PeakOil is You
Why the feeling that the U.S. will break up in future?
Re: Why the feeling that the U.S. will break up in future?
by bshirt » Sun 11 Apr 2010, 19:04:01
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'T')ake away all that and guess what, Texas would have to come up with some kind of social safety net.
There's a lot of folks who seem to think a social safety net is some kind of Librul scheme to take money from the hard-working guys and give it to the deadbeats. So I'm not convinced they would want any kind of social safety net. I can imagine an ideal "free Texas" in which disadvantaged people are just allowed to die. Their own fault for being poor, old, very young, sick, disabled, etc. Dumbfukistan is for the strong, pioneer-spirit kind of guys, not a bunch of weak freeloaders!
How sad that traditional American values like working, saving and not demanding endless free handouts results in being classified as being a member of "Dumbfukistan".
Otoh, it's appropriate considering how the parasitic mindset has been applauded and maintained for some time now. But for a host of reasons their delightful days of slobbering at the public trough might well be ending soon.
-
bshirt - Tar Sands
- Posts: 502
- Joined: Sat 23 Dec 2006, 04:00:00
Re: Why the feeling that the U.S. will break up in future?
by bshirt » Sun 11 Apr 2010, 19:20:13
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bshirt', 'I')'ll take my chances without the Federal govt and the Federal Reserve. I think the Midwest/South can and will adapt to the loss of the welfare state relatively quite easily. We'll see my compadre'....
So, do you really think a new Lone Star Republic wouldn't have a central bank? You hate the federal reserve, but every nation on earth has a central bank. And you say a new Confederacy wouldn't have a welfare state. Well, let's face it, a lot of minorities use those services. So would you deny blacks the right to vote? And if too many poor white voters wanted some food stamps, would you reinstate the property owning requirement for voting?
Those are very big changes there, so expect major rioting. To handle the major civil unrest, not to mention keeping Hugo Chavez from invading, you'd have to fund a robust military.
Oh sure, it's likely they would have a central bank. But why not one that has it's currency backed by something real like gold instead of nothing? Would they really want or need a fiat currency?
And mob rule Democracy almost certainly wouldn't prevail. The days of voting for stealing someone else's sweat off their back could very well be over. If that's unacceptable, why not vote with your feet and relocate to somewhere where it is?
Actually, despite the howling of screaming liberals that certainly will go nuclear for reading this "yes" I think voting requiring property is a fine idea. I think minorities can and will prosper. One could argue that the Welfare state hasn't done minorities any favors in the long run, wouldn't you agree?
I'm really not sure how much a "robust military" would be required. There's really not a bunch of Detroit's in these regions. But it's a good question.
-
bshirt - Tar Sands
- Posts: 502
- Joined: Sat 23 Dec 2006, 04:00:00
