Vermont secession?
- Thread starter twoblink
- Start date
- Status
Evil Monkey
member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2006
- Messages
- 1,486
Do you know what this mean for the gun owners of Vermont!?!?
NFA WEAPONS FOR EVERYBODY!!! WOOOOO-HOOOOO!
I don't live in Vermont and I'm happy! lol
Since they would no longer be regulated by the Federal Government, guess it would be a great time to make use of that auto sear you've stashed somewhere.
NFA WEAPONS FOR EVERYBODY!!! WOOOOO-HOOOOO!
I don't live in Vermont and I'm happy! lol
Since they would no longer be regulated by the Federal Government, guess it would be a great time to make use of that auto sear you've stashed somewhere.
cloudcroft
Member
twoblink,
I would love to see VT leave, too, but for other reasons than you have.
-- John D.
I would love to see VT leave, too, but for other reasons than you have.
-- John D.
Liberal Gun Nut
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2006
- Messages
- 388
Yeah if they tried to seceed it would in fact be a great time to use that auto sear. They would need it for about ten minutes.
Btw here's some info on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Vermont_Republic
Btw here's some info on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Vermont_Republic
Flyboy
Member
Yup. It's called "San Andreas."
ctdonath
Member
The group: "La Raza" ("The Race")
The cause: "Azltan" (western section of the area broadly around the US/Mexico border)
Yes, they're serious, and have a lot of active & potential supporters.
It's not. There are several active and serious secession movements afoot. Fortunately, they're mostly merely small and annoying.
La Raza does. When a major fraction of the Southwest decides they're not cooperating with the US government anymore, and are going to join Mexico instead, changing their mind will be rather difficult. People of sympathetic mindset tried to shut down multiple southern cities several times last year, and - while they didn't cause an outright shutdown - did manage to demonstrate pervasive influence.
I know upstate NY would dearly love to eject New York City.
Yeah, Frank Bryan is definitely not what one would call a Socialist liberal. He is a true small government anarcho-communalist (small c communist). He had several Chevettes in various stages of 'usefulness' on his front lawn, but finally acquiesced to the outcries of his pissed-off neighbors and friends.
He seems decent enough, but I'm not too impressed with the ideology of community-governance that eschews basic Libertarian priniciple.
He seems decent enough, but I'm not too impressed with the ideology of community-governance that eschews basic Libertarian priniciple.
Liberal Gun Nut
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2006
- Messages
- 388
It has absolutely no chance of changing the borders of the United States, not by one milimeter. It's beyond imagining that the Federal government would peacefully allow a continental United States border to be changed. Don't sell your San Diego real estate yet.
Not quite almost causing an outright shutdown of a few cities for a day is way different from redrawing a border. Look at how much effort the US is expending on maintaining the territorial integrity of a hopeless non-American mess 6,000 miles away.
All those guys who came here came because they don't want to be under the leadership of the Mexican government. They didn't come here so they could expand the Mexican government's reach.
twoblink
Member
Err..
DC is not a state, but can I put it on the expel list too??
Hm.. I lived in Cali for 20 years, I lived in NJ for 2, and my ex was from Mass. I now live in Taiwan;
If anybody understands the frustrations of bad gov'ment, it's ME..
ArfinGreebly
Moderator Emeritus
Not to be Practical
Not to be practical, or anything, but could we NOT encourage the severing of California?
This is called, in the parlance of the Good Book, cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Longest coastline (except Florida), huge agricultural regions, mountains, forests, and on and on . . .
Keep the land.
Just . . . eliminate the pollution.
Not to be practical, or anything, but could we NOT encourage the severing of California?
This is called, in the parlance of the Good Book, cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Longest coastline (except Florida), huge agricultural regions, mountains, forests, and on and on . . .
Keep the land.
Just . . . eliminate the pollution.
LAK Supply
Member
HAHAHAHAHAHA! We have more than our share of "pollution" around here! You are correct about CA though......extremely rich in resources. Anyway, if there was a secession action here it would just be to make a change to outright Socialism rather than the creeping form that is in progress now.
Thin Black Line
Member
How about:
"It has absolutely no chance of changing the borders of the Soviet Union,
not by one milimeter. It's beyond imagining that the Soviet government
would peacefully allow the USSR's border to be changed. Don't sell your
Ukrainian, Byelorussian, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Georgian, Azerbaijan,
Lithuanian, Moldavian, Latvian, Kyrgyz, Tajik, Armenian, Turkmen, Estonian
real estate yet."
In all seriousness, I see these declarations, manifestos, constitutions come
up all the time. I think there was even a book called "We The Other People"
that was a collection of writings from various US domestic groups in the 1960s.
Obviously "we" are still here as a nation. That changes when TPTB decides
it changes --not a couple million marchers in a nation of 300 million and not
20 guys who can attend a meeting in the backwaters. You'll see something
like this when a peaceful change has been determined in advance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_coup_attempt_of_1991
One must ask themselves how all this might work in the context of the
changes being considered within the context of spp.gov?
Dr. Dickie
Member
It will never happen and, if for no other reason, then because they do not have the space to handle the 100 million people that would move there
Ahh, and could we make it New Hampshire, I already got a place there!
Ahh, and could we make it New Hampshire, I already got a place there!
Thin Black Line
Member
Space has less to do with Vermont's success at secession than it's physical
location. It's going to remain locked within the traditional northeastern block.
Here's the biggest factor they would have to consider should they "go it alone":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont#Economy
location. It's going to remain locked within the traditional northeastern block.
Here's the biggest factor they would have to consider should they "go it alone":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont#Economy
Igloodude
Member
So Alaska and Hawaii are pretty good candidates for secession, I'd imagine.
cbsbyte
Member
Let me clarify, I did not mean to say the entire group wanted Vermont to be like France, just my two friends, who live near Burlington, who I have know since middle school. They are probably the exception and not the rule. They are more of the latte, chai, Volvo driving liberals than the old hippy types that started this movement many years ago. The problem is that the new age materilistic liberals are now the ones in charge in Vermont.
Thinking about what could make Vermont a viable economy two things come to mind:
1) Information systems: Set up privacy and free speech laws could be used to make an information safe haven for internet sites and data storage/solutions. Naturally a number of these will be porn and gambling, but that's okay by me.
2) Banking: Become the Switzerland or Cayman Islands of North America. Tough privacy laws and low taxes (both of which fall in line with a libertarian-esque agenda) could be used to encourage people around the world to store money in VT banks the revenue generated could be a significant boost to the economy considering the size of the VT population
Both of these have the advantage of not requiring as much infrastructure and investment as heavy industry and they fit well within a decentralized government system. Plus the banking money would make countries that are heavily invested in VT natural military allies (formal treaties would still be necessary) if they are ever attacked.
1) Information systems: Set up privacy and free speech laws could be used to make an information safe haven for internet sites and data storage/solutions. Naturally a number of these will be porn and gambling, but that's okay by me.
2) Banking: Become the Switzerland or Cayman Islands of North America. Tough privacy laws and low taxes (both of which fall in line with a libertarian-esque agenda) could be used to encourage people around the world to store money in VT banks the revenue generated could be a significant boost to the economy considering the size of the VT population
Both of these have the advantage of not requiring as much infrastructure and investment as heavy industry and they fit well within a decentralized government system. Plus the banking money would make countries that are heavily invested in VT natural military allies (formal treaties would still be necessary) if they are ever attacked.
Liberal Gun Nut
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2006
- Messages
- 388
The ending of the Soviet union happened after years of increasing independence of the various Soviet Republics. The final legal dissolution of it was non-violent because it was a fait accompli. The Soviet government didn't have the power to send in tanks.
The current US Federal government has plenty of power and support, and that's why the borders won't change by one milimeter.
Are there some scenarios where this could be different? Let's say there's a big dollar collapse. The Chinese and other Asians decide they don't want to buy any more T-bills. This causes the dollar to drop. Oil producing nations see this dollar drop and decide they want no more of it; they'll take only Euros now, thank you very much. China then sees what is happening and decides to start dumping its enormous dollar foreign exchange reserves. A mad cycle starts and the dollar plunges, losing half its value within a month.
Confidence in the strength of the United States is shattered, even at home. US soldiers and law enforcement (government employees) suddenly realize that their fixed government wages won't pay for gasoline or anything else anymore, so they lose interest in what they're doing and don't want the job anymore. Meanwhile, the prosperous states like California are wondering why they are on board a sinking ship. Secession talk becomes serious, in the state governments, and the federal government is impotent to stop it.
But that's a nonsense scenario. It won't happen because none of the business or government leaders around the world want to see a dollar collapse.
The current US Federal government has plenty of power and support, and that's why the borders won't change by one milimeter.
Are there some scenarios where this could be different? Let's say there's a big dollar collapse. The Chinese and other Asians decide they don't want to buy any more T-bills. This causes the dollar to drop. Oil producing nations see this dollar drop and decide they want no more of it; they'll take only Euros now, thank you very much. China then sees what is happening and decides to start dumping its enormous dollar foreign exchange reserves. A mad cycle starts and the dollar plunges, losing half its value within a month.
Confidence in the strength of the United States is shattered, even at home. US soldiers and law enforcement (government employees) suddenly realize that their fixed government wages won't pay for gasoline or anything else anymore, so they lose interest in what they're doing and don't want the job anymore. Meanwhile, the prosperous states like California are wondering why they are on board a sinking ship. Secession talk becomes serious, in the state governments, and the federal government is impotent to stop it.
But that's a nonsense scenario. It won't happen because none of the business or government leaders around the world want to see a dollar collapse.
Libertylover
Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2006
- Messages
- 172
I hope none of you think that the American people would just sit by and do nothing if Vermont were to actually secede (highly unlikely in my mind, but not because of a potential fed reaction, or because of the economy) and the feds went in guns a'blazin. They're already pissed off because we're in Iraq, and plenty of people are pissed over that because they think we're killing Arab women and children. Many more are pissed because we're shedding American blood over it.
Do any of you honestly think the American people would stand by and do nothing as American blood is spilled by the feds over a PEACEFUL secession??? I think they'd go absolutely hysterically nuts and a reaction like that could provoke even MORE secession talks in other areas.
As for the Aztlan crowd, I don't think they'd want violence any more than the feds or any of us would want violence. It could send something like 13% of the population over the line in the sand (or however many Hispanics feel empathy or loyalty towards that cause, I'm sure it's not ALL of them or even very MANY of them, but that's too large a pool of candidates to be provoking) in all parts of the country. And they probably know that in the end, they'd lose, and poof, no more illegal immigration and "jobs Americans won't do" for them and their relatives.
Do any of you honestly think the American people would stand by and do nothing as American blood is spilled by the feds over a PEACEFUL secession??? I think they'd go absolutely hysterically nuts and a reaction like that could provoke even MORE secession talks in other areas.
As for the Aztlan crowd, I don't think they'd want violence any more than the feds or any of us would want violence. It could send something like 13% of the population over the line in the sand (or however many Hispanics feel empathy or loyalty towards that cause, I'm sure it's not ALL of them or even very MANY of them, but that's too large a pool of candidates to be provoking) in all parts of the country. And they probably know that in the end, they'd lose, and poof, no more illegal immigration and "jobs Americans won't do" for them and their relatives.
Igloodude
Member
It's not like a Vermont secession would cripple the US economy. And IIRC Vermont is the only US state not to have a DoD base, so no issue there with strategic basing (or any basing at all). No major Interstate connectivity (Lake Champlain separating NY and VT along half their border anyway) or other domestic supply lines at risk, with the possible exception of the St Lawrence Seaway, and that only tangentially.
- Status
