States that could survive as nations if they seceded from the USA

[SP Cook]

My top 3 candidates:

1) Texas
2) Hawaii
3) Alaska

I really would put Hawaii last.  Tourism comprises 25% of its economy.  Divested of the passport/visa free relationship and familiar culture, it is in competition with 2 dozen other places.  Many of which have workers that earn 3rd world wages.

The military, which comprises 10% of the population, is nearly 15% of the economy.  The USA really has no need of a military base in the middle of the Pacific. 

The rest is agriculture and fishing.  Again in competition with places where people make 3rd world wages.  Absent a tariff free relationship with the USA, that is done.   

The state's only real resource is the weather.  Full of rich people (highest %age of millionaires of any state) who have so much money they don't care to pay confiscatory taxes to support a welfare state.  In return, of course, for the ease of travel, protection of US laws, and everything else that goes with being a state.  Absent that, many of these people would opt for places like Florida or California, while others would look towards the Carribbean.

[kalvado]

Surprised they got that many.  What they may not have expected is that in New Hampshire, along with neighboring Vermont, the "locals" still play heavily into local and regional politics because both states still adhere to "Town Meeting".

My impression is that FSP actually counts on local support in NH. You know, "live free or die" type of things..

[US 41]

The USA really has no need of a military base in the middle of the Pacific. 

So I'm guessing that you don't view places like North Korea and China a direct threat to the US. I'd be very nervous not having a military base in Hawaii.

[kkt]

My top 3 candidates:

1) Texas
2) Hawaii
3) Alaska

I really would put Hawaii last.  Tourism comprises 25% of its economy.  Divested of the passport/visa free relationship and familiar culture, it is in competition with 2 dozen other places.  Many of which have workers that earn 3rd world wages.

The military, which comprises 10% of the population, is nearly 15% of the economy.  The USA really has no need of a military base in the middle of the Pacific. 

The rest is agriculture and fishing.  Again in competition with places where people make 3rd world wages.  Absent a tariff free relationship with the USA, that is done.   

The state's only real resource is the weather.  Full of rich people (highest %age of millionaires of any state) who have so much money they don't care to pay confiscatory taxes to support a welfare state.  In return, of course, for the ease of travel, protection of US laws, and everything else that goes with being a state.  Absent that, many of these people would opt for places like Florida or California, while others would look towards the Carribbean.

It depends a lot on the relations between independent Hawaii and the remaining United States.  Visas aren't required for visitors between a lot of friendly countries.  Hawaii would continue to get a lot of tourists from the mainland US because it's a short flight and English is the dominant language.  And a lot of tourists come from Japan, too, which would presumably continue to come to independent Hawaii.

Of course military and naval bases in the Pacific are very valuable to the US.  They're that much closer to hot spots in east Asia and the middle east, especially now that the US no longer has bases in the Philippines.  I expect independent Hawaii would negotiate a treaty for defense including continuing basing rights for the US military.

Hawaii might continue use of the US dollar as their currency.  It works for Panama and some other countries.

[AlexandriaVA]

Hawaii was an independent country until the US annexed it in the 1800s...

[kkt]

Hawaii was an independent country until the US annexed it in the 1800s...

Sort of... the kingdom of the whole group of islands wasn't established until after Western contact.  It wasn't so much a matter of whether it would stay independent as a matter of which Western power would annex them and whether the royal family would get a friendly buyout or be overthrown by force.

[dvferyance]

(It is possible for a state to be its own dictatorship. Democracy really didn't come to the Deep South until the Voting Rights Act was passed, so I'd say those states were practically dictatorships before then.)

Alabama still pretty much is a "dictatorship", since we haven't had a Democrat governor since the Republicans went conservative...

How is that a dictatorship?

At the very least it's a one party system here now for the most part. Dictatorship is probably the wrong word to use, but it was almost midnight when I wrote that and I was rather tired.

There are plenty of states that are one party both Republican and Democrat.

[bing101]

Not that I think it'll ever happen, but if California were to go its own way, the water situation would likely be addressed by massive desalinization.  While extremely expensive, California is also a relatively "high tax" state; the per capita cost of a delsalinization plant would be at least absorbable (if not easily so).  If such a plant could be located in more brackish waters such as upper Suisun Bay or elsewhere in the Delta, the byproducts/waste could be lessened.  (OK, we can sell it as "sea salt" to Whole Foods, Sprouts, and other such specialty food stores!)

California tried to say the same stuff in the Six California proposal back in 2014 but in reality that got thrown out because of ethical issues with the petitioners for the Six California's. Two Solano county was at an odd position its a product of 1850's gerrymandering between Sacramento and Bay Area economic interests to get the State Capitol in Benicia. Two Sacramento and Solano counties would still benefit from separation via North California because all the other states like Jefferson, San Joaquin, Silicon Valley, West California and South California would still have to comply with Drought emergency policies made in Sacramento even though the state split up.

[8.Lug]

None. The costs of

• Establishing a military and border controls
• Establishing diplomatic and trade relations with other countries
• Changeover to a new currency
• Assumption of that state's portion of the national debt
• Lost economic production due to new trade barriers with other states

Would all be enough to immediately drain even the wealthiest state's coffers.

Most every state could survive if it seceded. Trade has already been established, no need for new currency, who said anything about assuming debt, and refer back to trade already established - but your main point - military - not sure what a military would even be needed for. When was the last time any state needed military intervention for something? The LA riots?

What the real question should be is;
Which states could survive all by themselves

No more 49 other states, therefore no more trade with them. All resources from those other states are no longer available to you. You now need to look to the rest of the world for what you lack - which means you need to bring something of serious value to the world's bargaining table. So NOW which states have what it takes to be a player?

New York has the banks
Michigan has the cars
Illinois has the planes
Texas has the oil

What else?

[vdeane]

Wow, you make it sound like any state that seceded would face a full Cuba-style embargo from the US!

[english si]

Wow, you make it sound like any state that seceded would face a full Cuba-style embargo from the US!

#ProjectFear starting early! Its proponents better watch out as it's just as likely to alienate people and get them to leave the union (thinking Scotland Independence strong negative reaction to such tactics as well as Brexit)

[Max Rockatansky]

Wow, you make it sound like any state that seceded would face a full Cuba-style embargo from the US!

Well there is case history of that not going so well in the States.  Funny, I thought someone would have brought up the British Empire post WWII as an example for this thread.  Almost everyone completely forgets that was actually a thing.

[bing101]

None. The costs of

• Establishing a military and border controls
• Establishing diplomatic and trade relations with other countries
• Changeover to a new currency
• Assumption of that state's portion of the national debt
• Lost economic production due to new trade barriers with other states

Would all be enough to immediately drain even the wealthiest state's coffers.

Most every state could survive if it seceded. Trade has already been established, no need for new currency, who said anything about assuming debt, and refer back to trade already established - but your main point - military - not sure what a military would even be needed for. When was the last time any state needed military intervention for something? The LA riots?

What the real question should be is;
Which states could survive all by themselves

No more 49 other states, therefore no more trade with them. All resources from those other states are no longer available to you. You now need to look to the rest of the world for what you lack - which means you need to bring something of serious value to the world's bargaining table. So NOW which states have what it takes to be a player?

New York has the banks
Michigan has the cars
Illinois has the planes
Texas has the oil

What else?

California has the app tech companies and Biotech industry?

[kalvado]

None. The costs of

• Establishing a military and border controls
• Establishing diplomatic and trade relations with other countries
• Changeover to a new currency
• Assumption of that state's portion of the national debt
• Lost economic production due to new trade barriers with other states

Would all be enough to immediately drain even the wealthiest state's coffers.

Most every state could survive if it seceded. Trade has already been established, no need for new currency, who said anything about assuming debt, and refer back to trade already established - but your main point - military - not sure what a military would even be needed for. When was the last time any state needed military intervention for something? The LA riots?

What the real question should be is;
Which states could survive all by themselves

No more 49 other states, therefore no more trade with them. All resources from those other states are no longer available to you. You now need to look to the rest of the world for what you lack - which means you need to bring something of serious value to the world's bargaining table. So NOW which states have what it takes to be a player?

New York has the banks
Michigan has the cars
Illinois has the planes
Texas has the oil

What else?

If you think IL has planes, DE would be the most successful one since it has everything else...

[TravelingBethelite]

None. The costs of

• Establishing a military and border controls
• Establishing diplomatic and trade relations with other countries
• Changeover to a new currency
• Assumption of that state's portion of the national debt
• Lost economic production due to new trade barriers with other states

Would all be enough to immediately drain even the wealthiest state's coffers.

Most every state could survive if it seceded. Trade has already been established, no need for new currency, who said anything about assuming debt, and refer back to trade already established - but your main point - military - not sure what a military would even be needed for. When was the last time any state needed military intervention for something? The LA riots?

What the real question should be is;
Which states could survive all by themselves

No more 49 other states, therefore no more trade with them. All resources from those other states are no longer available to you. You now need to look to the rest of the world for what you lack - which means you need to bring something of serious value to the world's bargaining table. So NOW which states have what it takes to be a player?

New York has the banks
Michigan has the cars
Illinois has the planes
Texas has the oil

What else?

If you think IL has planes, DE would be the most successful one since it has everything else...

After all, there's a building there that is the legal address for 285,000 businesses. Heck, it's the tax dodge for both Trump and Clinton.

Wilmington has 1.09 major corporations for each 1 of their residents. 

[empirestate]

California has the app tech companies and Biotech industry?

Let's try entertainment...



iPhone