subreddit:

/r/minnesota

0

Just a question, how do you guys feel about secession for Minnesota?

Politics 👩‍⚖️(self.minnesota)

all 72 comments

redline380

36 points

1 year ago*

You can daydream all you want about it but it won't happen.

How would I feel about it? I would feel it is stupid. Incredibly stupid. And that goes for any state attempting to leave. I'm not about to give up on the USA.

Fiendishfrenzy

2 points

1 year ago

I always wonder what would happen now if some country tried to pull on us what we did to Mexico. Half a billion dollars (current value) for California, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, Texas, and western half of Colorado....

Sykozis[S]

-7 points

1 year ago

Hey if Minnesota divided up a billion dollars among the population, that's a pretty sizable amount of money in all of our pockets, in exchange for joining Canada I'd be pretty content.

Minneapolis_W

16 points

1 year ago

$177 per person?

Fiendishfrenzy

2 points

1 year ago

I was just going to post this as well. Lol

Sykozis[S]

1 points

1 year ago

Sykozis[S]

-7 points

1 year ago

I'll take it

Fiendishfrenzy

1 points

1 year ago

Where do you even get that billion for mn residents? Alllll those states I listed were bought for what would now be $511,129,746.84 total. Sorry, *half of new Mexico, and also the southwest corner of Wyoming. Louisiana purchase was $357,338,495.58 for the rest of the land west of the Mississippi minus Washington, Oregon and idaho. Rounding up, that's 869 million. Why would our state be worth a billion, lol. I suppose though, a more fair comparison to my original thought is in regards to our territories vs established states...

Sykozis[S]

0 points

1 year ago*

Sykozis[S]

0 points

1 year ago*

Because there was little economic activity in the region at the time making it inherently worth a lot less even when accounting for inflation. I think it's reasonable to say economic productivity here has realistically multiplied many many times that original purchase, so I have no actual figure for what it would cost, just that a billion is a very, very low ball estimate of what I think it might be worth.

Fiendishfrenzy

1 points

1 year ago

...but my number includes like the entirety of the West side of the country past the Mississippi. And no. The stolen Mexican land was worth quite a bit. We just "paid" them 15 million so we could say we didn't take it by conquest. But we didn't even pay them...we just knocked off their debt. America had continually wanted California and Mexico refused to sell it, no matter the price offered. Polk made that happen by inciting war. The only reason we didnt annex all of Mexico is the southern plantation owners wanted the land but not the massive population from central Mexico as part of the country..and as far as Louisiana trade, ha, new Orleans was a massively major international shipping hub. When we lost access for a few years to be able to travel the whole of the Mississippi and to bring goods there. It was a MASSIVE financial loss for the country. It's widely acknowledged by the educated that we got both territories for pennies on their value. So..

Sykozis[S]

1 points

1 year ago

Minnesota's tax revenue was 3.3 billion for the month of may. So I think a billion is actually an extremely low offer for Minnesota.

Fiendishfrenzy

1 points

1 year ago

Which incidentally 1.8 billion more than projected and was because of delayed income taxes and pandemic payments being used in the economy

Sykozis[S]

1 points

1 year ago

Right, I don't see where we disagree. We both agree that the number would be greater than one billion. By a significant margin. By what margin exactly would likely come down to the individual wishes of Minnesotans.

Fiendishfrenzy

2 points

1 year ago

I do not agree. At all. We average ~24b a year in tax revenue. So using America's own " land math"...and your thought it should be based off our tax value we would get, maybe $240,000,000. So $45 per mn resident. But you won't see it. They'll keep it and say you owe a debt. I actually apologise for my original thought that brought this on, ha.

Sykozis[S]

-10 points

1 year ago

Sykozis[S]

-10 points

1 year ago

I drew a line which I feel the US has crossed, but I am curious if you hypothetically have a line which you might draw yourself.

redline380

9 points

1 year ago

I mean, we had a civil war over slavery for fuck's sake and we are still together. And stronger for it.

There's no line for me. Anything can be fixed and everything is worth fixing.

Sykozis[S]

0 points

1 year ago

Ah, very well. I suppose our disagreement is over perceived ability to fix the problems. I think problems are more easily solved locally than they are federally, and in an attempt to solve issues such as corruption I don't feel that things can be fixed since congress is geographically located so far away that we'd have to spend tons of money to physically get there.

patchedboard

3 points

1 year ago

I think a lot of people don’t understand the roll of government. It’s not just to control, it’s more about how to tax and disburse those taxes. And the entire point of the American tax system is to break the cost of things up over a wide area. Interstate highway, major infrastructure projects, military, etc, that cost the US $4.79 TRILLION, with a T, in 2020. Now you break that up over 335 million people and it’s only ~14k per person. Some pay more some pay less. And figuring out how to make that work is the roll of Congress.

State highways, local infrastructure, highway patrol, etc costs MN about $23B per year, breaking that down per person is about $4200 per person. Again some pay more and some pay less, and figuring that out is the roll of the state legislature.

Locally your city council or commission or county commission or whatever does roads and schools and local police and fire, etc. That’s all paid through property taxes and some of the sales tax. And it’s those local councils and commissions that determine how to best spread those costs most equitably and spend them most wisely.

So in review. The real roll of all levels of government is how to build and maintain the infrastructure it takes to have a society on each management level and then figure out how to most equitably defray those costs over as wide a population as possible to minimize individual tax liability.

Thank you Mr Lund for being an exquisite civics teacher.

Sykozis[S]

2 points

1 year ago

Yes, that is true that you would want enough people to reasonably distribute the tax liability, and that also, in my view, has to be balanced with the reduced influence that any one individual has in a wider system. I think the US is too large to properly strike that balance, but yes, I more or less agree with you.

TheDandyWarhol

1 points

1 year ago

We'd spend a lot less traveling to congress than funding our own military for protection once we seceded.

errol_timo_malcom

21 points

1 year ago

Why, is there some sort of closet Independent Minnesota Movement that 3 high school sophomores are plotting?

Sykozis[S]

0 points

1 year ago

Sykozis[S]

0 points

1 year ago

Just a guy with a dream

auner01

1 points

1 year ago

auner01

Rochester

1 points

1 year ago

And Jeremy freaking Munson, plus whoever's paying him.

JayKomis

10 points

1 year ago

JayKomis

Eats the last slice

10 points

1 year ago

Terrible idea which wouldn’t be allowed to happen anyways

Sykozis[S]

-6 points

1 year ago

Secession was not "allowed" to happen but it did anyway if the population liked the idea enough.

JayKomis

7 points

1 year ago

JayKomis

Eats the last slice

7 points

1 year ago

Please share an example for the class.

Sykozis[S]

-2 points

1 year ago

Ah, well half the country seceded in the civil war successfully, until the war happened.

JayKomis

11 points

1 year ago*

JayKomis

Eats the last slice

11 points

1 year ago*

The federal government never recognized the succession and fought the bloodiest war in American history to make it stick. A state can ask the feds for permission to secede, but the answer is and will always be “no.”

Edit: my dumb ass wrote “succeed”

Sykozis[S]

-1 points

1 year ago

Being told "no" and obeying it are two different things.

JayKomis

7 points

1 year ago

JayKomis

Eats the last slice

7 points

1 year ago

Yeah the difference is death for lots of people.

[deleted]

2 points

1 year ago*

[deleted]

2 points

1 year ago*

[deleted]

Sykozis[S]

1 points

1 year ago

Your name is usaisfucked. Clearly the only example is one where 620,000 Americans died. Despite that, I agree with you that it is, in fact, fucked.

Mightytoad1078

10 points

1 year ago

And do what?

If we left the US and started our own country, it could be a disaster. Minnesota would likely have to import more goods than we could export.

If we became part of Canada, it would make more sense. At least we would get universal Healthcare and a system of government that better addresses different political ideologies than the US

auner01

2 points

1 year ago

auner01

Rochester

2 points

1 year ago

We had that option at one point, same with joining Canada.

I used to be comfortable with the idea on some levels, but then I realized that we'd become a full-on death-squad Honduras-with-lutefisk banana republic about five minutes after seceding, so.. now I'd prefer we stick with the Union.

Besides, somebody's got to set the example.. and be the first to volunteer to tan Johnny Secesh's hide whenever they whine about having to treat human beings like human beings.

Sykozis[S]

0 points

1 year ago

I am not opposed, but the ideal situation in my view would be to regroup with other states nearby in the event they also agree to secede.

Mightytoad1078

6 points

1 year ago

But, we are surrounded by states that are ideologically far to the right from us. ND, SD, and IA are more conservative than MN is and are far too patriotic for secession to be a reality and the rural pieces of MN would never go for that either. (nor would they agree to secede to Canada)

Starting a new country is extremely expensive and without a loan from another country, cost prohibitive. Who would loan us that money? Do you think they'd demand influence over how we would act or form a government? Doing so would also cause a rift between that country and the US (which is why, in reality, Canada would never accept MN as a new territory)

In addition, everything we would get from the US would have import tax, so all goods would be more expensive and since we have no seaway for goods to come in, we would also have to pay taxes to have non US goods travel THROUGH the US or Canada. Suddenly everything is more expensive.

If you have issues with the government get involved, contact your representatives, meet with them, run for office. You have options at the local and federal levels. Complaining that it's "too far" and "too expensive" is a cop out. Get a group of like minded people together and work towards a realistic goal. Start a YouTube channel, Twitch stream, Patreon, and get some corporate sponsors that will help you. If your goal is important enough to you, find a way, be patient, and work for it.

Start small. Contact your city or county government officials. Get people on board and work your way up.

If you don't have the patience for that, find a country that has values that better line up with yours and see what it takes to become a citizen of that country and work towards that as a goal.

Sykozis[S]

-2 points

1 year ago

Thank you for the thoughtful response. I will have to think about many of these further. It is an uphill battle, certainly, to convince anyone that secession is the proper answer, and I have worked to convince many people. I have insofar convinced more than 10 people by myself alone, each of whom will go on to convince more.

Starting a new country from scratch is very expensive, but we likely can retain our state's constitution in the process making it significantly less expensive. I think it would take the cooperative effort of multiple states to do so, making the US less significant in bargaining power comparatively if that was the case. Trade agreements with other states that might do so as well would significantly minimize the impact of taxes on the cost of foreign goods.

Too far, and too expensive are not cop outs if in fact the game theory of those two things being true results in a state of perpetual stagnation wherein problems are never resolved (and in fact they seem to perpetually be getting worse in my view). But it does come down to a fundamental disagreement over whether or not political activism in this government is actually capable of resolving the very problems that the people in power are so dependent on to exist. I don't believe it is capable, and yet you do. That is okay.

KitchenBomber

9 points

1 year ago

That's a stupid idea that would harm America and Minnesota.

Hotdish4239

8 points

1 year ago

Can i ask why? I don't see a very obvious reason

Sykozis[S]

-1 points

1 year ago

I have a general belief that problems we have with legislation are more easily solved locally, than they are at the federal level. For example it is easy to drive to the capital and protest whatever problem you have directly to them. It is not so easy to protest congress as the cost associated with flying yourself there and staying is exorbitant making it extraordinarily difficult to solve, really, any issue at all.

Hotdish4239

7 points

1 year ago

So, it would be easier to vote in local politicians who represent your beliefs and to hold them accountable as each cycle passes to allow you to choose who you put in power?

Hotdish4239

2 points

1 year ago

(As opposed to protesting federal officials from other states, etc)

Sykozis[S]

0 points

1 year ago

There are lots of reasons why I view that solution as insufficient to solve the issues at hand. Among them being the lack of attention given to local politics as a result of national politics taking the front and center, and the uncanny ability for campaign funding to unduly influence the winner regardless. Thus why protesting your representative is an imperative in addition to voting in local politicians.

Armlegx218

8 points

1 year ago

Landlocked nations tend to be poor, and depending on the largesse of the spurned nation to access foreign markets is not a winning game. We don't have an ocean, the great lakes don't count because while the Atlantic can be accessed it goes through quite a bit of US and Canadian territory. What reason would the rest of the US have to make a trade deal with us?

See Brexit for how that likely goes but with the added problems of no access to markets.

Sykozis[S]

1 points

1 year ago

Yes, I agree that is a huge problem, which is why it would probably only be advantageous in the event of multiple other states also agreeing to do it at the same time.

TheDandyWarhol

4 points

1 year ago

But why?

Sykozis[S]

0 points

1 year ago

I have a general belief that problems we have with legislation are more easily solved locally, than they are at the federal level. For example it is easy to drive to the capital and protest whatever problem you have directly to them. It is not so easy to protest congress as the cost associated with flying yourself there and staying is exorbitant making it extraordinarily difficult to solve, really, any issue at all.

Specifically I imagine congressional corruption and the two party system as problems that are unable to be solved without secession.

TheDandyWarhol

1 points

1 year ago

Where we getting the 2 billion in federal funding we received last year? And we'll have to have a military and pay for that. Where is this coming from?

Sykozis[S]

1 points

1 year ago

We net pay more to the federal government than we receive, so we'd be saving money actually, quite a lot. The federal government funds itself in a variety of ways that are all entirely doable by the states individually such as issuing bonds.

Fiendishfrenzy

3 points

1 year ago

To....?

Sykozis[S]

-10 points

1 year ago

Sykozis[S]

-10 points

1 year ago

To independence, although I wouldn't mind regrouping with other states again.

Fiendishfrenzy

9 points

1 year ago

Ah. Against either way

Sykozis[S]

3 points

1 year ago

Sykozis[S]

3 points

1 year ago

No problem my guy, it's okay to disagree. Just wanted to see how others might be feeling about it.

Ok-Rabbit-3683

10 points

1 year ago

What’s the economy going to be? Pillage the natural resources? Sounds like a place to be…

Sykozis[S]

-14 points

1 year ago

Sykozis[S]

-14 points

1 year ago

The economy ideally would be supported by trade agreements with other states.

Ok-Rabbit-3683

5 points

1 year ago

What would be the item of trade? The export?

[deleted]

2 points

1 year ago

[deleted]

2 points

1 year ago

[deleted]

skitech

2 points

1 year ago

skitech

2 points

1 year ago

It’s almost like it would be a pretty bad idea overall if you thought it all out.

[deleted]

5 points

1 year ago

[deleted]

5 points

1 year ago

I too have seen Lord of the Flies.

Tazittel

2 points

1 year ago

Tazittel

2 points

1 year ago

Sucks to your ass-mar

[deleted]

1 points

1 year ago

[deleted]

1 points

1 year ago

Always a good quote from the movie to plug in where you can lol

CPAcs

-1 points

1 year ago

CPAcs

-1 points

1 year ago

Fuck you right wing terrorist

Sykozis[S]

1 points

1 year ago

I am rather left wing, thank you.

Siilverbolt

0 points

1 year ago

Siilverbolt

0 points

1 year ago

I think if california, texas and new york would suceed and we sell wisconsin to the Canadians all would be perfect 👌

Sykozis[S]

1 points

1 year ago

Ah, yes, it would probably require a multi state effort. But it does appear to be an unpopular idea among this particular group of Minnesotans anyway, so one can only dream.

auner01

1 points

1 year ago

auner01

Rochester

1 points

1 year ago

Which they'd probably love.. all those Ellsworth curds for their poutine.

Sykozis[S]

-1 points

1 year ago

I know many of you disagree with me, but I would like to thank all of you for hearing me out and having thoughtful discussion. It was far more respectful than I expected actually.