Can we just end this?

[ctrawick]

Look, it seems to me that, as a nation, we are so far apart there needs to be a resolution.

How about we just allow everyone move to where they want to be and run their "state" like they want?

Rules are;

1. We will take care of each other militarily 100% as long as each side pays the % they need to kind of like NATO. (No BS, but really do freaking pay)

2. If either side has to have a bail out ($) of their "state" the other gets to purchase, if they want, the "state" and have the citizens move to other States on their side. (no cheating)

3. If you decide to change sides must give up your citizenship and get approved to move to the other states and live by their laws. You will not be able to vote, cause any problems, or be forced to move back to their original "state" and never be allowed in again.

please add your thoughts.

 

[CSCOTTOSUPOKES]

My thought is the legislator that brings this to committee will be laughed out of the room.

 

[ctrawick]

I forgot about family;

4. this is not Germany after WWII, your crazy family can come to the other side to visit for a reasonable amount of time. (I am guessing it will be until the sane portion of the family gets tired of the crap and tells you to go back home)

 

[ctrawick]

My thought is the legislator that brings this to committee will be laughed out of the room.

Is this not what would make the "crazy" people from each side happy? I am sure I am missing out on some reasonable govt things that would need to be worked out. I am a freaking smart guy!

 

[Ostatedchi]

It is almost like you are advocating for a republic of states bound together - almost like ... exactly like the founders originally intended. Don't like Virginia, move to Georgia and live under their laws.

 

[ctrawick]

It is almost like you are advocating for a republic of states bound together - almost like ... exactly like the founders originally intended. Don't like Virginia, move to Georgia and live under their laws.

Would people really hate that? Well, I know democrats would.

Dems, please tell me why this would suck.

 

[Bitter Creek]

I'm a states' rights advocate.

The good people of Alabama and the equally good people of Vermont are different and want different things. They should both be able to have their own idealistic societies to the extent possible.

 

[CSCOTTOSUPOKES]

Would people really hate that? Well, I know democrats would.

Dems, please tell me why this would suck.

Sooooo...I could move back to Washington if I wanted. Kinda like that?

How is your plan some exciting innovative idea?

 

[ctrawick]

Sooooo...I could move back to Washington if I wanted. Kinda like that?

How is your plan some exciting innovative idea?

If you like it that is awesome.

It is not, but I we are both tired of the other and hate putting up with their crap. Will you join in on this or fight it?

 

[ctrawick]

All this takes is a convention of states, right?

 

[CowboyJD]

All this takes is a convention of states, right?

Change the Constitution back to the Articles of Confederation.

The Articles didn’t work out so well though.

 

[07pilt]

I'm OK with splitting things up, but I think your rules need tweaking.

I think the military thing you bring up is important, as a big part of American prosperity is based on the security of our own continent. If you are going to force everyone to pitch in though you have to split it up between defense and offense. I refuse to allow my VermontBucks to pay for another Vietnam or Iraq.

No bailouts are necessary if there are independent monetary systems.

Let the split countries make their own individual immigration laws, with the exception of an automatic once a year 90 day visa for visiting other states/countries for passport holders in former US countries.

 

[ctrawick]

I'm OK with splitting things up, but I think your rules need tweaking.

I think the military thing you bring up is important, as a big part of American prosperity is based on the security of our own continent. If you are going to force everyone to pitch in though you have to split it up between defense and offense. I refuse to allow my VermontBucks to pay for another Vietnam or Iraq.

No bailouts are necessary if there are independent monetary systems.

Let the split countries make their own individual immigration laws, with the exception of an automatic once a year 90 day visa for visiting other states/countries for passport holders in former US countries.

We might be close, but; isn't' your VermontBucks deal kind of like making students make the same grade no mater how hard they try? Nope, I am not sure I agree.

There has to be a way for the other side to bailout and purchase the land or we could have other countries move in, right?

Okay, but the 90 day rule has to be enforced.

 

[Ostatedchi]

Change the Constitution back to the Articles of Confederation.

The Articles didn’t work out so well though.

No but we could roll back a few of the changes now and get much closer to the original republic idea.

 

[CowboyJD]

No but we could roll back a few of the changes now and get much closer to the original republic idea.

Well, federalism is pretty fluid by nature. If you want less federal control...elect people that will do that.

 

[Ostatedchi]

I think the military thing you bring up is important, as a big part of American prosperity is based on the security of our own continent. If you are going to force everyone to pitch in though you have to split it up between defense and offense. I refuse to allow my VermontBucks to pay for another Vietnam or Iraq.

Distinction without a difference.

That's like saying the lottery money is earmarked for education. Great, that just means they don't have to allocate money from the general fund to make up the difference.

 

[07pilt]

We might be close, but; isn't' your VermontBucks deal kind of like making students make the same grade no mater how hard they try? Nope, I am not sure I agree.

Huh? No if I am going to the trouble of moving to a liberal state/country I don't want my taxes to go to paying for empire. I am Okay for with a defensive military, not invasion forces though.

There has to be a way for the other side to bailout and purchase the land or we could have other countries move in, right?

No need for bailouts if there are independent monetary systems. My VermontBucks go to paying for a defensive military to prevent other countries from moving in.

Okay, but the 90 day rule has to be enforced.

It doesn't have to be enforced if the state/country doesn't want to enforce it. Your state/country could be a real hardass about enforcing the 90 limit, and my state/country could be lax.

 

[ctrawick]

Huh? No if I am going to the trouble of moving to a liberal state/country I don't want my taxes to go to paying for empire. I am Okay for with a defensive military, not invasion forces though.

No need for bailouts if there are independent monetary systems. My VermontBucks go to paying for a defensive military to prevent other countries from moving in.


It doesn't have to be enforced if the state/country doesn't want to enforce it. Your state/country could be a real hardass about enforcing the 90 limit, and my state/country could be lax.

Dont want to move, not the "sane" states problem. There is a reason we are splitting and there is no need to start the same problems right off the bat.

To have a good defense there has to be an offense. Please provide a way for Vermontbucks to defend itself.

Okay, if the "sane" states do not want "borders" that is their problem, but I defer to #2 and how you keep yourself safe.

 

[trapped_in_tx]

Well, federalism is pretty fluid by nature. If you want less federal control...elect people that will do that.

Unfortunately the candidates keep lying about that topic.