Succession or States Rights
Posted 07 November 2012 - 03:21 PM
Could we "head it off at the pass" by going to stronger states, and weaker federal government, and allow citizens to move to states that appeal more to them?
Just crazy, 100 years down the road thinking here.....
Posted 07 November 2012 - 03:35 PM
Posted 07 November 2012 - 04:06 PM
Posted 07 November 2012 - 04:20 PM
Posted 07 November 2012 - 04:25 PM
The Mississippi's and Alabama's and South Carolina's of the world would fold like a cheap tent.
Posted 07 November 2012 - 04:26 PM
I for one am a big fan of southern success.
I can't believe it took 4 posts....
Posted 07 November 2012 - 04:28 PM
Most of the South would never really go with that, as it would be economic suicide.
Why would the North not go for it?
Posted 07 November 2012 - 05:05 PM
Why would the North not go for it?
I'm not sure why they would, but economically it would actually be viable.
Posted 08 November 2012 - 10:28 AM
Posted 08 November 2012 - 11:08 AM
Posted 08 November 2012 - 11:13 AM
You mean like if States had the power bring about laws that are against Federal laws?
No, more like taking much of the responsibilities from the federal government and give it to the states.
Flipping the tax burden around. Let the federal gov be in charge of interstate travel, and defense, and the state for the rest.
Instead of 5% to the state, and 25% to the federal, have it turned around.
If Mississippi wants bad schools and low income taxes....so be it.
If New Jersey wants awesome schools and high income taxes....so be it.
Give people options.
Posted 08 November 2012 - 11:19 AM
Posted 08 November 2012 - 11:35 AM
This falls in line with one of my theories about the structure of the country and the way its developed in respect to its land mass, resource hot spots, and population centers
The two big ideological sects in this country fall all the way back to the rural based production areas for either farming or resource extraction and then you have the highly populated zones of highly interactive more shared lifestyle in the city with factory based production. Now that we've gone through the rise and evolution of the American suburbs to a more new urbanist/edge city philosophy where a bulk of the country likes to live, it has blurred the lines between the two ideological ends that have evolved in this country. The founders of this country could not have envisioned the way we have morphed into this technological online office based globally connected lifestyle.
The sides that act as the basis for division just do not match up with our post-modern culture from a physical and societal infrastructure perspective. Without modernization/overhaul, the actual population will continue to evolve and the guys in DC will continue to be stuck in post-war policies and arguments, manipulating from the top, not knowing how to actually serve the evolved lifestyles rather just knowing how to make them feel socially comfortable.
Its not about giving a certain level of government more power but becoming sustainable at the most local level possible in all aspects.
I honestly think in order to do so, we don't need to give more power to the "states" but rather expand and modify the physical boundaries of states. Given how our economy has evolved relative to our technologies and regional make-up, the "state" in many regards has become irrelevant. I think we need more regionally defined states with less representative layers. A total rethink of our in-house borders and government.