Your opinion wanted. Should the use break up?

Should this union remain together?

Here is the reason for the question. The US is not an ethnic nation like France or Germany. It is a political nation. Once the reason for union ceases, then why remain together? This national is very polarized. About the last time this nation was this polarized was around the time of the Civil War. We broke up then. Is it time to break up again?

We basically have to nations. Blue states that are comfortable with a cradle to grave welfare state like they have in Western Europe. Then there are the Red States that want as little government as possible.

So my question to you is, should we go our separate ways. Should Red and Blue states get a divorce? Is the marriage over?

 

We already have a federal system. The blue States already get to raise taxes as high as they want and have their own state healthcare systems if they like. There is plenty of room for each blue state to be as blue as they are willing to pay for. The problem is when the blue states want to force all the other states to be blue.

 

Periods of division come an go. There's no reason for the Union to break apart.

 

we can't the red states need the money the north generates for welfare

 

LMAO

Do you really honestly not see the population trends changing as Americans flee the high tax Blue states for the Red ones? Within a decade the Red ones will be the ones providing for the blue.

 

way to take that bait.....keep dreaming and look at the demograpics of who is leaving the Blue for the Red............inner city blacks and you all can have them

 

There'd be no problem if Democrats would just leave people alone. But they want to impose their will on the entire country.

 

Lee & Grant settled that issue.

 

It's as clear and reasonable as that. I agree wholeheartedly with you.

 

The concept of nations is completely artificial, there is nothing in the concept of a nation that says that they should only include one people. The US retains some of it's international power from being large. As much as I dislike the US as a world police, I don't think I'd prefer China or India.

There is another question of who gets what. I can't think of many nation-splittings that have not resulted in war over the border areas. Paki-India conflict, Israel/Palestine, Alsace-Lorraine, Jugoslavia, Most of Africa and so on. How will Nukes, important cities and natural resources be distributed? Will the Blue states have to have two parts, one on each shore? And these are just the things I can pull off the top of my head.

 

My best friend's girlfriend is Russian and she of course hates hates hates US foreign policy, but she is still unable to get past that basic fact that if the US isn't the "world police" who would be better? There are no good alternatives to US power.

Why the US won't break up is that we could never agree on how to split up the federal debt.

 

I voted no, but to you I answer yes: here's how: idiots should move to middle east for which it has been liberated, taking all the politicians and all the paper money, we will get new money and rebuild. btw, i did not bother to read the rest of your post.

You even asked the opposite question in title and in post, nice try

 

All of the wealth would pour from the blue to the red states, and all of the dependents would head in the opposite direction. Blue states would be a failed nation within a few decades.

I don't think we should break up, just because we need to be powerful because of threats from other large nations. If I could be king of the world, I'd break up all nations and have leadership at lower levels.

 

I'd like a divorce. The Blue spouse is a deadbeat crackhead.



_

 

It takes two to tango. Always another side to the story where a relationship is involved.

 

I think you have it mixed up.

 

Moderates are enablers.


_

 

Exactly ...............
no, that wasn't clear enough. edit:
Exactly

 

Yeah, that's why I discuss things on forums with lots of Americans and do my part to influence the political environment rather than just being Anti-American.

 

How about we turn this into authoritarian vs libertarian.

I know which one I would live in. It would not be the big government part.

 

As much as I'd love to ditch all the red states, and see how they fare with providing nothing for their least well off, and not providing college financial aid which will probably mean they can't keep up in the competitive economy and show them the liberals were right all along to advocate for universal college education (if a person desires it), it doesn't seem like the solution to anything. Differences are going to arise no matter what, so it's better to accept Democracy as it is and attempt to change the nation by making your voice heard through letters to a newspaper, joining political groups, and voting.

 

I wouldn't mind seeing all the red states form their own union. Once they gravitated towards some Libertarian economics the north would have to fight them off like the illegal Mexican's!

 

Ya, I'm sure folks would just be lining up at the border to get into liberal Utopias like Detroit and New Jersey.

 

theres barely any difference between Republicans and Democrats

 

You are hopelessly delusional. You think that Republicans would actually adopt free market economics?