A few thoughts about January 6, 2021
- Thread starter ObsidianJones
- Start date
At this point it seems completely insane to pretend that there is enough of a shared national identity for the U.S. to remain a single nation. Insisting on acting like a whole when the nation is divided and fragmented is a waste of time and effort. And besides, if the so called fly-over states are so afraid of being overruled or dismissed by coastal states they should get the chance to make their own rules. Break the U.S. up into separate countries, it doesn't have to be 1 state = 1 country, but if people were forced to cooperate in order to achieve their goals, such as importing or exporting goods, traveling, arranging infrastructure, they might realize that they take a whole lot for granted.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,462
- 3,421
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
What they should do is break up the US so all the cities are one country and all the rural areas are another. Cause the problem with saying things like we aren't enough of a shared national identity is that cities tend to have similar morals and rural tends to have similar morals regardless of what part of the country it is.
Now that's what we need, an American Brexit (Amexit? USexit? The Purge?) from ourselves. I'm sure that would go well.
This kind of stupid shit is why the electoral college is so harmful. It gets people thinking that there's "Blue States" and "Red States" and not jumbled bits of population split 55-45 or less.
There's more GOP in California than there are in Texas and more Democrats in Texas than in New York
We "flyover states" make plenty of our own rules. That's how State Government works, fucks sake. Can people who live in countries smaller than Montana just shut the fuck up about "flyover states" please? Driving across your country and back is a day trip
There's more GOP in California than there are in Texas and more Democrats in Texas than in New York
We "flyover states" make plenty of our own rules. That's how State Government works, fucks sake. Can people who live in countries smaller than Montana just shut the fuck up about "flyover states" please? Driving across your country and back is a day trip
Last edited:
So would a number of other states when they realise how subsidised agriculture is by the government to keep prices low for both production and transportation to help supply them.
Also if you google it most of the data is per $ of produce sold which would mean non subsidised crops would be selling for higher amounts.
Remember last time you tried making this argument? I remember. California still produces the most agriculturally and there is absolutely not the negative correlation of population and agricultural output that you think there is.
Edit: oh, you added in some bullshit this time about subsidies. Well, I’m not going to waste my time checking dairy subsidies vs corn, but agricultural subsidies are large for California’s dairy and Iowa’s corn. It’s not like only the flyover states get subsidies.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,462
- 3,421
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Actually flyover states get more subsidies then California.
EWG's Farm Subsidy Database
EWG's Farm Subsidy Database put the issue on the map and is driving reform. Just ten percent of America's largest and richest farms collect almost three-fourths of federal farm subsidies; cash payments that often harm the environment.
farm.ewg.org
Over 1995-2020 Cali got 13 billion in subsidies, but Iowa got 35 billion, Nebraska got 24 billion, Kansas got 24 billion. TX was the largest receiver of subsidies at almost 40 billion.
While that's true, there's been a few things that haven't happened in umpteen years going around recently. Not saying this isn't a big deal, but it'd have seemed a much bigger deal last administration.
Oh sure, I get that, but they seemed to have been waiting for someone suitably evil to latch onto, he didn't seem to need to work very hard. He has no talent for leadership, they've got a real talent for being led.
I stand corrected. Still not enough to change that “flyover” states don’t deserve extra representation on the basis of agricultural output.Actually flyover states get more subsidies then California.
EWG's Farm Subsidy Database
EWG's Farm Subsidy Database put the issue on the map and is driving reform. Just ten percent of America's largest and richest farms collect almost three-fourths of federal farm subsidies; cash payments that often harm the environment.
Over 1995-2020 Cali got 13 billion in subsidies, but Iowa got 35 billion, Nebraska got 24 billion, Kansas got 24 billion. TX was the largest receiver of subsidies at almost 40 billion.
Oh I did.
I brought up the exact same point about it being by $ and that not taking into account subsidies and then you went very quiet and didn't actually counter it but went off on a tangent instead.
Oh and the major things California was making money on for output weren't milk or corn lol
Pretty sure that was either because I got banned or something. And you didn’t mention, cite, or emphasize subsidies at the time.
No. It’s nuts and fruit, but dairy is a significant thing for California, also beef.
Last edited:
That is pretty much my point, smaller nations tend to be more culturally homogenous, and people tend to identify, primarily, by their nationality. As opposed to the U.S. where people tend to identify by state. Of course a texan is going to be displeased about a californian making decisions on his behalf. Now, Texas might not be as culturally homogenous as where I live, but it is far easier to accept the opinions of "city folk" as long as they're texan, and not californian, because that adds on another identity.
Also, if we're talking about size, does that mean that people from flyover states need to shut up about coastal states since they tend to have smaller populations?
My point, as you put it, is that y'all are so "culturally homogeneous" that you've got no idea what you're talking about when you talk about US rural areas and flyover states, so please stop trying. You're just fucking wrong about so, so much. Barring a handful of our stupidest, mainly Texans, we're all Americans first over here before states factor in.
You get that y'all are doing the exact same thing as the Chipman's and the Maher's of the US do but with less cultural context, right? It's no less aggravating either
I don't think that's true. I think it's actually kind of the opposite of true, and I think that's the problem with the "flyover state" rhetoric. The US is actually quite homogenous. Each state is effectively its own small country, with its own urban and rural areas and culturally distinct communities, the same as any small country. Some states might have a slightly different urban or rural balance, or a slightly different economic focus, or a slightly different demographic makeup, but that's largely a generalization. The political tensions within the US aren't between states, they're also within states.
Small countries are not necessarily culturally homogenous, they can in fact be far less culturally homogenous than the US. Consider the UK or Spain, which are also a group of countries welded together but without any overarching federal political structure, and which have huge cultural and political divisions as a result. Consider Switzerland, which has four different national languages and seven recognized dialects in a country smaller than West Virginia. The US is a very young country, relatively speaking. Many small countries have very long and complicated histories which have produced incredibly deep divisions or even irreconcilable internal differences. Still, they manage.
The US splitting into "redland" and "blueland" is a fantasy. It would not, in reality, be any better than any other historical attempt at partition (which has a very poor historical track record, to put it extremely mildly) and it would not solve the problems of political division in the US. What is needed in the US is a restoration of faith in the democratic process, ideally through reform.
I dunno and I don’t care. Your argument still sucks ass as your obsession with “flyover” agriculture ignores the massive agricultural centers outside of the Midwest and agriculture still isn’t votes. We also need other resources than food, like wood, oil, fish, ports, etc., y’know, other things that the most disproportionately affected state by the electoral college has in abundance.