Texas Sucession
What do you guys think the likelihood of this happening?
Discuss
Also here is some info.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/12/06/could-texas-really-secede-from-the-union-the-answer-is/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/05/texas-secede_n_4213506.html
Re: Texas Sucession
From what I can tell, the likelihood of secession happening is about 1%.
Texas is famous for oil, however, as is Alaska.
I'm curious, what percentage of the state's total reserve has been pumped out as of today? How much remains?
From my understanding, there is currently a great mass of oil that the United States allows to go unused, holding it out for the future, perhaps even military preparedness. I think the bulk of this unused oil is in Alaska, but, if I'm wrong, if Texas has a sizeable reserve, then it could weather economic storms on its own better than almost any other state in the Union.
The only weakness I can see Texas having is a lack of great freshwater reserves.
On the other hand, by that reasoning, I suppose it could be argued Michigan is the most potentially rugged survivor of all ...
It'd negatively impact Texas's economy significantly if it did, so pretty darn unlikely. Sure, they can manage independently, just like California could, but there's no particular benefit to.
It also doesn't help that like most red states, they get more from federal spending than they put in. Link
They aren't as dependent as a lot of others, but they'd still take a hit when just talking direct money.
Plus social reasons, i.e. 'they don't want to.'
Originally posted by Bardock42
The assumption that Texas would do as well if it was not within the infrastructure and protection of the United States is imo not warranted. It is more likely that Texas would become closer to Mexican standards, than that they continue to thrive.
I take the exact opposite position of you.
Not only would they do well, they'd probably do better if we assume the US doesn't become a dick and just treats Texas like a friendlier Mexico. Additionally, Texas would improve it's "standards" and thrive even more if it were independent.
Let's go down the list of why they could succeed:
1. Money: They have "financial solvency." They are a net positive state with federal taxes. So any federal assistance they receive for things such as schools and highways is moot: they'd actually have more money if they seceded. And it is a comfortable margin. So much so that they could increase the funds they have available for state programs AND reduce taxes: both with comfortable changes. Not bad, right? But some would argue the federal military and federal contracts would evaporate which would cut out a large part of both the revenue and assistance from Texas.
Regardless, here is a nice chart that talks about the tax revenue versus the tax spending:
For Texas, it is:
Federal Tax Revenue: $265,336,000,000
Federal Tax Burden: $147,338,000,000
If we assume that the Federal Government does not throw a fit and keeps the military bases and federal contracts in Texas (because we do that with Japan and Germany, for example, already), there shouldn't be a problem. It's just that Texas would get a massive bump in "funds" due to the loss in tax burden to the Federal Government.
Why should the US keep friendly relations with Texas if Texas secedes? That's a good question...but the obvious answer is that there are too many federal contracts and military bases in Texas at the moment and it would cost too much to just get rid of them.
By the way, it looks like the financial burden on the US Government is even less, now, for FY2015, than the above numbers:
https://www.usaspending.gov/transparency/Pages/StateSummary.aspx?StateCode=TX&FiscalYear=2015
$96 billion instead of $147 billion. We don't have FY2015 Tax Revenue Collection data quite yet but it is likely higher than $265 billion because Texas economy is still growing and the shifts in tax policy from 2014 to 2015 did not change very drastically. My estimate for for FY2015 Federal Tax Revenue is $285 billion.
Regardless, the case for financial solvency for Texas is made very strong for this year better than many others. More than in a long time, Texas can be quite financially comfortable if they seceded and lost their federal tax burden. Texas could drastically increase spending per citizen and still offer tax breaks to its people. Additionally, they could probably increase tax revenues, marginally, due to being an independent nation that can conduct trade with other nations and states. Meaning, increased revenue, decreased tax burdens.
2. Energy Leverage: So let's assume the US wants to play hardball and really tries to stick it to Texas if it seceded. Would the US even do that? Probably not. Here's why:
Texas has 1/4th of the US's oil reserve and 1/3 of the US's natural gas reserves. 95% of the nations oil and gas comes from Texas' pipelines as well (pun). For these 3 very basic reasons, alone, the US would not try to play hardball with an independent Texas. Relations would remain friendly (assuming Texas successfully seceded).
3. Economy: Texas has a very robust economy and is home to more Fortune 500 businesses than any other state.
4. Power Grid: Texas has it's own power grid. It would be far easier for them to drop from the US than any other state when it comes to electricity.
5. Military and Law Enforcement: Texas has it's own robust military and law enforcement (Texas Rangers). They can and do police themselves. They'd still need to rely on the FBI for crimes that cross borders, however.
Here's another source that chops down my post to very simplistic points:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/13/secession-yall-why-texas-can-pull-it-off/
Originally posted by Q99
It also doesn't help that like most red states, they get more from federal spending than they put in. Link
I directly contradict this with numbers straight from the sources. The above site uses a weighted/calculated measure instead of raw numbers (and they use 3 different categories)...which skews the perception of what is taking place. Texas is actually the second highest tax positive state in the US: behind California.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
It would be the same as if Scotland had broken off from the UK. Pointless.One non-economic impact on the USA would be that the Republicans would likely never get a president in the White House again.
idk, democracy seems to have a way of voters getting disappointed with the parties in power.
I'm sorry if the question is would Texas survive sure it would but would it thrive. It would have to go through some growing pains.
If Texas seceded any US resources and items would be removed. Yes this would include US military bases. We keep the ones we do in Japan and Germany because A) They serve strategic purposes for location) and B) we have treaties with them.
They would also have to get their own currency which could be valued pretty low. I mean Texas has oil but they aren't competing with the other major oil producing countries.
Also the US economy will still be much stronger than Texas' and that is who they would be competing with. Also most businesses would probably move their offices back to US soil. So all those Fortune 500s could quickly leave Texas.
Originally posted by Bardock42
And the whole world just puts in all the agreements it has with the US with Texas because **** it...that's how politics work
Yes, because in modern history, European nations that split or merged utterly collapsed. And economies as small and insignificant as Texas wouldn't warrant renegotiation nor would people be willing to put in the effort to do so. Nor would temporary measures for things like NAFTA be put into place during a transition period. In fact, no one knows how to actually make trade agreements or negotiate them. All the trade agreement writers and negotiators died under the Reagan administration back in the 80s.
😮💨
Originally posted by dadudemonThe point he was trying to make is that Texas isn't just going to become a massive international power. It's going to need to get it's own trade agreements and won't be able to rely on the US power behind it.
Yes, because in modern history, European nations that split or merged utterly collapsed. And economies as small and insignificant as Texas wouldn't warrant renegotiation nor would people be willing to put in the effort to do so. Nor would temporary measures for things like NAFTA be put into place during a transition period. In fact, no one knows how to actually make trade agreements or negotiate them. All the trade agreement writers and negotiators died under the Reagan administration back in the 80s.😮💨
Also most of those small countries aren't exactly rocking a lot of power.
Originally posted by Newjak
The point he was trying to make is that Texas isn't just going to become a massive international power. It's going to need to get it's own trade agreements and won't be able to rely on the US power behind it.
Yeah, that much is very obvious but it is a argument from ignorance or argument from incredulity fallacy. "It's too hard and we just don't know" won't cut it. And it since there is much more incentive to make trade agreements than not, it would very obviously be expeditiously negotiated. Also, as I hinted, it would be obvious that a transition period would be undertaken. Since it would be easier for Texas, than any other state, to make this transition, as I indicated in my previous post, this transition is not some incredulous and insurmountable task.
Originally posted by Newjak
Also most of those small countries aren't exactly rocking a lot of power.
I think your sentence should finish with, "...like Texas would have." That's a very valid point. Since Texas would be a world player, if it is independent, it's transition into the big leagues of nations would rustle some jimmies.
