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.
Again, you would be willing to cut off your limbs just to satisfy your nose, that isn't a smart way to live.
Why would I be cutting off my limbs? Do I need you? Do I like you? Do I enjoy being in the same country as you? Do you even like being in the same country as me? Why? I mean, the way you act, you would think a country like New Zealand would be absolutely miserable since their economy is nearly 1/100th the size of America's.
Breaking up California is a bad idea. Why not break up Texas! That state is much larger and the large and growing Hispanic population is marginalized due to ingrained state politics that make sure the districts are gerrymandered...
Texas has the right to break up into smaller states but why would we want to break up our Republic, heck if we left instead we would take more than we have now when we did.
Why would I be cutting off my limbs? Do I need you? Do I like you? Do I enjoy being in the same country as you? Do you even like being in the same country as me? Why? I mean, the way you act, you would think a country like New Zealand would be absolutely miserable since their economy is nearly 1/100th the size of America's.
But is it?
If you say so, but I hardly think Oklahoma would be in the same situation as New Zealand, you need us and your limbs more than you are aware of.
But that is okay, no one is forcing you out of this country, so you are welcome to stay for as long as you like.
If you say so, but I hardly think Oklahoma would be in the same situation as New Zealand, you need us and your limbs more than you are aware of.
But that is okay, no one is forcing you out of this country, so you are welcome to stay for as long as you like.
First, Oklahoma doesn't really need the rest of the country, short of the fact it is landlocked. To the extent that Oklahoma gets a lot of money from the government, in all honesty, its because of the benefits handed to Native-Americans, and because of the areas of concentrated poverty that "dot" the major cities, mostly from the large numbers of blacks in north Tulsa, and in East Oklahoma City. As well as the massive influx of Hispanics in many areas in the state.
The actual economy of Oklahoma is rooted mostly in oil/gas and from farming(which would be largely unaffected by a split). Oklahoma gets very little tourism relative it its overall economy. Oklahoma is not a financial center.
The Oklahoma economy wouldn't change markedly if it was to secede. Though you would probably see a lot more consumer goods being "made in Oklahoma", if it were to be independent.
In all honesty, I don't see a significant reduction in the standard-of-living of Oklahomans if they were to become independent. The same can be said for basically any other state whose economy is built on commodities and who has other natural resources. Such as basically every "red-state" in the country.
The actual issue with state secession is not economic. There isn't a single state in America that wouldn't be successful if they were independent(though some would be slightly more and some slightly less).
The problem with secession is social. Oklahomans aren't a distinct group of people. As my friend says a lot, he hates the Federal government, but he ain't gonna live in a country run by Mary Fallin either.
If Oklahoma actually tried to secede(and was successful), it would immediately fall apart into innumerable divisions. Many of the Native-Americans would want to break away from the rest of Oklahoma, especially those near the border who have significant investments in casinos. All the Hispanics and blacks would want to become independent from the rest of Oklahoma. A large percentage of people who live in the major cities, who basically don't really even acknowledge that they live in Oklahoma, and are quite embarrassed of us "hicks" with our "hick accents". Let alone anyone who works at Tinker, or who otherwise have employment in some fashion related to the Federal government. Plus tons of people who live near the border.
As a result, such a split would lead to absolute chaos, and would last for many years. While whatever actually was left of Oklahoma after all was said and done, had to completely restructure itself.
Its funny, to most people, that kind of chaos is basically terrifying. I find it to be incredibly exciting. And makes my imagination run 100 MPH for all the potential problems and possibilities.
And, in my view, I think America is actually pretty fragile. I think if this country ever began to crack, it would crumble into a thousand pieces. Basically, if Texas for some reason did secede, it would start a domino effect that would be impossible to stop.
First, Oklahoma doesn't really need the rest of the country, short of the fact it is landlocked. To the extent that Oklahoma gets a lot of money from the government, in all honesty, its because of the benefits handed to Native-Americans, and because of the areas of concentrated poverty that "dot" the major cities, mostly from the large numbers of blacks in north Tulsa, and in East Oklahoma City. As well as the massive influx of Hispanics in many areas in the state.
The actual economy of Oklahoma is rooted mostly in oil/gas and from farming(which would be largely unaffected by a split). Oklahoma gets very little tourism relative it its overall economy. Oklahoma is not a financial center.
The Oklahoma economy wouldn't change markedly if it was to secede. Though you would probably see a lot more consumer goods being "made in Oklahoma", if it were to be independent.
In all honesty, I don't see a significant reduction in the standard-of-living of Oklahomans if they were to become independent. The same can be said for basically any other state whose economy is built on commodities and who has other natural resources. Such as basically every "red-state" in the country.
The actual issue with state secession is not economic. There isn't a single state in America that wouldn't be successful if they were independent(though some would be slightly more and some slightly less).
The problem with secession is social. Oklahomans aren't a distinct group of people. As my friend says a lot, he hates the Federal government, but he ain't gonna live in a country run by Mary Fallin either.
If Oklahoma actually tried to secede(and was successful), it would immediately fall apart into innumerable divisions. Many of the Native-Americans would want to break away from the rest of Oklahoma, especially those near the border who have significant investments in casinos. All the Hispanics and blacks would want to become independent from the rest of Oklahoma. A large percentage of people who live in the major cities, who basically don't really even acknowledge that they live in Oklahoma, and are quite embarrassed of us "hicks" with our "hick accents". Let alone anyone who works at Tinker, or who otherwise have employment in some fashion related to the Federal government. Plus tons of people who live near the border.
As a result, such a split would lead to absolute chaos, and would last for many years. While whatever actually was left of Oklahoma after all was said and done, had to completely restructure itself.
Its funny, to most people, that kind of chaos is basically terrifying. I find it to be incredibly exciting. And makes my imagination run 100 MPH for all the potential problems and possibilities.
And, in my view, I think America is actually pretty fragile. I think if this country ever began to crack, it would crumble into a thousand pieces. Basically, if Texas for some reason did secede, it would start a domino effect that would be impossible to stop.
I would gladly give up 99% of this country's GDP if it meant getting rid of a bunch of obnoxious liberals.
Look, if California was so much better off on its own, why does it even bother staying in America? I mean, who honestly believes California is full of super-patriotic Americans?
The truth is, California's economy is incredibly reliant on the rest of America. What do you think would happen to Hollywood if the rest of the United States became a foreign country? What do you think would happen to Silicon Valley? For that matter, San Francisco is a huge financial center because it houses one of the largest Federal Reserve banks. Which covers basically the entire Western United States.
California also relies heavily on tourism from the rest of the United States. And its real-estate markets are heavily inflated by the infusion of capital from all over the country(nice weather, on the ocean).
The Red States by and large are far more capable of being independent countries than liberal states. The Red States have all the natural resources. The primary reason red states haven't developed some of the industries of the more liberal states, is because they just haven't needed to. Those industries already exist elsewhere in the country, and in many cases, those industries are already being supported in some way by our government(IE GM, GE, Boeing, bailouts, subsidies, contracts, etc).
If a Red State was actually an independent country, it would do just like all other independent nations do. It would develop its own industries. In fact, if a red state actually did secede, you would probably see a building boom as they try to develop all their own industries/institutions.
Look at it like this, lets imagine each and every state seceding from the union unilaterally. The states who have economies that are largely based on resource-extraction will be the least affected. Because resources are "international commodities". They can sell their products all over the world.
States who rely mostly on finance, government, education, industry, and tourism, will be most negatively affected.
Thus, the states that would be hit hardest by a breakup, would be states like Massachusetts, New York, Florida, and Colorado.
You really expect us to believe that red states haven't developed strong white collar industries because they haven't felt like it? Right-wingers are truly delusional.
The reason coastal blue states have all those industries is because they're desirable places to live. They have geographical and historic advantages red states can't touch. Sure, red states could try to lure talent as independent nations, but don't expect that to end well. They can't even create a flourishing agricultural industry without massive government kickbacks.
Naw, the red states, for all their endless whining and carping, won't let their meal ticket slip away. They love sucking up tax dollars from large, wealthy, urban states like California even as they are envious and resentful of the hand which feeds them. Yet propose cutting off their endless amounts of pork and welfare paid for by states like California and watch the righties squeal like stuck pigs.
Spot on. The VAST majority of our nation's productivity comes from the big urban centers, and they are overwhelmingly liberal. Red states contribute a whole lot of nothing in comparison.
You really expect us to believe that red states haven't developed strong white collar industries because they haven't felt like it? Right-wingers are truly delusional.
The reason coastal blue states have all those industries is because they're desirable places to live. They have geographical and historic advantages red states can't touch. Sure, red states could try to lure talent as independent nations, but don't expect that to end well. They can't even create a flourishing agricultural industry without massive government kickbacks.
Well, the best way to answer your question, is really to just ask, what exactly is a modern economy? What has caused the things which exist as they are, to be as they are. And also, to what degree might things change, if things were different?
Lets use a simple example, North Dakota.
North Dakota produces about ~35 million barrels of oil per month, with a population of ~740,000.
Kuwait produces ~79 million barrels of oil per month, with a population of ~4 million.
That means North Dakota produces ~47.3 barrels of oil per-month per-person. Kuwait produces only 19.75 barrels of oil per-month per-person.
Qatar, which is objectively the country with the highest GDP per-capita in the world. Produces ~47.1 million barrels of oil a month, with a population of ~2.15 million. That is ~21.9 barrels of oil per-month per-person.
Alaska produces about ~15 million barrels a month, with a population of 740k. That is ~20 barrels of oil per-month per-person. Wyoming is ~12. New Mexico is ~5. Texas is ~4. And Oklahoma is ~3.
And that doesn't even touch natural gas, coal, other mining, livestock, and agriculture.
Now, it is certainly true that "red states" don't currently have much manufacturing and technology. But why? I mean, tiny countries all across Europe have more technology and manufacturing than pretty much any "red-state".
A good point of reference for this discussion might be "Estonia".
Estonia was part of the Soviet Union until 1991, it was an economic backwater, and still only has a population of ~1.3 million. It is now the wealthiest ex-Soviet country(per-capita). It doesn't take long to build up a technology-based economy if there is any kind of need for it.
Where in America does technology usually derive itself? Well, in most cases from colleges, especially top technology colleges, such as MIT, Berkeley, and Caltech. But, when someone in the Midwest wants to go to one of these top technology schools, he will just go to school out-of-state. And once he graduates, he will often stay and work in and around the college he went to school at. Because the colleges usually have their own research and development wing, and it is funded by government grants. And usually there are technology companies which sprout up near these colleges that try to soak up the talent produced by these colleges(or as a result of startups of recent graduates who are still in the area).
There are obviously schools of technology in other countries. And some Americans will go to school in places like the UK, at Oxford or Cambridge. But almost everyone will go to school within their own country, and once they graduate, they will usually stay within their country as well. So, instead of red-staters heading up to Massachusetts or out to California to either go to school or to start up a business(IE silicon valley). You would see technology schools and companies sprout up in places all over.
And the same goes for manufacturing as well. If the rest of America cut Oklahoma off from whatever product it liked, it would just make it itself. That is basically how American manufacturing began in the first place. Thomas Jefferson placed the embargo on Britain, cutting off trade, so then Americans started just making their own stuff. And it is why even after the embargo ended, America had ridiculously high tariffs for decades, to support the "fledgling industry" of America.
The point is, it is ignorant to think that red-states would collapse without the blue-states. As a general rule, red-states would actually fare better than blue states. As I said, blue-state economies rely heavily on industries which would largely die without a Federal government. This is especially true for things like Wall-street and other financial centers which rely heavily on support from the banking system(IE the Federal Reserve).
If we are being honest, states like Colorado, Nevada, Oregon, Maryland, and pretty much the entire Northeast would collapse without the Federal government. The only blue-states which could still do well on their own, would really just be Washington State and California. The rest of the blue states are basically garbage without the Federal government and the huge US market to sell to.
Breaking up California means giving more voice to the backwards Conservative element of the state. This makes the idea an atrocious one. Conservatives need LESS of a voice, not more. Not surprising that a venture capitalist from silicon valley floated this ridiculous idea.
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.
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.
