Total Posts:17|Showing Posts:1-17
Jump to topic:

Dividing up America

Cowboy0108
Posts: 420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 12:33:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
America should split into the following nations:
A. GA, TN, AL, MS, FL, SC, NC, WV, VA, LA, KY, TX, OK, IN
B. New England, IL, D.C., MN, WI, MI,
C. KA, Nebraska, IW, ND, SD, MO, AK, Montana, Idaho, Utah
D. CA, NV, AR, NM, OR, WA,
Alaska and Hawaii will go to whoever will have them
Conditions:
A. The split is peaceful
B. The states cannot change location
C. The debt is split up according to the percentage of the population in each location...Ex B has 50% of the population...It gets 50% of the debt
D. The military is split up based on where the most volunteers come from...Ex. A has 45%(just hypothetical) of the military volunteers, it gets 45% of the military
E. All nations remain republics

What do you think...Please, for every con, mention a pro. For every pro, mention a con. When you answer state your state and which nation(this will help me see where the different opinions come from). Also, state for or against the split.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 12:36:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Or just leave the states on their own and abolish the federal government. That would be disastrous for the south though, as they consume the vast majority of federal welfare.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 1:28:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/5/2013 12:33:40 AM, Cowboy0108 wrote:
America should split into the following nations:
A. GA, TN, AL, MS, FL, SC, NC, WV, VA, LA, KY, TX, OK, IN
B. New England, IL, D.C., MN, WI, MI,
C. KA, Nebraska, IW, ND, SD, MO, AK, Montana, Idaho, Utah
D. CA, NV, AR, NM, OR, WA,
Alaska and Hawaii will go to whoever will have them
Conditions:
A. The split is peaceful
B. The states cannot change location
C. The debt is split up according to the percentage of the population in each location...Ex B has 50% of the population...It gets 50% of the debt
D. The military is split up based on where the most volunteers come from...Ex. A has 45%(just hypothetical) of the military volunteers, it gets 45% of the military
E. All nations remain republics

What do you think...Please, for every con, mention a pro. For every pro, mention a con. When you answer state your state and which nation(this will help me see where the different opinions come from). Also, state for or against the split.

A. Agree
B. Agree
C. Hell no, states take care of their OWN debt. New York has a balanced budget, southern states have unbalanced budgets as a general rule. They pay their own debts.
D. Military personnel go to their home states
E. Agree
F (proposal). All people should get a voucher to move if they disagree with the general political ideology of their new nation. There is no way in hell you're making me stay in Fundieland with Texas and Mississippi, since the idiots there would likely pick someone like Rick Perry or Santorum as their president, who will then gleefully piss on my First Amendment rights to not have congress enforce exclusively religious principles on the general populace. NO.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
Cowboy0108
Posts: 420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 1:37:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/5/2013 1:28:31 AM, drhead wrote:
At 4/5/2013 12:33:40 AM, Cowboy0108 wrote:
America should split into the following nations:
A. GA, TN, AL, MS, FL, SC, NC, WV, VA, LA, KY, TX, OK, IN
B. New England, IL, D.C., MN, WI, MI,
C. KA, Nebraska, IW, ND, SD, MO, AK, Montana, Idaho, Utah
D. CA, NV, AR, NM, OR, WA,
Alaska and Hawaii will go to whoever will have them
Conditions:
A. The split is peaceful
B. The states cannot change location
C. The debt is split up according to the percentage of the population in each location...Ex B has 50% of the population...It gets 50% of the debt
D. The military is split up based on where the most volunteers come from...Ex. A has 45%(just hypothetical) of the military volunteers, it gets 45% of the military
E. All nations remain republics

What do you think...Please, for every con, mention a pro. For every pro, mention a con. When you answer state your state and which nation(this will help me see where the different opinions come from). Also, state for or against the split.

A. Agree
B. Agree
C. Hell no, states take care of their OWN debt. New York has a balanced budget, southern states have unbalanced budgets as a general rule. They pay their own debts.
D. Military personnel go to their home states
E. Agree
F (proposal). All people should get a voucher to move if they disagree with the general political ideology of their new nation. There is no way in hell you're making me stay in Fundieland with Texas and Mississippi, since the idiots there would likely pick someone like Rick Perry or Santorum as their president, who will then gleefully piss on my First Amendment rights to not have congress enforce exclusively religious principles on the general populace. NO.

I do agree with your voucher idea, but still support getting out of the same country as California, land of the free, home of the gays.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 9:36:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Instead of dividing the federation, we could just decentralize the federal government
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
suttichart.denpruektham
Posts: 1,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 10:21:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Debt should go to where the money is invested. For example if latest congressional budget indicated that 15 percent of public money is going to highway say, Texas, tha;t should be where the debt go.

Military personal should go to where there original states. Problem is military hardware , intelligent resource, installation, nuclear arsenal etc. should go to the state that would succeed the US, like how the Russia now inherited most of military asset from USSR.
FolkCat1234
Posts: 12
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 11:13:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
No. Historically, one of the strengths of America was its culture. If we were split, the results would be disastrous. What if President Rick Perry of the Southern Federation decides he doesn't like the godless heathens of the New England Republic? Say Prime Minister Hickenlooper has a border dispute with the Southwestern Coalition? I, for one, do not want the possibility of living through any civil wars in my lifetime. Americans need each other for all of our distinct traits. Sure, we could use a bit more states' rights, but secession is foolish.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 11:47:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/5/2013 9:36:57 AM, DanT wrote:
Instead of dividing the federation, we could just decentralize the federal government

Yah, why chop up the baby when you can just remove the tumor?
Celarix
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 6:43:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I find the concept interesting, but in the sense of a true, unadulterated test of which ideology, which economic method works best in the long run. I propose dividing the nation into Red States and Blue States - Red States get Romney, Blue States get Obama. Then, we can try true conservatism and true liberalism and see which one really works out over time. A multiparty division could also be tried.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 6:47:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/5/2013 6:43:38 PM, Celarix wrote:
I find the concept interesting, but in the sense of a true, unadulterated test of which ideology, which economic method works best in the long run. I propose dividing the nation into Red States and Blue States - Red States get Romney, Blue States get Obama. Then, we can try true conservatism and true liberalism and see which one really works out over time. A multiparty division could also be tried.

Yeah... cause Romney is the epitome of a true conservative.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 7:11:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/5/2013 12:36:01 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Or just leave the states on their own and abolish the federal government. That would be disastrous for the south though, as they consume the vast majority of federal welfare.

Nah, the welfare recipients down there would just flee up the blue country. Or die.

And the rest would be happier.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 7:25:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/5/2013 12:33:40 AM, Cowboy0108 wrote:
America should split into the following nations:
A. GA, TN, AL, MS, FL, SC, NC, WV, VA, LA, KY, TX, OK, IN

No way we are taking WV.

B. New England, IL, D.C., MN, WI, MI,

Nobody wants New Jersey either, maybe we can make it a suburb of Puerto Rico or something.

C. KA, Nebraska, IW, ND, SD, MO, AK, Montana, Idaho, Utah

What state is IW again?

D. CA, NV, AR, NM, OR, WA,

Alaska and Hawaii will go to whoever will have them

Alaska was in C, did they already secede?

Conditions:
A. The split is peaceful
B. The states cannot change location

We need this rule because states moving around is a problem?

C. The debt is split up according to the percentage of the population in each location...Ex B has 50% of the population...It gets 50% of the debt

No way, Washington DC made the debt, it's thiers, B gets it.

D. The military is split up based on where the most volunteers come from...Ex. A has 45%(just hypothetical) of the military volunteers, it gets 45% of the military

E. All nations remain republics

Crap, becoming the dictator of A is out of the question then? Can we still call it Sidewalkeria, I've already got a cool flag picked out and everything.

What do you think...Please, for every con, mention a pro. For every pro, mention a con. When you answer state your state and which nation(this will help me see where the different opinions come from). Also, state for or against the split.

I live in Georgia an A state of course, and no, if I can't be the dictator of Sidewalkeria, then forget it, I don't support dissolving the US.

And let's see, a con would be Bernie Madoff, and a pro would be Peyton Manning.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/5/2013 8:10:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
We shouldn't divide America. However, we should elect a President and a Congress willing to work together and compromise so we can save this country.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2013 2:06:18 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/5/2013 7:11:53 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 4/5/2013 12:36:01 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Or just leave the states on their own and abolish the federal government. That would be disastrous for the south though, as they consume the vast majority of federal welfare.

Nah, the welfare recipients down there would just flee up the blue country. Or die.

And the rest would be happier.

If it's good to let them die off then why is it not good to kill them off?

What does it really mean to have the right to life?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
APB
Posts: 267
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2013 6:44:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
As I'm not from America, I don't know much about the individual states. What I do know is that splitting up before you've cleaned up your collective mess will probably screw you all big time.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2013 7:15:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/6/2013 2:06:18 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 4/5/2013 7:11:53 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 4/5/2013 12:36:01 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Or just leave the states on their own and abolish the federal government. That would be disastrous for the south though, as they consume the vast majority of federal welfare.

Nah, the welfare recipients down there would just flee up the blue country. Or die.

And the rest would be happier.

If it's good to let them die off then why is it not good to kill them off?
Some of them won't die off if you let them die. They'll do something useful. Also, you'd then justify violent retaliation.


What does it really mean to have the right to life?
It means that you won't take forcible action against another's life unless they take forcible action against yours, thus making it irrational for them to do so-- that is, rational for them to respect your "right to life" by leaving it alone.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.