• 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!

Texas GOP moves forward with secession

Well... bye!
 
beerftw said:
It won't go anywhere, The united states needs texas, It's natural recources massive farmland and manufacturing sector would cripple the entire us economy if it left. The federal govt would not allow one of it's three super economies leave.
Click to expand...

LOL. What would Texas do with all that farmland and manufacturing except sell it, and the biggest market for it would be the remaining 49 states.

And it won't go anywhere because it's too stupid even for Texas republicans, which is saying a lot. From the article:

UPDATE:
The vote failed, so for now at least secession will not be on the ballot.
Click to expand...
 
JasperL said:
LOL. What would Texas do with all that farmland and manufacturing except sell it, and the biggest market for it would be the remaining 49 states.

And it won't go anywhere because it's too stupid even for Texas republicans, which is saying a lot. From the article:
Click to expand...

You are aware texas is one of the three super economies right???? The other two are california and new york. If any of those three left, the great depression would look mild in comparison, it would be nearly one third of the united states major economic capacity leaving.
 
DaveFagan said:
Perhaps that is why the word "Texas" is synonomous with the word "nuts" in some parts of the World.
Click to expand...

And Texans wouldn't have it any other way. :gunsmilie
 
rocket88 said:
Texas GOP Moves Toward Vote On Seceding From Union - The New Civil Rights Movement

"Party of Lincoln?" That creaking sound you hear is Abe turning over in his grave.
Click to expand...
My thoughts:

1 - It's unbelievable unpatriotic to even have the referendum, and definitely reinforces many non-GOPer's opinion of them.
2 - It cannot legally happen (without war or treaty).
3 - It reminds me of my belief that our country might have been far better & far happier if we just excepted a 'split', during the Civil War.
 
beerftw said:
You are aware texas is one of the three super economies right???? The other two are california and new york. If any of those three left, the great depression would look mild in comparison, it would be nearly one third of the united states major economic capacity leaving.
Click to expand...
Maybe - maybe not.

The greatest loss for the union would be the trade through NAFTA channels, along with the petro products.

But since NAFTA is with the U.S., not the newly formed nation of Texas, I don't believe Texas would be privy to the agreement. This would be some mess!
 
Chomsky said:
My thoughts:

1 - It's unbelievable unpatriotic to even have the referendum, and definitely reinforces many non-GOPer's opinion of them.
2 - It cannot legally happen (without war or treaty).
3 - It reminds me of my belief that our country might have been far better & far happier if we just excepted a 'split', during the Civil War.
Click to expand...

They had better do it now, because by 2016 Texas will be under control of the Democrats....
 
It is a pity South Carolina attacked the USA in 1861. Secession could and should have been negotiated.
 
They had better do it now because by 2017 the Democrats will run Texas....
 
Last edited:
beerftw said:
You are aware texas is one of the three super economies right???? The other two are california and new york. If any of those three left, the great depression would look mild in comparison, it would be nearly one third of the united states major economic capacity leaving.
Click to expand...

It's all Texas bluster, chest pounding and talk anyway.

The funny thing about the 3 super states(and you're 100% right) you mentioned is all 3 states need each other. NY desperately needs Texas's energy and California's food. But without NY's money California and Texas would struggle mightily. Let's face it, love them or hate them much or our economy, including TX. And Cali. economies revolves around Wall Street's money.
 
Astrodome said:
They had better do it now, because by 2016 Texas will be under control of the Democrats....
Click to expand...
I think your time-frame's a bit optimistic, but yes, Texas is slowly turning bluer; and the GOP seem hell-bent on alienating the very voters that are turning it blue.
 
Astrodome said:
The had better do it now because by 2017 the Democrats will run Texas....
Click to expand...

They said the same in 2012 and 2014 and texas got redder, not the other way around
 
beerftw said:
They said the same in 2012 and 2014 and texas got redder, not the other way around
Click to expand...


Houston, San Antonio and Dallas all have Democrat mayors......The tide is turning blue very quickly...
 
rocket88 said:
Texas GOP Moves Toward Vote On Seceding From Union - The New Civil Rights Movement

"Party of Lincoln?" That creaking sound you hear is Abe turning over in his grave.
Click to expand...

I would tell Texas to not let the door hit them in the ass on the way out. Of course, this would be AFTER we removed 100% of our military assets - and NASA - from Texan soil. They think they can do better - go for it! Especially since they have the LOWEST educational attainment of any state in the nation.
 
beerftw said:
You are aware texas is one of the three super economies right???? The other two are california and new york. If any of those three left, the great depression would look mild in comparison, it would be nearly one third of the united states major economic capacity leaving.
Click to expand...

Um, no. Texas is indeed one of the very few red states that pays out more in federal taxes than it takes in...but not by much. What's more, once we remove all our military assets - and NASA - from Texas, and once so many of its citizens stop receiving support from the federal government, the "great depression" wouldn't be in America...but it might very well be in Texas.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Um, no. Texas is indeed one of the very few red states that pays out more in federal taxes than it takes in...but not by much. What's more, once we remove all our military assets - and NASA - from Texas, and once so many of its citizens stop receiving support from the federal government, the "great depression" wouldn't be in America...but it might very well be in Texas.
Click to expand...

Most of what the red states get is farm subsidies, which was setup by fdr. without quotas, subsidies would not likely be needed, since the govt pays farmers to produce less crops.


Fyi nasa is already dead and the military would spend a firtune because it's largest base fort hood is in texas, plus it has alot of smaller bases as well.


And no the great depression would be in the us, unless america had the capability to instantly replace one third of it's economic power instantly, which it does not, and never will.
 
Astrodome said:
Houston, San Antonio and Dallas all have Democrat mayors......The tide is turning blue very quickly...
Click to expand...

Those 3 cities are nt the whole state of texas, further texas was the last major state to switch to republicans after the southern move, Southern democrats are still major in texas, so assuming democrat= liberal in texas case is simply failure to understand texas demographics.
 
Chomsky said:
Maybe - maybe not.

The greatest loss for the union would be the trade through NAFTA channels, along with the petro products.

But since NAFTA is with the U.S., not the newly formed nation of Texas, I don't believe Texas would be privy to the agreement. This would be some mess!
Click to expand...

TExas itself does not need nafta, but prosper if it left would be entirely dependant on the us. Texas could thrive even if the us blocked all trade through the us mexico and the gulf coast. Texas however would not prosper, to achieve a high standard of living they need trade, and most likely the us would use sanctions and blockades to try and block the economy rather than using military force, which would allow texas to survive quite well but not prosper.
 
beerftw said:
TExas itself does not need nafta, but prosper if it left would be entirely dependant on the us. Texas could thrive even if the us blocked all trade through the us mexico and the gulf coast. Texas however would not prosper, to achieve a high standard of living they need trade, and most likely the us would use sanctions and blockades to try and block the economy rather than using military force, which would allow texas to survive quite well but not prosper.
Click to expand...
Good points, and I pretty much agree. I was thinking through the exact scenarios you postulated, but didn't post them.

Texas would survive, I suppose, but definitely it would not prosper.

And for all the stereotypes about well armed citizens, they'd have to cut a real quick military pact with the States, and start working on a military & standing Army!
 
Chomsky said:
Good points, and I pretty much agree. I was thinking through the exact scenarios you postulated, but didn't post them.

Texas would survive, I suppose, but definitely it would not prosper.

And for all the stereotypes about well armed citizens, they'd have to cut a real quick military pact with the States, and start working on a military & standing Army!
Click to expand...

Actually texas could build an effective military fairly quickly. Texas even has its own militia independant of the national guard. They have no shortage of volunteers, and could easily fend off mexico and make it hell for the us to invade texas. What would hurt them the most is economic through sanctions and blockades, limiting funds and resources to what is available in state.

The us would likely not attack texas until other options were exhausted, even the the us military won, the casualties would be massive on both sides, as well as a destruction of an economic superpower they were trying to keep in the union, or basically military conflict is a no win for either side.
 
beerftw said:
Actually texas could build an effective military fairly quickly. Texas even has its own militia independant of the national guard. They have no shortage of volunteers, and could easily fend off mexico and make it hell for the us to invade texas. What would hurt them the most is economic through sanctions and blockades, limiting funds and resources to what is available in state.

The us would likely not attack texas until other options were exhausted, even the the us military won, the casualties would be massive on both sides, as well as a destruction of an economic superpower they were trying to keep in the union, or basically military conflict is a no win for either side.
Click to expand...
I was working on the premise of a peaceful parting; Texas would still need defense in general, and maintaining a modern high-tech military is not inexpensive - that alone would further drag-down their economy.
 
Chomsky said:
I was working on the premise of a peaceful parting; Texas would still need defense in general, and maintaining a modern high-tech military is not inexpensive - that alone would further drag-down their economy.
Click to expand...

well the modern part would not drag down their economy, the thing that drags down the texas economy in that situation would drag down their ability to keep a modern military.They need alot of funds for r&d to fully modernise a military, which sanctions would cripple. However their ground forces would be formiddable, they would mostly suffer in air and mechanized divisions and would most likely convert civilian armored trucks like banks use and helicopters for their military, which would not be ideal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom