HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » What Would Happen If The ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:20 AM

What Would Happen If The Feds Let States Go Who Want To Secede:

What would happen if the feds let states go peacefully?
First of all, "it would be excellent financial news for those of us left behind if Obama were to grant a number of the rebel states their wish," says Dana Milbank at The Washington Post. That's because most states threatening to secede are part of the old Confederacy, and "low tax" southern red states typically get "far more from the federal government in expenditures than they pay in taxes." Each California and New Jersey taxpayer, for example, pays thousands each year to subsidize residents of Louisiana and Alabama the lone exception is Texas, which, thanks to oil revenue, comes out about even, tax-wise.

And what about residents of unshackled red states?
If you're in a state intent on bolting the Union, there is good tax news, says MarketWatch's Arends: "You will be liberated from the sheer living hell of the federal tax code." Of course, you'll also "get fewer government services." Also, your newly independent nation "will go into recession, and fast." The feds would take back their highway, airport, and university research funding, and maybe even demand a refund, says the Fort Worth Star-Telegram in an editorial. Obama would close down or repossess federal courthouses, prisons, national parks, and military bases that pump tens of billions each into local economies. Plus, Texas and other newly minted nations would have to pay for their own militaries, says Jack Simmons at the UT-Arlington Shorthorn. "We would also need some form of health care, some sort of disaster relief, a postal service, welfare, social security, FDA, CIA, FBI the list goes on," totaling well over a trillion dollars. "And that's just start-up costs."

http://theweek.com/article/index/236871/what-would-happen-if-texas-actually-seceded

31 replies, 2780 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 31 replies Author Time Post
Reply What Would Happen If The Feds Let States Go Who Want To Secede: (Original post)
EV_Ares Nov 2012 OP
cali Nov 2012 #1
H2O Man Nov 2012 #25
Angleae Nov 2012 #2
fasttense Nov 2012 #4
Angleae Nov 2012 #5
thesquanderer Nov 2012 #10
Angleae Nov 2012 #11
thesquanderer Nov 2012 #23
Aerows Nov 2012 #24
EOTE Nov 2012 #8
Renew Deal Nov 2012 #16
Jester Messiah Nov 2012 #17
Capt. Obvious Nov 2012 #26
jmowreader Nov 2012 #3
onenote Nov 2012 #6
Angleae Nov 2012 #7
SDjack Nov 2012 #18
jmowreader Nov 2012 #31
caseymoz Nov 2012 #19
Motown_Johnny Nov 2012 #9
cordelia Nov 2012 #12
JoeyT Nov 2012 #13
wandy Nov 2012 #30
OldDem2012 Nov 2012 #14
Paladin Nov 2012 #15
RC Nov 2012 #20
cherokeeprogressive Nov 2012 #21
MineralMan Nov 2012 #22
BlueMan Votes Nov 2012 #27
JHB Nov 2012 #28
jwirr Nov 2012 #29

Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:39 AM

1. this is one of the silliest what ifs evah

fantasy politics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:31 AM

25. While I fully agree

with your first line, and the first word in your second line .... I do not think it worthy of being ranked as fantasy "politics." It is fantasy nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:49 AM

2. "it would be excellent financial news for those of us left behind" WTF

The national debt currently sits at $16.26 trillion. The states that stay would have to deal with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:39 AM

4. As the Darth Vader of the RepubliCON party said, "Deficits Don't Matter."

Really they don't. It's all a con by the RepubliCONS. If deficits were a real problem, America would have gone under when the deficits blew up under Nixon, Raygun and the bushes. Yet, all the while they were piling up the debt not a word was spoken. Not a problem with the debt was mentioned. No one saw it coming? Really?

The minute a Democratic President takes office, suddenly the debt becomes a problem. Oh come on.

The debt crisis is a sham, used to cut the social safety net when needed. If the American people would eliminate Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and any help for the middle class and poor, the RepubliCONS would suddenly shut up about the deficit.

There are 3 things that caused this deficit:

The Wars

The Tax give aways to the filthy rich

The Great Recession

And yet all of the solutions RepubliCONS come up with do NOT address any of the real causes. Funny huh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fasttense (Reply #4)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:47 AM

5. The problem is, if all those state leave, how do the remaning ones pay for it.

It's far too much money for the remaining 20-25 states to cover (and that assumes other states don't bolt for other reasons). Interest payments are $220 billion or more/year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #5)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:17 AM

10. Except for Texas...

...the states that want to secede take more revenue from the federal government than they provide. Therefore, the remaining union would be in better financial shape if the other secessions happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #10)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:29 AM

11. And you think that when they leave, the projects the money was spent on just stops?

Like the CDC & NASA, not to mention Social Security. With the states of AL, AK, AR, AZ, FL, GA, ID, IN, KA, KY, LA, MI, MO, MS, NE, NC, ND, OK, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VI, WV, WY leaving, federal tax income drops by just over a trillion dollars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #11)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:12 AM

23. Since you mention Social Security...

To answer the question the way you posted it in your subject line, yes, if the states left, a lot of projects money was spent on just stops. You mention Social Security. If those state were not in the union, then the federal government would no longer need to send social security checks to those residents. Though that's not the best example, since social security funding is not related to the deficit anyway. But along those lines, the federal government would not have to provide other services... disaster relief, highway support, medicare/medicaid subsidies, etc.

Obviously, none of this is going to happen, but the point is, except for Texas, those states are, to use the Republican vernacular, takers. As others have pointed out, that's the irony... the states most up in arms about what they perceive as the government's socialist Robin Hood tendencies are largely the ones that most benefit from it. They get more from the federal government (per person) than they pay.

However, you are correct in the sense that, it's not as simple as saying, "hey, they provide 1.1 trillion in revenue but they take 1.2 trillion back (or whatever), so we'd be financially better off without them," because some things, like defense spending which goes to firms in those states, would not be eliminated... it would be shifted to projects in the remaining states, so that spending indeed would not drop just because those states are gone. But OTOH, once those jobs are moved to the remaining union states, the tax revenues from those states would increase as well! So the calculus is a bit complicated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fasttense (Reply #4)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:26 AM

24. Precisely

If Romney would have won the election, does anyone *really* think we'd be talking about a "fiscal cliff"?

No. We'd be discussing the gear up to invade Iran with absolutely no discussion of how to pay for it. It happens every time. Republicans care about the deficit until they get into office, and then they come up with ways to drive it up as far as possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:07 AM

8. It would be easier to pay off that debt if we didn't have to worry about...

all those states who take in far more from the government than they pay in taxes. These states are the "welfare moms" that republicans cry so incessantly about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:09 AM

16. The states that leave take their share of the national debt with them.

So the debt goes down and the payer pool becomes more reliable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:14 AM

17. Hah, no. They helped rack it up, they'll still be getting a bill for their share. [nt]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:33 AM

26. 47% of the states are moochers - let them leave

24 / 50+DC = 47%

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:30 AM

3. The thing is, states don't want to secede

A handful of whiny teabaggers want to secede. The Texas petition has 70,000 names on it. In Texas that's nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmowreader (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:53 AM

6. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmowreader (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:55 AM

7. True, but it's still an interesting scenario to analyze.

And that's all it will be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #7)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:17 AM

18. Let's make it more interesting.

For example, two reasons why the scenario will not occur.
1. The seceding States would come under political control of the RW Xian hate mongers, causing them to be isolated by the modern nations of the world. They would be ruined economically by sanctions, just as is happening to Iran.
2. The remaining USA would be too small to continue as the world's leading aggressor nation. That role would be assumed by another Nation. Our capitalists would be ruined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SDjack (Reply #18)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:14 PM

31. Let's make it really interesting

We have 48 contiguous states, a lot of them are landlocked, and none of them can survive on their own because none of them make or grow all the things necessary for life. Because states would no longer have federal money coming in, they would live off tariffs and higher state taxes.

Let us say you run the Food City in Bristol, Tennessee, and you need oranges to sell. Eating oranges come from California, and there are four states between California and Tennessee. Under the United States they can't charge duties and imposts on interstate shipments; under the Separate Nations the individual countries would have to. Your choices would then be to pay duty to AZ, NM, TX and AR (expensive) or airfreight food to TN (more expensive). The third alternative is to create a European Union-style trade agreement between the states.

Currency would be another problem. No central government means no centralized money. One of the founders' wisest decisions was to write into the constitution prohibitions against states either printing money or declaring tangible goods like tobacco to be usable as money. America is strong because her money is strong, and it's strong because there's only one kind. Under 48 nations interstate commerce would require currency exchanges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmowreader (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:17 AM

19. And how many of those signatures are not from Texas?


I can see at least some people signing just to say, "Yeah, go already."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:09 AM

9. They don't really want to secede, this is a temper tantrum.

Just like Rush was going to move to Costa Rica if (then) Sen. Obama won. It is all bluster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:35 AM

12. This again????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:52 AM

13. The right wing religious fanatics would focus

on wiping out all dissenters in their midst, and within ten years you'd be surrounded by what amounts to Afghanistan back when the Taliban was still in control. I doubt y'all would enjoy it much more than we would. We (liberals and minorities in the south) would be dead pretty quickly. You blue states would have to deal with suicide bombers and constant border skirmishes, assuming they didn't wipe you out on the first try because 90% of their crippled economy was spent building up their military.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoeyT (Reply #13)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:18 PM

30. The first question would be WHAT right wing religious fanatics.....

They come in many flavors. Who would be in control....
The cathlocis?
The bapstis?
Those folk that scream about Jesus while dancing with a snake?
I suspect they would have to fight their religious wars long before they built a military and got serious about a civil war.
Even if a state survived that before a collation could be made with any other state they might have to fight it out over who's invisable cloud sprite was the most righteous.
Fortunately, for them, it just ain't gonna happen. Just some Teapublican whinnying cause they didn't get their way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:55 AM

14. This is extremely lazy journalism. Milbank must already be on Holiday vacation....

A few thousand mostly racist idiots sign petitions wanting to secede and Milbank milks that weak crap into a full-blown article and his editors at the Post let him get away with it. Both Milbank and the Post are better than this....what the Hell are they thinking?

It's also interesting that Milbank states "most states threatening to secede are part of the old Confederacy", when petitions were also received from wannabe secessionists in New York, Colorado, North Dakota, Indiana, Kentucky, New Jersey, Oregon, and Montana. If I recall my old classes in US History correctly, unless they've been radically revised, NONE of those states were part of the old Confederacy. It is additionally notable that absolutely NO states have made any official request to secede from the Union, just a few thousand individuals pissed about losing the recent Presidential election.

I've got a newsflash for those folks unhappy enough to sign such an ignorant petition. You folks are welcome to leave the US anytime you wish...pack your bags, renounce your citizenship, and leave your passports with any US Customs agent at your port of departure. Goodbye and good riddance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:57 AM

15. Blue State Jack-Off Material. Ain't Going To Happen. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:32 AM

20. I gota question.

 

If a state does secede, it is being assumed they will no longer be a part of the United States.

Wouldn't those states just regress to being a Territory again, instead? I can't see the Federal Government, being the colonial power it is, risk losing all those mineral rights, canon fodder and having to fortify hundreds of thousands of miles of new borders against all those new evil furnieers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:36 AM

21. Still with this ridiculous shit?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:20 AM

22. There are no states that want to secede. Not one.

There are residents of some states who want their state to secede, but there are exactly zero states where anything near a majority of residents want to secede.

It is a very important distinction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:34 AM

27. well...we'd need to buy all new flags...

 

a small price to pay to be relieved of texas and florida, i'd say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:50 AM

28. I'd ride my unicorn to get out from under the flock of flying pigs...

...'cause if you think pigeons are bad....


Once again, there are no STATES that want to secede. There's just scattered bunches of whining crybabies clicking on Internet polls. Which makes them just as useful as any other Internet poll: less than birdcage liner, because parakeets can't crap on pixels.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EV_Ares (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:59 AM

29. It is not so much that STATES want to secede as that there are some people in those states that

want to secede.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread