Suppose we did become two countries, which one would be better off financially?

[rdean]

I said grain and beef. Not agriculture. They are related, but not the same.

Try again.

Grain is grass. Not terribly hard to grow.

Why don't you try and grow a wheat field in urban detroit then.

We'll wait.

Detroit is surrounded by open country.

 

[rikules]

First, take a look at the states that voted Democrat (blue) and the states that voted Republican (red).

Now, compare that to the states that "receive" LESS than one dollar back for every dollar they pay the federal government (blue) and the states that "receive" MORE than one dollar back for every dollar they pay the federal government.

Remember, Texas has oil wells.

What is this telling us?

The states that hate government the most, benefit the most from government.

The states that talk secession, benefit most from the government.

Say the US did split into red and blue countries. What kind of countries would they be?

You would have the wealthiest country in the world with a government surplus. And you would have a third world country deeply in debt.

Now, why would a party based mainly in red states, believe they are the ones to manage the country? We had that already for 8 years and look how that worked out, then look at their own states. What is that saying about their ability to manage economies? No making accusations. Just pointing out facts.

Imagine if some state such as California got to keep more of the money they give to the federal government instead of giving it to South Carolina and Alabama and Kentucky?

Just sayin'.

red states would be much better off.


my reasoning;


cons HATE liberals
and blue states


so every con in the country would leave every blue state and become citizens of red state America


since the military and police and militia are almost ALL conservatives they would bolt blue state America for red state America and they would take their weapons (tanks, jets, nuclear weapons) with them

leaving blue state America completely defenseless against its' enemies...

its' WORST enemy (red state America)
hating liberals and blue states as much as they do
would IMMEDIATELY declare war on blue state America
and, not waiting for the possibility of a surrender (cons LIKE to kill people and destroy things)
they would invade blue state America
kill as many liberals as they could
rape as many liberal women as they could
then immediately annex blue state America back into the United Conservative Christian States of America (complete with the stars and bars as their new flag)

 

[RadiomanATL]

Grain is grass. Not terribly hard to grow.

Why don't you try and grow a wheat field in urban detroit then.

We'll wait.

Detroit is surrounded by open country.

Not enough to support the rest of the population of the rest of your mythical utopia.

 

[rdean]

First, take a look at the states that voted Democrat (blue) and the states that voted Republican (red).

Now, compare that to the states that "receive" LESS than one dollar back for every dollar they pay the federal government (blue) and the states that "receive" MORE than one dollar back for every dollar they pay the federal government.

Remember, Texas has oil wells.

What is this telling us?

The states that hate government the most, benefit the most from government.

The states that talk secession, benefit most from the government.

Say the US did split into red and blue countries. What kind of countries would they be?

You would have the wealthiest country in the world with a government surplus. And you would have a third world country deeply in debt.

Now, why would a party based mainly in red states, believe they are the ones to manage the country? We had that already for 8 years and look how that worked out, then look at their own states. What is that saying about their ability to manage economies? No making accusations. Just pointing out facts.

Imagine if some state such as California got to keep more of the money they give to the federal government instead of giving it to South Carolina and Alabama and Kentucky?

Just sayin'.

red states would be much better off.


my reasoning;


cons HATE liberals
and blue states


so every con in the country would leave every blue state and become citizens of red state America


since the military and police and militia are almost ALL conservatives they would bolt blue state America for red state America and they would take their weapons (tanks, jets, nuclear weapons) with them

leaving blue state America completely defenseless against its' enemies...

its' WORST enemy (red state America)
hating liberals and blue states as much as they do
would IMMEDIATELY declare war on blue state America
and, not waiting for the possibility of a surrender (cons LIKE to kill people and destroy things)
they would invade blue state America
kill as many liberals as they could
rape as many liberal women as they could
then immediately annex blue state America back into the United Conservative Christian States of America (complete with the stars and bars as their new flag)

tanks, jets, nuclear weapons

All designed by scientists and engineers. Only 6% of scientists are Republican. Without their slaves, the Red States would quickly become a third world country operated by the "Christian Taliban". The only threat to the Blue States would be when they "snuck across the border" looking for work.

Considering their disdain for birth control, their population would explode. So would STDs.