Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:red states get the military. what makes you think you wouldn't be blue-state Greece? Germany the most red of the bunch doesn't want to pay for all the liberal takers. You can already move to Canada....just go it's easy. But you don't...cuz canada sux.

http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/02/02/canadian-premier-comes-to-u-s-for-health-care/

This is actually pretty hilarious. "The Red States get the military." It does explain a lot of things, though. Just to clue you in: "the military" costs money. Shitloads of money. And aside from a mediocre oil industry, the Red States don't have any. You sound pretty damned provincial, actually. You realize that one can't just "move to Canada" right? Or France for that matter. It's very difficult to get a work visa.Anyway, much better to un-suck the country we live in, make it live up to its ideals, and attempt to drag it kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

Aimee4 wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:red states get the military. what makes you think you wouldn't be blue-state Greece? Germany the most red of the bunch doesn't want to pay for all the liberal takers. You can already move to Canada....just go it's easy. But you don't...cuz canada sux.

http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/02/02/canadian-premier-comes-to-u-s-for-health-care/

This is actually pretty hilarious. "The Red States get the military." It does explain a lot of things, though. Just to clue you in: "the military" costs money. Shitloads of money. And aside from a mediocre oil industry, the Red States don't have any. You sound pretty damned provincial, actually. You realize that one can't just "move to Canada" right? Or France for that matter. It's very difficult to get a work visa.Anyway, much better to un-suck the country we live in, make it live up to its ideals, and attempt to drag it kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

This is actually a myth. If you list the GDP by state and population, the red states produce as much per capita as the blue states. Also, if you haven't noticed, much of our produce is grown in the red states, along with manufacturing and steel.

Anonymous wrote:

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Note that the blue wouldn't need nearly as large a military, because we wouldn't be sending it on ruinous romps. We probably would want a hard-core border patrol, though.

Why would the blue state utopia need a border patrol? Worried about illegal immigrants from red states?

Yeah - that actually is what I meant.

It would be a tough call for the blues. You'd want to take in all cultural refugees, but you wouldn't want to be an economic escape valve for that red hellhole.

As may be somewhat obvious, I'm not a big pro-immigration leftist. My eyes were open long before California Prop 8.

How do you reconcile your views that red/confederate america would be an economic hellhole with the fact that Texas is the sole bright spot in the U.S. economy at present? If nothing else, your blue utopia would be cutting huge checks to red/confederate america for energy production, because they would not want to get their hands dirty with things like coal and oil. (If I recall correctly, California is a huge net electrical importer, including from coal plants in Nevada.) Or will it be a nuclear-powered blue utopia? That's quite doable, actually, but as with border control I doubt your blue colleagues will allow it to happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Aimee4 wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:red states get the military. what makes you think you wouldn't be blue-state Greece? Germany the most red of the bunch doesn't want to pay for all the liberal takers. You can already move to Canada....just go it's easy. But you don't...cuz canada sux.

http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/02/02/canadian-premier-comes-to-u-s-for-health-care/

This is actually pretty hilarious. "The Red States get the military." It does explain a lot of things, though. Just to clue you in: "the military" costs money. Shitloads of money. And aside from a mediocre oil industry, the Red States don't have any. You sound pretty damned provincial, actually. You realize that one can't just "move to Canada" right? Or France for that matter. It's very difficult to get a work visa.Anyway, much better to un-suck the country we live in, make it live up to its ideals, and attempt to drag it kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

This is actually a myth. If you list the GDP by state and population, the red states produce as much per capita as the blue states. Also, if you haven't noticed, much of our produce is grown in the red states, along with manufacturing and steel.

Can you point to your source on that? Because I am looking at the GDP data on the BEA site and it looks like the only red states that are above average are Texas, Alaska, Colorado, and Wyoming, and of course half of those are built on oil.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:red states get the military. what makes you think you wouldn't be blue-state Greece? Germany the most red of the bunch doesn't want to pay for all the liberal takers. You can already move to Canada....just go it's easy. But you don't...cuz canada sux.

http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/02/02/canadian-premier-comes-to-u-s-for-health-care/

This is actually pretty hilarious. "The Red States get the military." It does explain a lot of things, though. Just to clue you in: "the military" costs money. Shitloads of money. And aside from a mediocre oil industry, the Red States don't have any. You sound pretty damned provincial, actually. You realize that one can't just "move to Canada" right? Or France for that matter. It's very difficult to get a work visa.Anyway, much better to un-suck the country we live in, make it live up to its ideals, and attempt to drag it kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

Seriously? The red states don't have any industry? Please. There is a ton of heavy industry left in red america: oil and gas production, petrochemicals, agriculture, mining, auto assembly (you don't think the Honda and Toyota plants in red-state Alabama and Tennessee beat the pants off of the fossils in the upper midwest?)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Note that the blue wouldn't need nearly as large a military, because we wouldn't be sending it on ruinous romps. We probably would want a hard-core border patrol, though.

Why would the blue state utopia need a border patrol? Worried about illegal immigrants from red states?

Yeah - that actually is what I meant.

It would be a tough call for the blues. You'd want to take in all cultural refugees, but you wouldn't want to be an economic escape valve for that red hellhole.

As may be somewhat obvious, I'm not a big pro-immigration leftist. My eyes were open long before California Prop 8.

How do you reconcile your views that red/confederate america would be an economic hellhole with the fact that Texas is the sole bright spot in the U.S. economy at present? If nothing else, your blue utopia would be cutting huge checks to red/confederate america for energy production, because they would not want to get their hands dirty with things like coal and oil. (If I recall correctly, California is a huge net electrical importer, including from coal plants in Nevada.) Or will it be a nuclear-powered blue utopia? That's quite doable, actually, but as with border control I doubt your blue colleagues will allow it to happen.

Blue states already massively subsidize oil and coal production. We'd simply be getting resources on the open market. The New Confederate States of America would be the equivalent of Venezuela. It's pretty comical that some think Toyota and Honda would keep their rural factories running should there be a political split. Not going to happen. Those factories would be in Mexico because they're even better at repressing their labor force than Red State America. Those factories are in rural america because they're exploiting a loophole in our trade regime by siting them in America, but in the most third-world part of America.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:red states get the military. what makes you think you wouldn't be blue-state Greece? Germany the most red of the bunch doesn't want to pay for all the liberal takers. You can already move to Canada....just go it's easy. But you don't...cuz canada sux.

http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/02/02/canadian-premier-comes-to-u-s-for-health-care/

This is actually pretty hilarious. "The Red States get the military." It does explain a lot of things, though. Just to clue you in: "the military" costs money. Shitloads of money. And aside from a mediocre oil industry, the Red States don't have any. You sound pretty damned provincial, actually. You realize that one can't just "move to Canada" right? Or France for that matter. It's very difficult to get a work visa.Anyway, much better to un-suck the country we live in, make it live up to its ideals, and attempt to drag it kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

Seriously? The red states don't have any industry? Please. There is a ton of heavy industry left in red america: oil and gas production, petrochemicals, agriculture, mining, auto assembly (you don't think the Honda and Toyota plants in red-state Alabama and Tennessee beat the pants off of the fossils in the upper midwest?)

Extractive industry, and exploitation of cheap labor by foreign corporations. Don't worry, I'm sure Blue State America will also be building cheap fabrication plants down there as soon as the Great Split happens. Of course, all the corporate HQs, the intellectual capital, and the good jobs will stay here in the First World.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Note that the blue wouldn't need nearly as large a military, because we wouldn't be sending it on ruinous romps. We probably would want a hard-core border patrol, though.

Why would the blue state utopia need a border patrol? Worried about illegal immigrants from red states?

Yeah - that actually is what I meant.

It would be a tough call for the blues. You'd want to take in all cultural refugees, but you wouldn't want to be an economic escape valve for that red hellhole.

As may be somewhat obvious, I'm not a big pro-immigration leftist. My eyes were open long before California Prop 8.

How do you reconcile your views that red/confederate america would be an economic hellhole with the fact that Texas is the sole bright spot in the U.S. economy at present? If nothing else, your blue utopia would be cutting huge checks to red/confederate america for energy production, because they would not want to get their hands dirty with things like coal and oil. (If I recall correctly, California is a huge net electrical importer, including from coal plants in Nevada.) Or will it be a nuclear-powered blue utopia? That's quite doable, actually, but as with border control I doubt your blue colleagues will allow it to happen.

Blue states already massively subsidize oil and coal production. We'd simply be getting resources on the open market. The New Confederate States of America would be the equivalent of Venezuela. It's pretty comical that some think Toyota and Honda would keep their rural factories running should there be a political split. Not going to happen. Those factories would be in Mexico because they're even better at repressing their labor force than Red State America. Those factories are in rural america because they're exploiting a loophole in our trade regime by siting them in America, but in the most third-world part of America.

Dear lord. I wish you were trolling, but I sense you actually think that. The economy of Texas will simply dry up and blow away without the support of blue america? That's delusional.

Anonymous wrote:
The economy of Texas--much like any other political entity with little intellectual capital and a decent source of natural resources--would of course not collapse. Heck, Mexico does pretty well too. As a political society, it's not really my cup of tea, but some folks like that model: great disparities of wealth, miniscule middle-class, almost-nonexistent regulations, etc, etc... Heck, we might come vacation on South Padre Island and spend some hard currency. Probably still be cheaper than going to the more upscale Mexican resorts.

Aimee4 wrote:And if you look at University of Texas, it scores quite well on the college rankings.

Anonymous wrote:

Aimee4 wrote:And if you look at University of Texas, it scores quite well on the college rankings.

Sure, but Austin's essentially the equivalent of West Berlin. If you think there won't be an immediate stream of refugees post-split you're fooling yourself.

takoma wrote:I love the fact that a thread I started to discuss how to cure divisiveness has turned into a celebration of the idea of splitting the country. I apologize for thinking that divisiveness is a bad thing.