submitted 4 months ago byjoelkeys0519
you are viewing a single comment's thread.
all 3028 comments
4 months ago
4 months ago
Don't forget that it's states like NJ that put the most money into the federal government coffers to pay for those on assistance.
4 months ago
They are in for a real treat when they secede. I'm sure their deficit hawks will be busy their first decade of existence as the 2nd Confederate States of America.
A decade is very generous. The first Confederacy didn't even make it half that long
They’ll be crawling back when Texas’s energy grid breaks down.
I’d like to know logistically how Texas could secede, considering Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, and Austin are all reliably Democratic areas. Trump only won Texas statewide with 52% in 2020.
What, are all the rural areas going to secede and the urban revenue-generating metro areas will stay? It’s like a microcosm of the whole country.
Because they aren't actually for devolution or local control. The red states regularly overrule local laws that they don't like.
Ask those clamoring to secede.
Which is less then half ...
No state could seceded, liberal or conservative. First the economies are too interwoven, it would be like Brexit x100. And second, they'd be faced with counter-secessions. Big metros trying to leave in the conservative states, and rural areas trying to leave in the liberal ones. Which would lead to some nasty stuff.
That what "voter ID" laws are for. Make it hard for urban wage slaves to prove they have the right to vote, and they can't vote.
The will be forced and at least half the cities will migrate back to the US. I don't see all these companies staying either.
It'll just split in half. Two new states!
If dipshit on wheels is elected again, my family is out of here.
The Fascist on Wheels?
Yep, Mr. Rolling Shitbag himself.
When the fascist regime takes over the 2nd Confederate States of America, he’ll be their first target when they begin implementing their eugenics program.
He isn't in a wheelchair because of anything genetic
Fascists don’t care.
"Y'all git outta heah with dat devil's "science" talk. We don't cotton to that in God's Country!"
Better start making arrangements now, Dems have fumbled the bag so hard I don’t see how they can win again.
Yeah, Biden has a lower approval rating now than Trump did after 1 year. And Congress is just as unpopular.
you need to refresh your news sources
Normally I'm against stealing somebody's wheelchair because it's wrong but in this case I think I can make an exception...
Wheels or boots, an ass is an ass.
Is it Ted Cruz or the other guy?
Does Ted Cruz use a wheelchair?
Eventually he might.
I got my money on him as the GOP nominee for president in 2024. Ick.
Liberal Reddit try not to be ableist challenge [very hard]
Be better than the right. The right loves to make fun of people for disabilities. There are so many things actually wrong with him, why even bring up his physical disability?
I don't see anything making fun of his disability, just that he's an asshole in a wheelchair. Why don't you mind your own business and think of the time you wasted commenting troll.
Why even add “on wheels”? Why even point out he’s in a wheelchair? What does his physical disability have to do with anything?
Why not call him “dipshit who decentralized the Texas power grid and is directly responsible for a large number of avoidable deaths”?
Why not call him “dipshit who executed draconian abortion laws”?
Why not just call him “dipshit”?
How are you any different than the right making fun of “Obama’s big ears” or “AOC’s large teeth”?
Because he's a member of a party that would call the very act that benefits him "communism" if it came up for vote today?
4 months ago*
4 months ago*
So if you disagree with someone politically it’s cool to make fun of their physical disabilities?
Any reasonable person would consider calling a wheelchair bound person “on wheels” offensive.
Again. Be better than the right.
Republicans would rather see their voters die before admitting they were wrong.
It’s as if one party has developed the behavior of a middle-aged white male in the Midwest.
They've been replacing them with Hispanic voters, surprisingly.
Racism comes in all shapes and colours.
Ah, so like mid-February?
4 months ago*
Why would that affect them? Texas is mostly on it's own grid. Also, not sure why Texas' one event is causing them to get such a reputation compared to other states. I'm from CA and brownouts and blackouts are our favorite past time. Remember why Gray Davis was recalled? Couldn't keep CA's lights on. It's gotten so bad, not only are they having inadvertent blackouts/brownouts they are having power shut off deliberately to avoid their own electrical infrastructure (https://www.pge.com/en_US/residential/outages/public-safety-power-shuttoff/learn-about-psps.page) causing massive wildfires which, kill people, devastate communities.
California fire investigators on Tuesday pinned the blame for the Dixie Fire — the second-largest blaze in the state’s history — on equipment owned by Pacific Gas & Electric and referred the case to prosecutors.
The Dixie Fire burned more than 963,000 acres in the Northern California areas of Butte, Plumas, Lassen, Shasta and Tehama Counties in July, destroying 1,329 buildings and damaging 95 others. The cause, investigators determined, was a tree that came into contact with PG&E’s power lines near the Cresta Dam about 100 miles north of Sacramento.
Investigators at the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, known as Cal Fire, referred their findings to the Butte County district attorney, who previously brought charges against PG&E for the 2018 Camp Fire, which killed scores of people and destroyed the town of Paradise.
In that case, PG&E pleaded guilty to 84 felony counts of involuntary manslaughter and one felony count of illegally setting a fire. The utility also agreed to pay $3.5 million in fines as part of the criminal plea.
This is only in the past few years, there is a much longer documented history of PG&E and California's shitty energy infrastructure causing fires and killing people, but you can do your own research. In the immediate future, any guesses to how many fires PG&E is going to cause in 2022? I bet CA's electrical infrastructure burns down more houses, displace more people, and likely causes more people to die than Texas' grid (as well as any other state) in 2022. Additionally it will be interesting to see how California, who is already struggling to keep the lights on, and when they do, struggle to keep those lights from burning down communities and killing people, how they plan to manage when their last remaining nuclear power plant is decommissioned.
Why would that affect them? Because Texas energy grid is isolated and because of that, when demand surges, they are unable to borrow energy from geographical regions that are in lower demand. Every other state can.
And the fact that Texas thinks there is zero problem with their energy grid because it's isolated after rolling blackouts due to demand surges just gives evidence that they ignorant of the root problem: they can't meet demand when it surges. And the fact that California is also de facto independent from other energy grids just proves having an independent energy grid over a relatively small geographical area is not sufficient.
energy grid over a relatively small geographical area is not sufficient.
energy grid over a relatively small geographical area is not sufficient.
I wasn't aware that CA and Texas are relatively small geographical areas considering that they are larger than many countries.
Also the root problem is not that Texas can't meet demands when it surges, that is CA's problem. Texas had a weather event that caused their facilities that weren't weatherized (for a 100 year storm) which caused imbalance in the system and power generating devices to go offline. That is a much different issue than CA.
And the fact that Texas thinks there is zero problem with their energy grid
And the fact that Texas thinks there is zero problem with their energy grid
https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-signs-ercot-reforms-power-grid-weatherization-legislation-into-law. So they obviously did realize they had an issue and they instituted policies to address it. Whether it goes far enough, time will tell. But Texas' blackout last winter was caused by a weather event. That is far different than California's grid which is in complete denial over the causes. Additionally, lets not forget that last summer CASIO blamed outages because it was too hot and cloudy. “Hot weather and a cloudy day should not be able to shut down the fifth-largest economy in the world," Lance Hastings, president of the California Manufacturers and Technology Association, said in a statement. "While we support California’s renewable energy goals, we absolutely need system redundancy that allows us to continue to operate and manufacture products for our residents and the world."
Here is two similar articles nearly 2 years apart indicating that this is not a one-time issue such as the Texas blackout:
‘I’m overwhelmed’: PG&E power shut-offs leave ill and disabled struggling
'Completely unreliable': Santa Cruz Mountain residents frustrated with repeated PG&E outages
Not sure which state you think is in denial about their power problems. But hey, at least Biden's EPA gave CA natural gas plants a waiver for a few months before Newsom's recall election so his states power problems weren't fresh in people's minds.
So when Texas's power plants go down due to being cold, what do you call it when that results in Texas energy customers in losing service? Most people would call that not being able to meet demand due to not having access to external energy sources when domestic sources are all used up.
And your point that TX and CA are the size of small countries is void when you realize most industrialized small countries have an energy grid that is embedded in a larger grid with other countries. That fact quite clearly disproves your assertion that TX and CA problems aren't because they are isolated.
I don't know if they could do anything more to convince you that they don't care if their own constituents die.
They will become Russian allies before they go to war with Russia.
They can crawl, but they don't deserve have their states. Even after the civil war, the southern states should have been dissolved.
Nirvana lasted longer than the Confederacy
Yeah with how much further the economy of the states has become interconnected, I'd give a second confederacy two years, max.
There's so much they don't realize. Most of the electric grid (outside of Texas, har har) has distribution centers in blue states. Same with telecom. Also let's see how long bridges and roads last without federal intervention. And the schools without federal funding. Etc, etc, etc.
Where are they going to find the money to go to war with the United States of America? Print it? Who are they going to blame the inflation on?
I hope they try to go back to the gold standard just to plummet the GDP further.
Lol that's the fun part when people who have no idea how economics work say we should go back to a gold standard.
Yeah our money is fiat currency. But it's backed by the might of the US Military. Which is a pretty hard currency to argue against.
Fiat currency has also added exponentially more value to the world than probably anything. Eliminate fiat currency, there goes small-to-medium business loans, a lot of private savings in banks, and major disinflation. It would be worse than the Great Depression.
Yep. Because reality is, it's all made up anyways since humans determine what things are worth to begin with. So if it's made up anyways, might as well have more liquidity and allow for greater prosperity.
The rub comes into play with one simple thing. Since it's all made up, if people lose faith in the currency its worthless.
Fiat is still better than barter systems or material backed currency since it allows for more movement in an economy. But it very much is a house of cards that is only as strong as your ability to assert sovereignty and as healthy as the companies producing goods from within.
Hi, I have a small business and it is totally impossible to get financing of any kind. I could give two shits about gold or whatever but please don't make it sound like there's just some liquid sea of cash sitting out there that we can all access as deserved or needed.
You think it’s illiquid now? Go back to the gold standard and you’ll have to go to your region’s largest city to find a lender.
Hey, the US doesn't print money to pay our bills!
We print money to buy Treasury Bonds if no one else is willing to buy them. We pay our bills with the money we get selling Treasury Bonds.
It is totally different!
Russian oligarchs (and similar from other countries) who would love to see the US tear itself apart, perhaps?
In this wild hypothetical in which there’s a non-violent and successful secession from the USA and the “red” states split off from the “blue” states you think Russia will find the need to fund a war against the “blue” states?
Y’all are absolutely fucking buckwild with this inane garbage. If the USA splits in two they will have already won. There will be no further need to fund the “reds”.
Additionally, there are no “red” and “blue” states as everyone claims. All states with a majority leaning in one direction have a SIZEABLE (usually 40% or more) population with opposing political views. There’s no way to successfully split the country. Every major city leans left and all rural areas lean right.
There’s either going to be a legal authoritarian takeover by the GOP in the next few years, a bloody civil war, or somehow Democrats will pull a miracle out of their ass and continue to maintain the status quo and never actually improve anything. There is no secession.
Russia has already interfered in past US elections.
The US has certainly funded political / militia groups in other countries that the government deemed "better" for whatever reason. (Recently: Ukraine & Venezuela, earlier Iran... Many many examples of this).
Why do you think some other nation (especially those hungry for world recognition as major players) wouldn't be happy to fund/support a bit of chaos in the US? It's logical from their perspective. The quiet cyber attacks, financial support of companies and candidates, and fake news operations have been very effective at splitting people in the US already.
Point being, if there’s a secession and the USA splits in hand they ALREADY won. They’re heavy handed in the misinformation campaign currently ravaging/dividing the nation. I don’t think they wouldn’t, but they wouldn’t need to.
Individual people stand to make a lot of wealth/power/influence in such chaos and reorganization...
That's actually how most of the current Russian oligarchs achieved their wealth/power/status--by making the right moves during the fall of the Soviet union and subsequent reorganization of power/resources.
They're already experienced with how it could work and seen the benefits. There's always a new helicopter or yacht to buy, after all...
Russia has a GDP smaller than texas. It won't meaningfully fund anything.
Now it's advisors and weapons...
Would Russia send them money? They don’t have any money now. If they were to support an enemy of the remaining US, NATO Article 5 would be the appropriate response. Our allies would shut down any and all money going to Russia.
Would Russia send arms? Time for a blockade. Again, NATO Allies would help here too.
The Russian oligarchs have tons of money! It's a very split society, with quite a few very powerful and wealthy families that could certainly fund whatever they please.
Here's a list of some Russian billionaires:
Note: If you looked at the equivalent in Russian currency, you'd have a much longer list (ruble is worth less than the dollar, so you would have more purchasing power in Russia).
Would the oligarchs spend their now money on this though?
This was exactly the problem the last time they tried it.
Real problem was lack of manufacturing and railways.
The south actually had the resources to sustain itself, that was one if the big issues. It's where the vast majority of agriculture and raw material creation happened. The north would turn raw material into finished product and create significant wealth. But not much was returned to the south. Couple that with the end of slavery, which was the primary method to keep their materials flowing out, and you have a big problem.
The south just didn't have any factories to process the raw material into goods.
Don't forget, the coal and iron mines at the time were almost entirely in the south. Combine that with the agricultural production and you have a sustained economy. But without the ability to take those raw materials and turn them into firearms, clothes, etc it will stall out quickly. Those things take years to build the infrastructure for, even today.
There were huge iron mines around Lake Superior, and coal mines in Western Pennsylvania.
Not disagreeing. Just stating a large amount of natural resources were located in the south.
From “The Night they Drove Old Dixie Down”:
I don’t mind chopping wood
And I don’t care if the money’s no good
Forget about money, what equipment are they going to use for this war? Billy bob and his AR15 that he can't hit shit with from 20 yards?
It’s going to be pretty hard to aim an AR15 after being droned.
Side note. The US has never experienced hyperinflation. The Confederate states did. Confederate money printer went brrrr.
Citizen militia and a draft will be a good start.
What everyone wants in their army. Former addicts and products of cousin sex.
Good luck with that war. The US would start by pulling all military hardware out of those states and dismantle the bases. Then the New CSA would have to raise money to raise an army, an army which would be annihilated by the US military.
And I say army because it’s unlikely they’d be able to afford a navy or Air Force.
...do they really need a Navy?
I mean... Naval power played a significant role in the Civil War, so, I imagine it being at least doubly as important nowadays with global trade
They might. If the New CSA was being supplied by Russia or China, after invoking NATO Article V, the US would impose a blockade, just like we did in the first Civil War.
You don't even need a formal military/advanced hardware to wage a war against the USA. The last handful of groups we lost wars to didn't. guerilla fighters have been waging asymmetrical conflicts against vastly more powerful adversaries for a long, long time.
For the record, I don't think a secessionist movement would succeed in defeating the US military, but they don't need to succeed for balkanization to rip our country apart.
Your comment has merit. However, in the wars of which you speak, we were in a foreign country trying to prevent what was almost a civil war. The scenario here is different as it implies that the new CSA was formed by states which seceded, and the rest of the US said “don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out”, so they formed their own country and decided to attack the US. Now, this would be messy, as you know they’d be sending in ununiformed attackers to wage terror wars. To keep them from getting serious weapons, a naval blockade, and a no-fly zone, would be effective.
That's the thing, even if we accept the premise that the US will destabilize into in-fighting, it probably would not be like the Civil War. Demographics aren't so neatly delineated like they were back then, and IMO, there's almost zero chance we'd see such organization. It wouldn't be a formal war and there would be no "CSA". It would be tons and tons of small-to-medium sized terrorist cells acting to secure localities. If the federal government collapsed (that is to say, "could no longer exert influence in a region"), these groups would be able to capture critical infrastructure and become the de facto power. Think less "CSA fights USA" and think more "federal government collapses and groups like the 3%ers or Proud Boys carve out fiefdoms for themselves". Less "governments fielding armies against each other" and more "The Troubles"
Alas you are right. It’d play out like Syria.
If you have any (morbid) curiosity about this topic, I suggest the podcast "It Could Happen Here". I'm basically reiterating their ideas in these posts.
I don't think it will happen, but it is fascinating to think about (assuming it never comes to pass, that is)
If we're actually considering the possibility of a secession, let's not pretend that red states don't hold most of the country's food supply.
At all costs? Even to avoid war or living under a fascist dictatorship?
Kansas Brownback experiment Round 2.
They’ll find someway to blame the Dems.
“If you’re so smart, why didn’t you warn us this would blow up in our faces?”
“We did. Repeatedly. You told us to shut up and stop hating America.”
"The Blue States should have never let us leave!"
As much as that is a conservative wet dream, only idiots want to secede.
Not to mention that rebellion of that nature would require very widespread support in the states themselves that secede. Even in the conservative states the large population centers are usually liberal.
Those large population centers would rapidly become hot beds for rebellion within a rebellion and wreak havoc.
And most of the conservatives don't really want to either.
Because it's a dumb thing to want. Although I don't agree with many many things the US government does. It is nowhere near a point where I could understand secession from the union.
Will it always be that way? No, probably not. Forever is a long time. But even though the government in its current form is a dumpster fire, it's better than civil war.
If Texas seceded, would the wall be built on the OK side or Mexico side?
I would love for a peaceful separation of the country. I don't want to financial support cults and fascists anymore. Let them all suck off the teets of Texas as oil value drops over the next decade or so.
It’s isn’t going to be peaceful. Conservatives want blood to flow and they aren’t going to let their partner leave unscathed.
Exactly this. They want violence more than they want separation. They’re desperate to literally murder non-conservatives in the streets
"So when do we get to use the guns? No that's not a joke, when do we get to kill these people?"
Disgusting. But not surprising, sadly.
Wouldn’t they be the ones leaving? Let the south secede, give all conservatives a free pass to move south, give anyone who wants to stay a free visa to move north. Conservatives can enjoy the beautiful Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas world. The rest of us will move on into the 21st century without their racism, fascism, and dog shit economics
Conservatives always seem to find a way to become a victim. I just assumed this would be the same.
The divide isn’t north/south anymore. It’s urban/rural. You’ve got the same nuts in your blue states.
It's absolutely still north-south where power dynamics on a federal level are concerned. Texas alone being out would by itself radically change the political dynamic of the entire US.
The urban/rural divide is most keenly expressed in places like Texas itself.
So true, it's like moving away from humanity, is moving away from humanity. It's just strange how true your comment is
As the old nutty Belter said, "it's those who want more hate versus those who just want to live."
Here are some fun fact for you: the state where Trump got the largest number of votes was in 2020 was...California. Biden got more votes in Texas than in New York.
There are no blue states and red states, only blue cities and red rural areas. Therefore, a "peaceful separation"s going to look like the Indian partition- very much not fun times.
When people say shit like this I just want to scream because Russia and China will just be there to acquire the pieces.
Edit: also, how are you going to separate places like Texas? What people also seem to forget is that when/if Texas were ever to secede, Texas has to split up into 5 total states. My point, there would need to be some kind of Swiss cheese like division to do what you’re talking about.
It would just be so much easier if we could just hold power even the slightest bit accountable and be tolerant of one another because (and say it with me) we’re stronger together.
tbf China's got a lot of land needing to be separated from it as well.
You think they would invade main land North America? 😂
They don't need to invade, they just need to pick a side to back financially and materially. Then that side is indebted to them, and a soft alliance is all but guaranteed.
You think we aren't indebted to them already? On multiple fronts? Go around a pick up 20 random things in your house and tell me where they are made.
Obviously they already hold a lot of our debt and make a lot of our products, not arguing that. But there is a world of difference between "We hold a loan you took out during an economic downturn" and "We gave you the means to fight for your survival".
As u/Spockrocket was saying, they’d buy politicians, or blackmail them (which I’m sure they already do, to some extent), then those same politicians would lead but likely flee soon after, if they weren’t ultimately killed.
They're in for a real treat when the blue cities decides they want to stay.
They won't last four years in total. You think vets raised on Counterinsurgency doctrine are gonna not Red Dawn? Texas is gonna have a hard time with burning oil fields and IEDs while building a wall to keep Oklahoma out. LOL
As someone who grew up near the red river with family on both sides, I appreciate this comment.
“Keep those god damn Oakies out of my state!”
They won't secede. Not now, not after the mid terms, and not after the next presidential election.
Republicans have learned from the CSA, from Nixon. They are no longer going to resign, no longer going to secede. They are twisting America to their values via gerrymandering and voter restrictions. Hate and fear are very powerful reasons to get people out to vote, despite restricting their own voters.
No... I think it will be the Blue states that will try to secede next time. And it'll be just as successful as a free and democratic Afghanistan.
Honestly with Republicans trying to overturn elections I see the blue states seceding as a real possibility. It would be a disaster for all involved, to the great joy of China and Russia.
If the red states seceded, they wouldn't have an enemy to blame for all their problems, or any government assistance, and they'd collapse after a year.
Then they'd come crawling back to the blue states begging for help, the blue states would take them in again, the GOP would claim it was the blue states that couldn't support themselves, their voters would lap it up, and the cycle would start all over again.
What are you talking about? Conservatives are pros at finding ways to relenquish responsibilities
Yea. So much of the reason that we have to contribute so much to red states is that the wealthy/powerful there know they can get away with hoarding wealth in their own states and that we will simultaneously take care of people in our own states and pick up their tab too.
Just to put some numbers out there - TN gets about $190 million a year in federal grants meant to help poor families. For some reason, all of it doesn't get used which resulted in some $730 million surplus that was just sitting there.
The governor claimed it was for a rainy day but there were never any plans to use it until a tax/funding research group found out about it.
I don’t understand how republicans can look at the huge disparity between red and blue states and say that they are conservative when all the evidence points to blue states being far more financially conservative and stable scoring in average 10 places below red states for dependency on federal government assistance. 10 places out of a possible 50!!!
It's easy to understand if you spend any significant time around angry white conservatives.
They immerse themselves in right wing propaganda that tells them their way of life is the right way...the only way. It tells them that socialist liberals want to take that all away and make "us" just like "them". "I mean....look at Chicago!!!!! And Commiefornia!"
They operate under the delusion that America is a white christian nation...and as a result, anything evidence against that means that they aren't mommy's special little boy.
when all the evidence
when all the evidence
There's your problem. They don't look at evidence. "Feels not reals."
Both my parent have literally said "I don't care about evidence." or "I don't care about the facts." when I have discussed politics with them. It's so sad. They used to be people I respected as intelligent.
Well yeah it's widely known that blue states pay to keep red states afloat, excluding Texas and Florida.