

If you believe that the world is round - which scientists tell us, or that Multiple Sclerosis is a real thing (oh wait, that was supposedly a myth too), then you should believe the overwhelming 97% of scientists a partial list of them from NASA is here: http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/] when they tell you this change is way more rapid and pointed than the normal global climate changes that have occurred thus far in planet history. And considering how very serious this issue is, even if you don't choose to believe in science, what is so harmful about following their recommendations anyway - just in case they're right? So you recycle, reduce national dependency on processes that create destructive gases, compost in your yard - what really is the harm? Like people who choose to follow religion loosely just in case a God exists, most people really should want to cover their bases here. And to me, it does say a lot that the people who are so loudly proclaiming this is not an issue, this is not real science, are the same people that say women's bodies have the ability to naturally abort rape pregnancies, that you can see Russia from Alaska, that the internet is a "series of tubes," that fruit fly research is a waste of scientific funding because they're not humans, that trees in the rainforest should be eliminated because they emit carbon dioxide and make emissions WORSE, and that Mars in the same distance from Sun as the Earth is. These people by and large know less about science than the average 4th grader. So will I listen to them - people who admit they have no actual idea how climate change or weather patterns actually work, and themselves do not have even a bachelors in science degree, much less a doctorate - or to the overwhelming majority of doctoral-level scientists who are all in agreement about this issue?

It does us no harm to act as though this threat is real. And in fact it IS real, as so many people who live on islands and oceanfront land can readily attest to, given that they are losing land far more rapidly than previous generations, and that the weather patterns are becoming far more severe than ever before. People who say rapid climate change doesn't exist are the type of people who don't want any change, who want everything to stay like the "good old days," right? So, if you want this world to be like the one your grandpappy grew up in, you'll be aggressively FOR every environmental initiative that you can get your hands on, and you will do all it takes - or is even suggested it might take - to stop global warming. In the last decade many documented icebergs have melted and many island nations have had to begin evacuating some of their islands. That is massive change, and if change is bad, you'd better be a part of stopping it.

Scientific knowledge is ever-changing, which is its greatest attribute, and also its greatest downfall. But all we can do is go with what we've got. When the vast majority of our scientists say something is true, we have to either believe in science, or go back to praying away that tumor in your lung and believing that washing causes the plague. Education is our friend, not our enemy.

[flyboytampabay]

Please do!!!!! Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties please do. I was telling someone from out of state that most Floridians never go down to south Florida unless going on a cruise or on the way to the keys.

[StarfishKey]

Originally Posted by flyboytampabay

Please do!!!!! Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties please do. I was telling someone from out of state that most Floridians never go down to south Florida unless going on a cruise or on the way to the keys.

"Most Floridians" are already in SFL. We are talking about everyone in Orlando down the Key West. So technically, "most Floridians" don't travel to NFL, unless there's a hurricane that requires evacuation. I'm somewhat indifferent right now, since I see problems either with keeping it whole, or dividing the state. But technically, the majority of people, and the majority of money, are South of I-4.

[Miserere]

The panhandle should be part of Georgia, not a different state.

[miamifloridafan]

I'm against this and could we please stop talking about climate change already it is a hoax.