If the USA had to lose a state...

by **New Somersetshire** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:09 pm

Sociobiology wrote:
Treka wrote:The whole northeast can go to Canada , (so i'll be Canadian )

if the entire northeast became Canadian the rest of the country would go bankrupt and implode.
almost all of the states with a positive income are in the northeast.

Well, that's what all the rednecks get for always talking about us like we're some kind of moral degenerates. They have the nerve to talk about states' rights and then they refuse to respect our marriage laws. They can all rot.

by **Science-Oriented Scots** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:11 pm

Mike the Progressive wrote:
New Lusitaniagrad wrote:Jersey.

^This. Seriously, Fuck New Jersey, does it even have anything? It's like the dump site for the country anyway.

George Carlin wrote:"New Jersey: The Garden State" If you're growing smokestacks, yes.

by **New Somersetshire** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:23 pm

Mike the Progressive wrote:
New Lusitaniagrad wrote:Jersey.

^This. Seriously, Fuck New Jersey, does it even have anything? It's like the dump site for the country anyway.

New Jersey actually has a lot of refineries and industrial stuff. Despite all the trash talk and the nasty smell some areas of the state, it is profitable for the U.S. to own.

by **Qazox** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:11 am

Holy Marsh wrote:Wyoming. I have lived there. It is a horrible place, has the fewest people, and has epicly heavy winds that sent my asthma aflitter.

How could you live there? It doesn't exist.

by **Forlon** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:50 am

Qazox wrote:
Holy Marsh wrote:Wyoming. I have lived there. It is a horrible place, has the fewest people, and has epicly heavy winds that sent my asthma aflitter.

How could you live there? It doesn't exist.

Eh...it does unfortunately...I live about 20 some odd miles from the border of it...

by **Montanaa** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 4:13 am

I say Wyoming. Little population, too damn many cows, and just a waste of air!

by **Grainne Ni Malley** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 4:43 am

As of this point, it's going to be Arizona for me. I would say Texas, but I have an aunt and uncle there who are independently and individually millionaires with no children of their own. I'd be kinda screwing myself over.

by **Spalatia** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:37 am

Utah...I guess there are mining interests there, but...no more Mormons...so that'd be good.

by **Greater Tezdrian** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:41 am

Hawai'i. Hell, they aren't even legally a state

by **New Auditore** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:44 am

Greater Tezdrian wrote:Hawai'i. Hell, they aren't even legally a state

What are you talking about? Of course they're legally a state

by **Spalatia** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:51 am

SaintB wrote:
Occupied Deutschland wrote:No, those crazy fucks down there need a more responsible person to look after them.
Now Jersey, that wouldn't be a loss.

Sure it would, where would New York dump its garbage?

It's a Jersey thing

by **Valkern** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 4:17 pm

Texas, because it's large and (economically) diverse enough to survive on its own. Plus the fact that both sides would enjoy that arrangement very much.

The reason I say Texas and not California is that if California became independent, it would quickly become a rogue state and start conquering everything in sight. Unless the north secedes.

by **UCUMAY** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 4:19 pm

Valkern wrote:Texas, because it's large and (economically) diverse enough to survive on its own. Plus the fact that both sides would enjoy that arrangement very much.

The reason I say Texas and not California is that if California became independent, it would quickly become a rogue state and start conquering everything in sight. Unless the north secedes.

I wouldn't be happier. I'd spend 3 hours or more trying to cross the border to visit my boyfriend in OK.

by **Lackadaisical2** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 4:31 pm

The Archregimancy wrote:Given that even the US Congress has recognised that the annexation of the Kingdom of Hawaii was illegal (though with the wimpy proviso that "Nothing in this Joint Resolution is intended to serve as a settlement of any claims against the United States"), I add my vote to those calling in this thread for the restoration of the Kingdom of Hawaii.

Then where will I go for vacation?

The Philippines? Oh yeah, we gave that one up too. :palm:

by **Lackadaisical2** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 4:38 pm

Montanaa wrote:I say Wyoming. Little population, too damn many cows, and just a waste of air!

Thats a pretty strong case for keeping them around, I want their cow meat.

by **Xsyne** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 4:53 pm

The Soviet Technocracy wrote:4. Rhode Island better than all mentioned choices.

Naval Station Newport.

by **Greater Tezdrian** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:54 pm

New Auditore wrote:
Greater Tezdrian wrote:Hawai'i. Hell, they aren't even legally a state

What are you talking about? Of course they're legally a state

The Kingdom of Hawai'i is under US occupation illegal by the standards of international law. Of course, if the occupation were lifted, Hawai'i would probably become a republic.

by **Ethel mermania** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:57 pm

SaintB wrote:
Occupied Deutschland wrote:No, those crazy fucks down there need a more responsible person to look after them.
Now Jersey, that wouldn't be a loss.

Sure it would, where would New York dump its garbage?

That would be Virgina, North and South Carolina.

by **Farnhamia** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:59 pm

Holy Marsh wrote:Wyoming. I have lived there. It is a horrible place, has the fewest people, and has epicly heavy winds that sent my asthma aflitter.

That's not actually Wyoming's fault. The wind is a result of the fact that Nebraska sucks, more than the fact that Wyoming blows.

by **Greater Tezdrian** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 7:02 pm

Ethel mermania wrote:
SaintB wrote:Sure it would, where would New York dump its garbage?

That would be Virgina, North and South Carolina.

lol. Virginians can kick NY ass.

"Skallvia" · by **Maurepas** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 7:56 pm

Unilisia wrote:
Tavalu wrote:
But Idaho has Potatoes....and everyone loves Potatoes...Mississippi...hmm you may have a point there it is the poorest state in the Union, lets knock it out of the Union!

But then you'd have a 3rd world country mixed in with your country... I say give Alaska back to us Russian's

Meanwhile, use Mississippi for nuclear testing.

Some of us might not appreciate getting irradiated,

Maybe as long as it's northern Mississippi I can let it go, I can do without them, but the Coast has to be protected,

by **Power and Stability** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:38 pm

Just one? Well, I guess it would be Texas, since it was already it's own country before admission into the Union.

by **Arumdaum** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:43 pm

Valkern wrote:The reason I say Texas and not California is that if California became independent, it would quickly become a rogue state and start conquering everything in sight. Unless the north secedes.

Where'd you hear that from? :blink:

by **Lackadaisical2** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:45 pm

Greater Tezdrian wrote:
New Auditore wrote:What are you talking about? Of course they're legally a state

The Kingdom of Hawai'i is under US occupation illegal by the standards of international law. Of course, if the occupation were lifted, Hawai'i would probably become a republic.

If they held a referendum, would they vote to secede?

by **Lackadaisical2** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:46 pm

Maurepas wrote:
Unilisia wrote:
But then you'd have a 3rd world country mixed in with your country... I say give Alaska back to us Russian's

Meanwhile, use Mississippi for nuclear testing.

Some of us might not appreciate getting irradiated,

Maybe as long as it's northern Mississippi I can let it go, I can do without them, but the Coast has to be protected,

I've gone through Northern Mississippi before, theres no one up there. :blink:

If the USA had to lose a state...

Who is online