• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats: Texas gov should disavow secession talk

so the federal government is well within its borders to do as it pleases.

Yeah, you just keep singing that tune when the federal government does something you don't like such as all out banning gay marriage or abortion with a constitutional amendment. ;)
 
Yeah, you just keep singing that tune when the federal government does something you don't like such as all out banning gay marriage or abortion with a constitutional amendment. ;)

It already has, making marijuanna illegal, patriot act, and gay marriage being illegal (and previously anti-sodomy laws).

Somethings the right by the way embraced.
 
Texas doesn't have the truck nuts to seceed. Half it's population will flee if it were to try, it can't compete on a global level with its oil by itself and other than that I don't see what resources it's going to use to drive it's economy as an autonomous country. They are going to be landlocked and cut off from the national grid, so without taxes to support solar heating and hydroelectricity it's not going to have running electricity or useful domestic defenses. The taxation it will require to sustain itself will be higher than it already is now.
This can't compete thing is bull****. It has a massive population, and really all you need, even if this kind of export-driven global competition is your sort of thing is the right , is the resources to suppor the population and Texas certainly has that. If Denmark, Holland, Belgium and Sweden can compete I think Texas can.
 
It has a massive population, and really all you need, even if this kind of export-driven global competition is your sort of thing is the right , is the resources to suppor the population and Texas certainly has that. If Denmark, Holland, Belgium and Sweden can compete I think Texas can.

The problem is not everyone in Texas is FOR succession. Texas won't even try because it's population doesn't want it as a whole.
 
The problem is not everyone in Texas is FOR succession. Texas won't even try because it's population doesn't want it as a whole.

That's what I am saying, a LOT of them would leave.
 
The problem is not everyone in Texas is FOR succession. Texas won't even try because it's population doesn't want it as a whole.

Even that wouldn't actually matter unless it was most of them. All you need is the resources for the population level.
 
God I hope and pray that Texas declares war on Louisiana.
 
This can't compete thing is bull****. It has a massive population, and really all you need, even if this kind of export-driven global competition is your sort of thing is the right , is the resources to suppor the population and Texas certainly has that. If Denmark, Holland, Belgium and Sweden can compete I think Texas can.

Well first of all, a lot, maybe even most of it's population would leave if it seceeded. They would be left with a fractured infrastructure, and they would need to heavy taxes to sustain itself.

Also, all those smaller Europian countries are supported, they are all in a big union. Any where else you look, those little countries are impoverished. And I don't think the US is going to be supporting Texas in a way shape or form if it decides to leave.

It's about more than just population size too.
 
Well first of all, a lot, maybe even most of it's population would leave if it seceeded. They would be left with a fractured infrastructure, and they would need to heavy taxes to sustain itself.
I believe they pay more to the Union in taxes than they get back.

Certainly it would change things and the economy would have to adjust, particularly if there was no free trade agreement with the rest of the US, but they could certainly cope and probably flourished. You don't need a big population for that, particularly if you are servicing local needs instead of being export-driven.

Also, all those smaller Europian countries are supported, they are all in a big union.
They were fine long before that, also I think they provide more to it than they get out of it and it is simply a free trade zone not(as yet) a gov't, arguably whenever it has gone beyond that these nations have suffered, Texas could set up one of those with the US.

Any where else you look, those little countries are impoverished. And I don't think the US is going to be supporting Texas in a way shape or form if it decides to leave.
As far as I can see little countries do very well, even judging by the standards of corporate-consumerism. Switzerland, Norway, New Zealand, Australia(in population terms), Canada(again in population terms.), South Korea, Taiwan are all doing very well. In fact if you compare similar big nations to small ones, ie not Tanzania with the US, then the small ones tend to do as well, if not better.
 
Last edited:
I never denied that, but as of April 17th 2009 Texas is an official territory of the United States of America. It has NO international soveriegnty, so the federal government is well within its borders to do as it pleases.
States are NOT territories. Territories are the actual legal possessions of the United States government, and states are most assuredly not that.
 
It was a reckless statement and nothing good will come from it.
Why is it reckless? Why can no good come from it?

Yes, the idea of secession is a dangerous one. That does not per se make it a wrong idea.

What harm is done by voicing extreme discontent with the Federal government?
 
Back
Top Bottom