politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Terrible idea, that new country would instantly realize how awful it is needing to negotiate for oil when you have zero local sources of it.
The US has Texas, and Canada has Alberta.
You do not wanna form any kind of new pseudo country that doesn't have oil in 2025, you will have some serious issues within a couple years.
The only people that talk about any states or provinces separating are the people too ignorant of just how deeply they are dependent on all the rest of their country's exports, imports, and production.
Yes, even backwater places have an absolute fuck tonne of stuff they produce that you depend on every Just because you might think mineral mines, farms, oil, steel factories, forestry, etc etc isnt of major value, it is and you literally depend on it daily
You cant break out from that, but too many people have become too deeply dumb to grok how fucked their life would become if their specific state/province seperated.
You're cost of living would fucking skyrocket to levels you cant even imagine. So much random shit you currently take for granted still being affordable would vaporize as you suddenly realize "Oh yeah I guess we dont make that here locally do we, where does that come from? Shit it comes from there? I never knew they made this stuff, I use it every day! Now I cant have it at all? I can still, it just costs a lot more and is imported? Well how much does it cost? (spit take) IT COSTS HOW MUCH NOW?!?!"
Fun fact, oil can be brought in from other countries and when you control all the access to the Pacific ocean you're the one who controls the negotiations.
I think you just made an incredibly strong argument for why the US would use it's military to prevent this.
It would certainly be tricky. They would need support from the US military stationed in those states. That seems like a stretch to me. They wouldn't defect "just cause". You would need an action from the current US government that would force them to pick a side.
I suspect you would find a huge chunk if CA’s military gear requires stuff from other states.
It wouldnt matter as IRL the tech industry would jump ship and most who would be involved in this understand that fact.
I don’t think anything would be off the table in the realm of deals. Like they could make a deal with special treatment for tech companies or what not. There is still a lot of "customers" in that area that tech needs. There is always a give and take.
The pure dollar loss for the US in tax money from California alone, combined with Seattle’s import hubs, not to mention all the west coast tech sector would likely end with several remaining US state collapses in sheer funding weight alone. Several southern states only survive because of the critical mass of tax money from west cost cities.
The tech companies would relocate as the US DOD will not give any contracts to the companies that remain. CA,WA, and OR aren't going to be making a lot of money if they leave.
Curious... what in Oregon gets DOD money?
I'll guess that you have never been to California. There was pumpjack one block away from my house when I was growing up.
But in fact, the biggest thing keeping us from moving away from fossil fuels is the political pressure from people who make money from it. And if California went into Canada or Cascadia, those people would come with it, kicking and screaming all the way.
Note the idea was joining Canada as-is, or forming a "Cascadia". I think the latter is much much less realistic myself :)
I sure as heck wouldn't want B.C. or any Canadian province to split off from Canada.
EDIT: I think you're absolutely correct that separatists ignore their own region's dependencies on the parent state. Quebec, for example. The separatists there always hand-wave away the question of how they would deal with losing access to the rest of Canada's resources (physical, cultural, economic and political).
So there are levels of depth to this analysis. Yes, most people think about it very shallowly. Just saying I want out of the bad situation I am in. Kinda like the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. Then there is where you are at. Hey what about all the thing we get from outside this new bubble. The level after that is, what do the outside places get from us. And how do they balance. There are plenty of places that don't have thier own oil, yet they are fine because they produce something the places with oil need. That said, water is another sticking point for California depending on where the line ends up getting drawn.