BLUEXIT: A Modest Proposal For Separating Blue States From Red

How you gonna get the stuff between the coasts?

 

How do you expect to get imports?

 

Ah, so this is a personal vengeance issue. You might want to seek help for that.

 

Canada doesn't have enough transportation capacity to handle the traffic you would have to have to handle the flow of goods between the coasts.

Get ready to PAY!

 

Through the southern deep water ports!

 

Nope. No vengance. Just making you PAY for using our infrastructure!

 

You are acting like an idiot. Go away.

From Asia, LOL. Good luck with that.

You are delusional with hate.

 

What infrastructure. Have you heard of planes. Besides, we don't need anything from you.

California and esp the West Coast is a country in its own right. California alone is the 5th of 7th largest economy in the world. You are an afterthought. Nothing more.

 

In other words you have nothing of import to offer in refutation of my assertion. Leftists usually aren't able to refute things because they live in an alternate reality created from willful ignorance.

Look at a globe once in a while.

Ever hear of the Panama Canal?

 

What assertion? You mean your little pissing match. The idea of the Blue Exit obviously terrifies you. Otherwise you wouldn't be making asinine threats.

Good luck with that. Have you heard of shipping costs and time.

You all hate the liberals and don't want to be a part of the same country. Fine. You win. We hate you too now. And I'm not even a liberal.

You win. America is dead.

Almost everyone in the world hates you, including your own former countrymen. You win.

 

How much grain, meat, gasoline, kerosene, and diesel fuel are you going to ship by airplane?

How much crude oil does the West Coast produce? The last time I looked it was only about 30% of your needs!

More than half of the crude oil coming into East Coast refineries is shipped in by rail from red states.

You can tell yourself all you want that the Coasts will be self-sufficient but that is just willful ignorance. Willful ignorance is *not* a survival trait.

 

I am not in favor of anyone being exploited. Further, I don't see that a free market supports that either. Most societies that try to guarantee a standard of living find their controls make things worse- not better.

You may be aware of the terrible conditions in Venezuela today- but are probably not aware how they came about. I worked there for a while in the 80's, managing a contract for a US business. The day I flew in- martial law and curfew had been declared due to riots, and soldiers were everywhere. The government had been insuring a good living by controlling not the income but the costs of living. Every product price was controlled by government, so that all could afford things. If you bought a can of Pepsi, the maximum legal price was stamped on the can. Retailers who exceeded that could be arrested. I asked local people how suppliers could profit and survive under such a plan, and found that the government subsidized loss for business with national oil profits. However, oil money had run out, so they borrowed- until the World Bank and others refused them credit, unless they returned their system to a free market. So they started removing price controls- each week a new list of items went to free market rules. This created situations where fuel when up, but taxi drivers couldn't raise fares. Merchants wouldn't sell goods on hand, because in a few weeks they would be able to double the price. Groceries became outrageously high- and people couldn't buy them. 500 people killed in Caracas the day I arrived. Airports all locked down; you couldn't be out of your hotel between 6PM and 6 AM. In the 30 years since, this socialistic idealism has continued to dominate Venezuela politics- with results always producing disaster. Now- it's worse than it was 30 years ago. Beautiful country, nice people, many natural resources- horrible politicians who have no grasp of economics and free enterprise... so the people stave because the government and socialists say they need more controls. They just never learn.

There will always be those in a free market who don't participate, who expect to be carried. This is not the people who are disabled or at issue through no fault of their own- and we are a generous people who care for others in that position. Unfortunately we also feed the idea that the quality of life is an entitlement you need not work for; that to excell at what you do, to keep your word, to stand on your own two feet and contribute rather than burden- are not requirements or necessary.

There is a reason why some people fail when they have everything needed to succeed. Generally, that is lack of ambition, of self-respect and discipline. These are personal issues, not exploitation. You can't grant them by law or charity- but they are available anytime such people want to change themselves.

The free market concept works for those who work at it, but doesn't provide a free ride for those who don't- and they believe that constitutes exploitation.

 

No threats. Just a promise. A promise that you *will* PAY.

But we will have all that extra money coming in from the coasts to pay for the extra costs!

[quoteYou all hate the liberals and don't want to be a part of the same country. Fine. You win. We hate you too now. And I'm not even a liberal.[/quote]

I don't hate liberals. I just believe they are dead wrong and are taking this country down the toilet. I just don't want to get flushed along with them!

No, America is very much alive. That was proven last November!

 

You obviously never picked up a history book. No states are ever going anywhere, unless the constitution is changed to allow states to leave. Even if that did happen, which would be a million in one odds, there would be no actual blue states, because most folks wouldn't follow leftist kooks into your dystopian nightmare. You'd be little specks of blue, sorrunded by a sea of red. Good luck producing your own food, and energy. Lolz.

 

I know this. Why do you think I am a leftist?

 

After reading the thread, one thought comes immediately to mind. Paucity. As in the lack of thought being put into the advocacy of the separation of the union by those on the left.

For those advocating separation, have any of you reconciled yourselves with the motive? Why is it so important to folks advocating this to demand that their will be done? Do they suppose that at the moment of separation, the unity of the one direction and dictatorship will be achieved that will direct their little science experiment? How about the servitude of those who disagree with them within the territories they claim as theirs? These issues just don't evaporate, and yet, given the level of vapid mouth breathing that seems to be associated with the advocacy, it seems at least hopeful for the rests of us to recognize that these little temper tantrums seem unable to create a cogent argument for their willful abuse of the nation that sustains them.

 

Not sure if you're trying to make a coherent point, or what?

 

So are you going to threaten the state's with ssession every time a Republican is elected from now on?

 

Hey, that's an interesting system: The states that are not of the elected President's party colours do not pay taxes!

 

I thought it was rather funny as hell myself... but irony is indeed more difficult in writings (... right, Soldier?)

 

Those nukes are owned by the federal government, along with the soldiers stationed there. If California left, those soldiers would be removed and those nukes secured. Please tell me you understand this, right? I thought you were kidding at first but I'm starting to think you're being serious

 

I read the post you responded to. I think he made a misnomer when he referred to conservatism. People who are liberal in the classical sense tend to gravitate more to the Republican party these days especially since whay is liberal is what JFK stood for. To be honest it lines up a lot with what Reagan stood for. So this isn't liberalism verses conservatism. Its conservatism and liberalism being against socialist progressivism.

 

The argument that you are trying to make here fails on two very important points. The first is that your working class mentality blinds you to the fact that workers do not drive the economy, or are even its backbone. They are pawns.

The second point is that none of the so-called red districts are all that red. In everyone of the past several elections, more people have voted for Democrats than Republicans, yet there are more Republicans in office. This is because of the way in which districts in the south are gerrymandered. Thus when one looks into the demographics one finds that 40 to 49% of those living in red districts vote Democratic. When one looks further into it, one finds that after the creative arts, science, and computer/information technology, the highest concentration of freethinkers are in agriculture. If you think that those liberal leaning farmers and ranchers are going to just willingly donate their efforts and land to the cause of your fascist collective, you truly have a lot to learn.


The Beatles did a song that goes: "There is nothing that you can do that can't be done. Nothing that you can sing that can't be sung. Nothing for you to say but you can learn how to play the game. It's easy."

So I guess your argument fails on three points. It's like the best economic argument you can make is that if there were a red/blue divide that the red side would spend all its efforts trying to block the blue side from succeeding. That seems to be primarily what animates conservatives these days. The whole repeal and replace fiasco has nothing to do with healthcare, and everything to do with tearing down the legacy of Obama.

In any case, what makes you think that somehow blue areas would be deprived of, what are essentially menial labor accomplishments. Have you ever been out to a vegetable farm? I highly doubt many of those Mexican looking workers, who tend the fields and bring in the crops, are going to want to side with the reds, who so clearly repeatedly express their hatred for those Mexican workers.


If you can get out of your working class mentality for a moment, you'd see the real difference between red and blue. A difference that is readily observable. The Republican idea of cutting taxes and regulations to spur the economy is and idea that has been tried, and failed. You can look around the country and see the effect for yourself. The reason so many red districts are among those facing economic difficulties, is that Republican policy makers, in those districts, have been implementing Republican economic ideas and were blocking anything helpful from the federal government, mostly to spite Obama.

Conversely, in those districts that have been seeing the greatest economic growth, the local policy makers have been implementing liberal ideas. Liberals know that by offering unemployment insurance that layoffs in one sector don't bring down the economy and it makes it easier for a recovery. Liberals know that by providing good schools for all our children, that we gain, as a society, a citizenry that is knowledgeable and skilled, so that we can face the challenges before us. Liberals see that by offering equal rights and freedoms to those unlike ourselves, we are expanding our own rights and freedoms.


So in the end, the blue side would be richer, not only in economic terms, but also culturally, and socially, all full of hope of an ever improving future. All the while the blue side will sit there grumbling, wondering who they can tear down next, who they can obstruct.

 

how come whenever Red States talk about the nation splitting up, they always talk about deporting their blacks, Jews, Muslims, Liberals, Progressives, etc?

 

Fix the bolded. You meant "the red side".