Could the Northeast USA be an independent country?

[The Orson Empire]

Just because the people want it does not mean it is the right thing to do. A tyranny by majority is no better than a tyranny by minority (dictatorship).

But that's already happening. You could say that Republican policies that the majority want are tyrannical to the Democrat minority, or the other way around. Tyranny is subjective anyway.

"Ehh, tyranny is subjective anyway. We do not view establishing a theocratic dictatorship as tyranny, so that means it is not tyranny."

This is how you sound right now.

[Jamessonia]

But that's already happening. You could say that Republican policies that the majority want are tyrannical to the Democrat minority, or the other way around. Tyranny is subjective anyway.

"Ehh, tyranny is subjective anyway. We do not view establishing a theocratic dictatorship as tyranny, so that means it is not tyranny."

This is how you sound right now.

If the people don't view it as tyranny, is it? If the people of Texas/Alabama/[Republican state] want a religious based government, and they were allowed to secede and form one, why shouldn't they?

By the way, I don't support a theocratic dictatorship. I'm an atheist. I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

[Pandeeria]

"Ehh, tyranny is subjective anyway. We do not view establishing a theocratic dictatorship as tyranny, so that means it is not tyranny."

This is how you sound right now.

If the people don't view it as tyranny, is it? If the people of Texas/Alabama/[Republican state] want a religious based government, and they were allowed to secede and form one, why shouldn't they?

By the way, I don't support a theocratic dictatorship. I'm an atheist. I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

Just because the people want it doesn't mean it's not tyrannical.

The people also don't always know best.

[Jamessonia]

If the people don't view it as tyranny, is it? If the people of Texas/Alabama/[Republican state] want a religious based government, and they were allowed to secede and form one, why shouldn't they?

By the way, I don't support a theocratic dictatorship. I'm an atheist. I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

Just because the people want it doesn't mean it's not tyrannical.

The people also don't always know best.

Yet we let them vote.

[The Waste Land]

if the North east wants to leave they should be allowed to. same with Texas ,California and any other state or collections of states that want to leave. but sadly it's illegal and it disrupts the rights of people and states to make up their own minds

[WestRedMaple]

Anyplace COULD be an independent country.

Though, counting both New York and New Jersey as being among the eleven states in which I have resided, I do not find the depiction to be that accurate.

[Keventle]

if the North east wants to leave they should be allowed to. same with Texas ,California and any other state or collections of states that want to leave. but sadly it's illegal and it disrupts the rights of people and states to make up their own minds

We don't need another Europe.

[Pandeeria]

Just because the people want it doesn't mean it's not tyrannical.

The people also don't always know best.

Yet we let them vote.

And?

[Greater Istanistan]

Do it. You could become like Canada's best buddy.

In fact, we could annex the Northwest and kick Alberta out of the Federation so that the angry American neocons could have an oil-producing state to invade whenever they want.

[Jamessonia]

Yet we let them vote.

And?

If we are assuming that "the people" don't know what's best for them, why do we let them vote? Shouldn't a dictatorship be implemented to make the decisions?

[Waideland]

There's also the fact that the US would have trouble raising revenues without significantly increasing taxes if there was no Northeast - most NE states contribute far more in taxes than they receive in federal spending, while also having the wealthiest tax payers in the country who make up a lot of the federal tax base.

What 250k a year buys you in NYC is what 50K buys you between the oceans. Unfortunately, the federal tax rate doesn't make that distinction, so the people in that area get taxed more on their artificially inflated incomes.

Also, the NE isn't it's own economy. It's an economic hub for the rest of the country. If it's not part of the rest of the country, it's no longer our economic hub. To sustain it's current economic model, the NE would require free trade and finance that's nearly unheard of over national borders, as well as the willingness of what's left of the US to continue sending their money to what's now a foreign market.

[The Two Jerseys]

As someone living in Massachusetts, I say:

What the fuck?

Wahht the fahhck?

[Pandeeria]

And?

If we are assuming that "the people" don't know what's best for them, why do we let them vote? Shouldn't a dictatorship be implemented to make the decisions?

A dictatorship would be far worse. It's best for the people to elect their leader. Any and all alternatives are worse.

[Jamessonia]

If we are assuming that "the people" don't know what's best for them, why do we let them vote? Shouldn't a dictatorship be implemented to make the decisions?

A dictatorship would be far worse. It's best for the people to elect their leader. Any and all alternatives are worse.

But I thought we couldn't trust people to make their own decisions?

[Pandeeria]

A dictatorship would be far worse. It's best for the people to elect their leader. Any and all alternatives are worse.

But I thought we couldn't trust people to make their own decisions?

Didn't I just say the alternatives are worse?

[Greater Istanistan]

Note, however, that without said highly-developed hub the rest of the American economy would bomb.

Also, note that Canada and US have near-total free trade, as do the EEC nations. One could therefore expect the former US to form some kind of economic arrangement allowing political separation and continued economic integration. It would definitely benefit everyone, although given the higher share of taxes paid in NY (even if things do cost more there) any political separation would inevitably be far more economically harmful for the rest of the US.

[Jamessonia]

But I thought we couldn't trust people to make their own decisions?

Didn't I just say the alternatives are worse?

What if they elect a tyrannical government?

[Pandeeria]

Didn't I just say the alternatives are worse?

What if they elect a tyrannical government?

There are restrictions to stop them from doing that.

[Jamessonia]

What if they elect a tyrannical government?

There are restrictions to stop them from doing that.

If the people seceded to form their own government there wouldn't have to be.

[Pandeeria]

There are restrictions to stop them from doing that.

If the people seceded to form their own government there wouldn't have to be.

The people don't have to secede; there are restrictions.

[Jamessonia]

If the people seceded to form their own government there wouldn't have to be.

The people don't have to secede; there are restrictions.

This entire thread is based off the assumption that the people are allowed to secede.

[Pandeeria]

The people don't have to secede; there are restrictions.

This entire thread is based off the assumption that the people are allowed to secede.

Prove it.

[Jamessonia]

This entire thread is based off the assumption that the people are allowed to secede.

Prove it.

"So, after seeing the "1 in 4 Americans open to secession" thread, and with many Northeasterners/New Englanders saying it'd be interesting to see what it'd be like if the Northeast was separate from the US. I've been thinking about this recently: could the Northeastern United States go it alone? Should it be its own country?
I'm not saying that I'd even advocate for this, but it's interesting to think about and discuss."

Did you read the OP? The thread is a discussion of whether New England could be its own country. Logically, we have to assume that states are allowed to secede.

[Pandeeria]

Prove it.

"So, after seeing the "1 in 4 Americans open to secession" thread, and with many Northeasterners/New Englanders saying it'd be interesting to see what it'd be like if the Northeast was separate from the US. I've been thinking about this recently: could the Northeastern United States go it alone? Should it be its own country?
I'm not saying that I'd even advocate for this, but it's interesting to think about and discuss."

Did you read the OP? The thread is a discussion of whether New England could be its own country. Logically, we have to assume that states are allowed to secede.

The discussion is "If it should be it down country" and the answer is no.

[Jamessonia]

"So, after seeing the "1 in 4 Americans open to secession" thread, and with many Northeasterners/New Englanders saying it'd be interesting to see what it'd be like if the Northeast was separate from the US. I've been thinking about this recently: could the Northeastern United States go it alone? Should it be its own country?
I'm not saying that I'd even advocate for this, but it's interesting to think about and discuss."

Did you read the OP? The thread is a discussion of whether New England could be its own country. Logically, we have to assume that states are allowed to secede.

The discussion is "If it should be it down country" and the answer is no.

Ok. This argument has gone on long enough.

I agree, it shouldn't be its own country. But it's a little bit hypocritical that the US goes on about everyone having the right to their own homeland and at the same time not allow secession.