Should Texas or any other states should or be allowed to secede from the United States?

you're all living in fantasy land if you think for one minute that Constitution stands for anything. the military controls the country, they have the last word and there isn't anyone in this country that controls them if any state thinks they can secede............PERIOD

Yes, they definitely have the right to...the question is would the federal government allow them to exercise that right? The answer would be no...not in a million years.

Originally posted by thewanger
The states give power to the federal government. The federal government does not give power to the states. The states can take away that power at any time. Read The Constitution.

In cases like this Federal trumps State always as no state has the authourity and if it thinks of doing it all Federal money and taxdollars can be cut off to any entity who is considering seceeding.

reply to post by anumohi

unfortunately the military controls all the country and all the nuclear weapons. they have the last word.

Nuclear weapons as a response to a rebellious state is kind of like burning down your house when someone breaks in.

"Let's reduce them to rubble and force them to become part of the nation so we have to spend more money to rebuild them."

the government and the president controls nothing

This is a kinda-sorta statement. This is true in the sense that the President would probably be declared unfit for duty if he ordered military action against a non-violent secession. I've got friends and family all over the U.S. - some are people I've met in person, others are people I've known through the internet and phone communications, and still others are people I've met through the military. Anyone who tells me to engage the family of my friends and family can go suck a lemon, or my gun barrel, depending upon which one is required to make them pipe-down.

and for any reason the military and the private contractors don't get their due they will quickly slap the insurrectionists back into reality.

This is not really going to be an issue. If Missouri were to secede from the union - I would still be getting paid in U.S. Dollars by DFAS, Cleveland for my reserve drills, and still be getting paid at one of my jobs (a contractor and sub-contractor for defense systems), likely in U.S. Dollars. So long as the national government can print money out of thin air - anyone with a job working for that government is guaranteed to be paid. ... Of course, pay-rates may not keep up with inflation, but that's not a problem linked to secession, that's a problem linked to poor monetary policies and practices at the national level.

Now, my job at the local restaurant may shift over to payment in a different currency, or otherwise be impacted by the secession - but I don't see a change in currency being done very rapidly. The U.S. dollar would still hold far more value than any state-printed tinder. The only other thing that may happen is if the state allowed businesses to create their own currency systems (IE - Microsoft Points, Facebook Credits, etc) and allow far more freedom in that respect.

Now, the real question would be whether or not Missouri would like the fact that I'm also an employee of, technically, another government. Since quite a few in Missouri are federal military or former federal military, this would be a considerable issue. Would I still be allowed to be a citizen of Missouri -and- remain in service with the U.S. Navy?

The converse also applies - would the U.S. Navy allow me to be a citizen of Missouri and serve? Would I be grandfathered in, or would I be considered a security risk?

The military, itself, would be split on the idea of secession. Personally - whether I agree with it or not at the time, I don't see military action as a good idea, and would openly and actively oppose military action against a seceeding state(s). It's simply not worth an ideological battle - no state is retarded enough to try and think they can completely do their own thing - they will still have to interact with what remains of the U.S., and will have to have a pretty good game-plan for how to handle things like interstate highways, federal military bases, federal employees residing in the state, currency concerns, etc.

It is no longer a necessity that the country 'stick together' in such a literal sense to survive and excel. There should be no call for military action, as the result of any would be far more economically and socially destructive than the secession could ever be.

you have to understand where and what for all your tax dollars have been doing since Eisenhower.

They have been doing far too many things of such varied and conflicting natures to reduce it down to a few sentences regarding a hypothetical scenario entailing secession.

I'm all for it. I've even read articles in which Gov. Rick Perry has made conversation of the possibilities of doing so. I don't support the man, but I'm down for a secession. And I think you'll find a large majority of Texans will agree.

Texas Secede

Originally posted by Jazzyguy
Secession! What Would It Look Like If Red States Formed Their Own Country?

From me, the answer is yes. It's just my opinion, I don't know the details regarding the technicality or the legality of it, but the general principle is you shouldn't force a state to stay within a UNITED States if it's no longer wish to do so.

LOL

That article had me rolling with its propaganda.

The reason why the North invaded the South is because they wanted to retain the Southern citizens as tax slaves.

If the North thought that the South would economically implode, they could have simply let the South secede and sat back and watched the fireworks show.

Liberals always argue that the States have no right to secede precisely because they know their precious welfare programs would implode as all the businesses and jobs moved into the economically free zone created.

But I'm glad to see that some liberals have become so completely uneducated about how their own welfare system works that they actually think allowing states to leave the union is a good idea in their mind.

Public education coming back to bite the dems in their own rear end? LOL

Perhaps I should just shut up and applaud the author since he's ultimately doing libertarians a service.

I make this comment seriously - the propaganda was sooo bad that I thought I was reading a spoof piece hahahah.

I mean can't believe someone is that ignorant.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by Jazzyguy
Secession! What Would It Look Like If Red States Formed Their Own Country?

From me, the answer is yes. It's just my opinion, I don't know the details regarding the technicality or the legality of it, but the general principle is you shouldn't force a state to stay within a UNITED States if it's no longer wish to do so.

LOL

That article had me rolling with its propaganda.

The reason why the North invaded the South is because they wanted to retain the Southern citizens as tax slaves.

If the North thought that the South would economically implode, they could have simply let the South secede and sat back and watched the fireworks show.

Liberals always argue that the States have no right to secede precisely because they know their precious welfare programs would implode as all the businesses and jobs moved into the economically free zone created.

But I'm glad to see that some liberals have become so completely uneducated about how their own welfare system works that they actually think allowing states to leave the union is a good idea in their mind.

Doing this again, one day later

You didn't bother to refutiate Mississippi's declaration in the other thread, so you just brought it here

I really don't care anymore if they want to secede, I really don't get em and they don't get me, I think we would be better separate. I am sure the laborers in the "economically free" states would get tired of earning $.40 REAL QUICK, maybe they would enjoy bring in Mexicans or Savi's? They love em in the Free places



Here is Mississippi's Declaration

Mississippi

[Copied by Justin Sanders from "Journal of the State Convention", (Jackson, MS: E. Barksdale, State Printer, 1861), pp. 86-88]

A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union.
In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

reply to post by Janky Red


case in point.

so you think we should let states secede?

are you in agreement with the author of the article?

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by Janky Red

 

case in point.

so you think we should let states secede?

are you in agreement with the author of the article?

Yes - I think people should be free to establish a place with rules like they desire, I have never been against this,
nobody is doing it, I wouldn't stop them and I would be vehemently AGAINST being violent to prevent them from doing so.


To some degree, I think Texas would not be able to harbor a diverse population and I think they would have a hard time retaining menial laborers. I also think they civilization would break down once corporations produced
an even more extreme version of what we have here today, Texans would become wise and others would trumpet
what you dig to the grave. I think Texas would have to accept a larger influx of Mexicans to be the hands, non
Business owners would consider going to a place that provides a base line for work because the hire in wage is already elevated at time of hire.

IT still wouldn't be what you want - they have some pretty archaic laws there, might more there in a month myself, love the torture I suppose

reply to post by Janky Red

I really don't care anymore if they want to secede, I really don't get em and they don't get me, I think we would be better separate. I am sure the laborers in the "economically free" states would get tired of earning $.40 REAL QUICK, maybe they would enjoy bring in Mexicans or Savi's? They love em in the Free places

There will always be stupid people who hire the cheapest labor around to build what they build for as cheap as possible. There's a reason the term "cheap" in close proximity to "product" generally means one of poor quality.

Businesses have a responsibility to their customers that must be shouldered by the employees and directed by the managers. The parts we build where I work are milspec. Our employer will hire people at the lowest price point he can negotiate; he's not afraid to hire people because he sure as hell isn't afraid to fire them. Wages for what I do are generally pretty standard across the industry irregardless of minimum wage laws (we generally get above minimum wage).

Sure - they could get some Mexicans in there and set up the Company Store - but they'd soon be out of work because they would not meet ISO 9000/9001 certifications and no longer be eligible to fill contracts within the defense industry.

You're not going to buy cars that fall apart or shop at stores where no one speaks English.

Smart employers hire employees for their contribution to the goal of the business and negotiate pay to have an employee that can come to work not stressed about finances and feeling like they are improving their life by working for that employer.

Working for an employer is just like working as a private contractor. When I seek employment - I am contracting my service and experience to another individual(s) at a negotiated compensation. They are not just trying to get work out of me. I am trying to make a sale to them. This goes both ways - they can be ripped off, and I can be ripped off.

The example is more extreme in the case of private contractors like electricians. Some of those guys -seriously- overcharge for their services. I could about equal my hypothetical active duty military pay (by time you factor in benefits such as housing) charging only 50% of what some of these electricians charge.

Labor unions with a high percentage of the employee market can also extort pay raises out of companies with no valid reason. Why should a guy manning an impact drill on an assembly line get $15/hour entry for what amounts to an entry level job that just about any human being not physically disabled can be trained to do? Why should I have to pay more for a car, even though I'm working at a more appropriate wage at a smaller company, because these clowns all band together and mob-rape the employer?

I'd say that even if I had a job working there. Sure - getting paid $15/hr for something that requires no certificates of know-how is pretty nice, but rather unreasonable.

Let's assume for a minute that through secession or a repeal of the federal government the red and blue states suddenly became two separate countries.

Would both survive? I'd say yes. They would have enough collective resources to exist as two of the top gdp states in the world.

Would they both be economically equal? No.

The blue states have a higher collective GDP. That's a given. They would presumably have more money to work with. Until you factor in debt.

The blue states have much higher debt and a much more extensive operating drain than the red states.

The red states have a lower GDP but compared to the blue have much less debt and operating costs are lower.

So,
Who would do better?

The one that lived within their means.

Who is more likely to do that?

You already know.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

Once again for the small children: Read Your Constitution! of the United States cuz obviously your foreign.

reply to post by Jazzyguy
Duh okiedokie moron!

Originally posted by Jazzyguy
Secession! What Would It Look Like If Red States Formed Their Own Country?

From me, the answer is yes. It's just my opinion, I don't know the details regarding the technicality or the legality of it, but the general principle is you shouldn't force a state to stay within a UNITED States if it's no longer wish to do so.

That is not it, the U.S. or the United States is a seperate and distinct coutry with it's own flag, laws, code and police force. These united states of America are seperate and distinct already, we just need to get OUR governors to stop accepting the fruad and coercion of the buerocrats in Washington!!