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

[hbelkins]

Obviously, Texas. It's big enough, has several large cities, and has an economy that could sustain independence.

I also think Florida could. The tourism industry would continue to thrive if they did not enact ridiculous entry requirements.

I do not think California could survive, primarily because of water issues.

I also have my doubts about New York. If the state of New York became an independent nation, the financial markets for the USA would move out of NYC. This would be a blow to New York's economy.

[jeffandnicole]

Any state that gets more from the Feds than they send in wouldn't survive! So while many states think they'll be fine, suddenly money they would get for construction, national parks, health care, etc would be in trouble.

[empirestate]

I also have my doubts about New York. If the state of New York became an independent nation, the financial markets for the USA would move out of NYC. This would be a blow to New York's economy.

More than just the financial markets. The influence of NYC as a whole is national, not statewide–it is the de facto capital of the U.S. in many non-governmental aspects (and with its financial weight, inevitably some governmental ones as well). In fact, the states that are left behind would be apt to suffer at least as much as the state that it takes with it. The U.S. as a whole could survive, but the Northeast region would be dealt a serious blow (and other Northeastern states would likely move to secede along with New York to avoid economic ruin).

I think if New York seceded, it would become more like an autonomous "federal district" that would continue to have great influence on the surrounding country.

[kphoger]

Apropos:

[kurumi]

Texas is a little below the median in terms of "dependency on federal benefits": https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/. So #Texit could be viable. It also has the population and scale of economy that most other states do not.

The comparisons on that page are interesting... goes against some of the stereotypes and assumptions many have about which states benefit from government spending.

[Desert Man]

The 3 most likely places are 1. Texas (only 1% of Texans believe or support secession and independence), 2. Cascadia (the Pacific NW region of WA state, Oregon, northern ID, parts of northern CA and extending into British Columbia of Canada), and 3. Hawaii (once a kingdom under the native Hawaiian people until US annexation in 1898). Then there's Alaska (by itself away from the lower 48), Vermont (the "second republic" movement (VT wasn't part of the US from 1777 to 1791) and Puerto Rico (despite the majority voted for statehood in 2012, the commonwealth is broke from their fiscal crisis).

And the other 3 youngest members (statehood admission) of the USA: the Dakotas with the micronation Republic of Lakotah claimed Oglala Sioux reservation land also in Neb., Wyo. and Mont., the Indian Territory of Oklahoma which was sovereign from 1838 to 1907 statehood: the Cherokee, Chickashaw, Choctaw, Muskogee and Seminole Nations, as well moderate-sized tribal nations of Osage, Shawnee, and Lenni-Lenape or Delaware in the eastern half of OK, and Aztlan or "El Norte" in Arizona, New Mexico (ironic name) and southern Colorado with portions of California, if Mexico doesn't reclaimed the land in what's known as "La Reconquista" of Hispanic, Latino and Chicano peoples in the last half a century, by political power and demographically near majority growth.

[bandit957]

Probably any state could "survive." It's surprising just how many tiny countries there are out there.

But many of these states would probably become dictatorships. Some pretty much already are.

(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.)

[Brandon]

Probably any state could "survive." It's surprising just how many tiny countries there are out there.

In it's current condition, Illinois could not.  Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan, Kentucky, Missouri, and Iowa would stand a far better chance.

[kkt]

Survive in what sense, is the obvious question.  A basket case like Haiti?  A poorer country, struggling to avoid de facto rule by drug lords, like Mexico?

California would do fine on its own.  Their water needs are primarily for agriculture, and could be reduced greatly by different choice of crops.  And being a separate country wouldn't stop California from buying water from the Colorado River etc. if it needed to.  It's really the inland west that has the greatest water crisis.  They have little agricultural use that could possibly change, they've been depending on well water from diminishing aquifers for many decades already yet don't have the political will to stop unsustainable water system hookups.

[bandit957]

Probably any state could "survive." It's surprising just how many tiny countries there are out there.

In it's current condition, Illinois could not.  Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan, Kentucky, Missouri, and Iowa would stand a far better chance.

I think all those states would have trouble, including Illinois. Minnesota though would have a very good chance.

But there are much smaller countries than Iowa out there.

[kkt]

New York would do just fine on its own too.  It's an international banking and business center now, and would remain so.  Sort of an American version of Switzerland.  It would still be one of the world's great ports, and still have some agriculture and manufacturing and tourism.

[AlexandriaVA]

Does anyone really think that if Iowa, for example, seceded that their economic ties with the rest of the country, would suddenly disappear? Of course not.

To put it another way, Canada is a sovereign nation, but the close business, economic, language, and cultural ties all make them extremely close to the United States (Quebec notwithstanding, which you may recall came very close to a Quexit back in the 90s).

Being a soverign nation does not make you isolationist....

[bandit957]

In the 1990s and 2000s, I almost caused a "Kexit".

[US71]

Didn't Texas beg to become a state so someone would pay their debts?

[AlexandriaVA]

Texas is still a taker state (gets $1.09 for every $1.00 it spends), so I don't see why it would leave.

https://mises.org/blog/which-states-rely-most-federal-spending

[Brandon]

Didn't Texas beg to become a state so someone would pay their debts?

Um, yes, as a matter of fact, they did.

[US71]

Didn't Texas beg to become a state so someone would pay their debts?

Um, yes, as a matter of fact, they did.

And now they keep talking about wanting to secede?

[kalvado]

Big question is what happens to federal debt in case state choose to leave. Do they take their fair share of that debt? And what is "fair" - proportional to population, area, assets, GDP?
a year worth of income in debt (and US federal debt is about 100% GDP) on top of about 15% in state and local government is enough to crush such a newborn without rock solid credit rating backed by huge military power.

[xcellntbuy]

Silly talk as we approach 240 years of independence.  It was tried before, the first seven of which formed a combine.  Four more joined and two more had parallel governments on both sides.  The experiment ended with more than 620,000 dead and 500,000 injured or maimed out of a total population of 30 million.  It was a very long time ago and no one alive today lived through it.  It is considered by many as the first modern war.  It should not be repeated despite having a huge flag of the Army of Northern Virginia flying on a very tall pole on northbound Interstate 75 in middle Georgia with a billboard next to it with the advertisement "#Secede."

[Desert Man]

what about Florida? and the small, yet numerous neo-confederate movements in the South/SE US? It has been 150 years since the Civil War, however southern cultural identity, political differences and regional histories makes the South different from the North. In the 1980s, the Conch Republic of Key West and the Florida keys made headlines when they "officially" seceded from the union.

[jeffandnicole]

Should a state wish to secede, I wonder how many of their people would suddenly realize they now need passports to leave their 'country' to visit a neighboring state.

I wonder how many will blame the TSA for a false sense of security at airports, failing to realize the TSA is an American security force, and not involved in their little country. (It's common for Americans to go to another country and complain about the TSA security agents there...whom have nothing to do with the TSA.)

[kalvado]

what about Florida? and the small, yet numerous neo-confederate movements in the South/SE US? It has been 150 years since the Civil War, however southern cultural identity, political differences and regional histories makes the South different from the North. In the 1980s, the Conch Republic of Key West and the Florida keys made headlines when they "officially" seceded from the union.

Look up history of conch republic..

[Thing 342]

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.

[kalvado]

Should a state wish to secede, I wonder how many of their people would suddenly realize they now need passports to leave their 'country' to visit a neighboring state.

I wonder how many will blame the TSA for a false sense of security at airports, failing to realize the TSA is an American security force, and not involved in their little country. (It's common for Americans to go to another country and complain about the TSA security agents there...whom have nothing to do with the TSA.)

Well.. An interesting fact.
I happened to talk to a high school kid who mentioned an interesting situation in their class:
At some point teacher asked how many students were in NYC (which is 3 hour drive from us, or $70 Greyhound round-trip)  - and about half of the class never went there.
How many of you did fly? - just that kid.

Which basically tells me that if things come to popular vote, there will be A LOT of people who don't care about travel - since they don't travel themselves.

[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.

Military - state can claim a "fair share" of existing military. Or, better, seize whatever is on their territory (think WA or ND getting 30% of US nuclear weapons)
Changeover to a new currency can be extremely profitable, depending on what happens with existing US dollars in the state.
Being smartass can end up with no federal debt obligations.