If the United States split into 50 countries, would you like it?

RandomPoster

Platinum Member
May 22, 2017
2,584
1,792
970
Imagine your state being its own country. There would be no more federal government halfway across the country. Local communities would have more freedom to enforce their own moral standards and take care of themselves the way they see fit. The United States would not be a huge superpower getting involved in foreign wars.
 
th


*****SMILE*****



:)
 
Makes sense in a rough way but fifty isn't necessary. And it's been proposed before.

This one wants to split it into five:

Five-US-Regions1-685x445.jpg


Ironically it says "America" but completely ignores Canadian regions and Latin America let alone South America...​

This one has eleven but it's so geographically jagged it looks like a gerrymandered Congressional district:

 
Makes sense in a rough way but fifty isn't necessary. And it's been proposed before.

This one wants to split it into five:

Five-US-Regions1-685x445.jpg


This one has eleven but it's so geographically jagged it looks like a gerrymandered Congressional district:


The Midwest, from Minnesota and the Dakotas down, combined with the rural South, including Texas, and finally Alaska thrown in would make a good country. We would have the majority of the food and oil. The rest of the country could try and get by on artificial food and green energy.
 
Makes sense in a rough way but fifty isn't necessary. And it's been proposed before.

This one wants to split it into five:

Five-US-Regions1-685x445.jpg


Ironically it says "America" but completely ignores Canadian regions and Latin America let alone South America...​

This one has eleven but it's so geographically jagged it looks like a gerrymandered Congressional district:


Personally?

I think we should divide into even smaller units.

I think all the mega cities, or most metropolitan areas should should be responsible for the area that is closest to the land and folks nearest them.

We should go back to the Greek city-state or Mayan City State model. Only when the leaders are directly responsive to the people they govern, is corruption at it's lowest and the bureaucracy the most responsive to the needs of the people.

This is the best way to de-centralize power, and make life more democratic and representative for the needs of all.

We need to find a way to integrate rural representation into urban districts. Other than that, let the cities rule.

2050: What if cities ruled the world?
2050: What if cities ruled the world?
". . .The growth of cities was mainly a phenomenon of the West during and after the industrial revolution. But urbanization is now predominantly a non-Western phenomenon. Economic and political power are shifting to cities and megacities outside the West, and to cities in Asia in particular.

Urbanization is also swelling the ranks of the middle classes, again increasingly outside the West. In short, urbanization trends shift economics, and, by association, politics to the cities. A strong implication for this scenario is the impact it will have on the public sector. It will result in the decentralization of government, moving responsibility for policy competence to the municipal level. Another word for that might be fragmentation – the reduction of the authority and fragmentation of central government.

The implications for business are also strong. Increasingly, firms will operate along mega-corridors between cities as part of global supply chains. For multinational companies, cities are already the nodal points which represent value clusters. Companies which operate in the global sphere identify the niches cities offer them and act accordingly. For them, cities, not countries, supply the value chain.

This scenario also sees a widening of the urban-rural divide. Rural and semi-rural areas will lose influence along with revenue – the power of the purse.

Nation states and international cooperation will not disappear. But there is a strong argument for decentralizing power and policy as much as possible to the municipal level. Cities are less bureaucratic and sluggish than higher levels of governance; they are better able to experiment, innovate and diffuse best practice.. . "
 

YUMPIN YIMMINY I live in Sweden!

This is great news. Now I gotta go get some wimmins. And some meatballs.

Just don't make me drive a Volvo :puke:

Fun fact --- when Monty Python's "Life of Brian" came out, theaters in Sweden advertised it as "the film so funny it was banned in Norway". :rofl:
 
Last edited:
Democrats did it during the Lincoln administration and they haven't changed a bit. The only time they call for secession is during republican administrations.
 
Democrats did it during the Lincoln administration and they haven't changed a bit. The only time they call for secession is during republican administrations.

I'll ask Santa to bring you a history book next Xmas. The Confederacy had no political parties, and in the last election before the Confederacy the Democrats got shut out.
 
Imagine your state being its own country. There would be no more federal government halfway across the country. Local communities would have more freedom to enforce their own moral standards and take care of themselves the way they see fit. The United States would not be a huge superpower getting involved in foreign wars.
This WOULD be interesting. Indiana, the state where I live, would be very self sufficient. We have plenty of farms here and most crops are grown in this state. So yes, this isn't a bad idea.
 

That top chart shows Malaysia as having a similar GDP to Minnesota. While their GDP may be similar, Malaysia's per-capita GDP is less than 1/5 that of Minnesota's.
VgaXd2_YpfU5errsVd-hEZg210ExTn5hG3p2XIb0HPQ.png

nhmbritgiio31.png


Better?

WTF, now I'm in Österreich??

Damn, whole 'nother language to practice now.

"Ve haf vays off making you talk... " :eusa_shifty:
 
Imagine your state being its own country. There would be no more federal government halfway across the country. Local communities would have more freedom to enforce their own moral standards and take care of themselves the way they see fit. The United States would not be a huge superpower getting involved in foreign wars.

Kewl. Then there would be no federal government to stop me from invading Minnesota and Illinois, and plundering them for whatever they had there.

I'd kinda like that. :04:
 

That top chart shows Malaysia as having a similar GDP to Minnesota. While their GDP may be similar, Malaysia's per-capita GDP is less than 1/5 that of Minnesota's.
VgaXd2_YpfU5errsVd-hEZg210ExTn5hG3p2XIb0HPQ.png

nhmbritgiio31.png


Better?

WTF, now I'm in Österreich??

Damn, whole 'nother language to practice now.

"Ve haf vays off making you talk... " :eusa_shifty:

Won't Lucy be pleased? :71:

 
Imagine your state being its own country. There would be no more federal government halfway across the country. Local communities would have more freedom to enforce their own moral standards and take care of themselves the way they see fit. The United States would not be a huge superpower getting involved in foreign wars.
Sounds great. Far better than the shit show we have now.
 
Imagine your state being its own country. There would be no more federal government halfway across the country. Local communities would have more freedom to enforce their own moral standards and take care of themselves the way they see fit. The United States would not be a huge superpower getting involved in foreign wars.
I think about it all the time. California would be a large powerful nation and I would be so much better off financially not supporting the low IQ southern states.
 
Democrats did it during the Lincoln administration and they haven't changed a bit. The only time they call for secession is during republican administrations.
I’m not a D or an R, but would much prefer a break up of the USA.
 
Makes sense in a rough way but fifty isn't necessary. And it's been proposed before.

This one wants to split it into five:

Five-US-Regions1-685x445.jpg


This one has eleven but it's so geographically jagged it looks like a gerrymandered Congressional district:


The Midwest, from Minnesota and the Dakotas down, combined with the rural South, including Texas, and finally Alaska thrown in would make a good country. We would have the majority of the food and oil. The rest of the country could try and get by on artificial food and green energy.
We in California produce most of the food that the USA eats. As for oil it is a non compete with our public transport.
 

Forum List

Back
Top