[Wherewillitland]

Some wanted Vermont to be its own country or a new province to Canada because its "different" from the rest of America. Why? I heard its because of its mostly liberal politics and it being the most rural state of America as well as the highest number of buddhists (still less than 5%) but those arent enough reasons.

[Sherylcatmom]

More info here.

[MRVphotog]

Originally Posted by Wherewillitland

I heard its because of its mostly liberal politics and it being the most rural state of America .

You heard wrong, Vermont is not even close to being the most rural state in America. There are 20 states more rural than Vermont. Wyoming is #2, Maine is #9, Vermont is #30.

well as the highest number of buddhists (still less than 5%) but those arent enough reasons.

This statement is even more laughable...care to share where you got this from?

There are secessionist groups in every state, most much larger than Vermont's. It's not a Vermont thing, it's a national movement. Here is a link to some. Don't forget to buy a t-shirt.
http://www.vermontrepublic.org/links

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by MRVphotog

You heard wrong, Vermont is not even close to being the most rural state in America. There are 20 states more rural than Vermont.

Yeah, Alaska has all other states beat for that...

Still, I support the idea but perhaps for different reasons: the federal government is simply out of control and doesn't follow the Constitution anymore. I do think it would be best to also have NH and ME secede and have a loose confederacy with them to make it more practical...

All of VT isn't all liberal like Burlington/etc., BTW, to the OP...

[Wherewillitland]

no you're both wrong. I think you are talking about overall population density. Yeach vermont would't classify as number one there, but it has THE HIGHEST popultion for a state where people live in rural areas. Thats not true for alaska where maybe half of alaskans live in anchorage.

[mustmove]

VT couldn't survive without federal dollars rolling in from more productive states. Secession is a joke.

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by mustmove

VT couldn't survive without federal dollars rolling in from more productive states. Secession is a joke.

End a lot of the federal mandates and those dollars may not be so necessary...get the state and local governments' spending habits under control and there'd be no problem.

[Dwatted Wabbit]

Originally Posted by arctichomesteader

End a lot of the federal mandates and those dollars may not be so necessary...get the state and local governments' spending habits under control and there'd be no problem.

Exactly.

In fact, IMHO the USA would probably be better off dividing into two, three, or perhaps four nations.
Unfortunately, it would be rather difficult to have one nation composed of the big cities, another of the more rural areas, and another of, perhaps, the deep south.
And Hawaii and Alaska would be at risk for something similar to what happened to Panama after we let go there. That would be a strategic risk of potentially disasterous proportions.

[MRVphotog]

Originally Posted by mustmove

VT couldn't survive without federal dollars rolling in from more productive states. Secession is a joke.

I don't think any state could survive without federal dollars. Secessionests are definately a fringe movement. When I lived in Montpelier they had a show on one of the local access channels. It was entertaining, I'll give them that.

Where - If that's your premise than both South and North Dakota would be more rural than Vermont plus alot of other states. Maine for sure. I assume your using the fed minimum of 50,000 to be a city which is another major flaw in your thesis. Burlington might have only 40,000 people by the last US census but the greater Burlington area, definately non-rural, is well over 100,000.

Population density is a much better stat in determing how rural a state in IMHO. I lived in Wyoming for many years where every town is about 100 miles apart. Vermont feels crowded to me, even in the NEK, when compared to that.