Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: easymo on November 13, 2000, 07:31:00 PM
-
Is it time for Texans to consider withdrawal from the union. Events in Florida have already rendered the Constitution of the United States questionable as the true law of the land.
This move would not be unprecedented. Texas was a sovereign nation at the time of its admittance into the union. And a previous attempt to secede was thwarted only through force of arms, by the northern states.
Financially this would be not be difficult to accomplish. We have many natural resources. Not the least of which would be our oil reserves. We would in fact, enjoy a large upward swing in our economy, in all probability. If need be, this resource should be adequate to field a modern armed force.
Leadership is available through a number of sources. We have a former President of the United States. Plus, at the time of this writing, a potential President.
So what do ya'all think.
[This message has been edited by easymo (edited 11-13-2000).]
-
I say it's time that the US Government starts a carpet-bombing campaign on Austin to thwart this little plan in it's infancy. I know a few uppity bastards in that general area who could use it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Oh, and Mason...how about you ship me your fancy new video card so's i can keep it safe until the bombing subsides!
SOB
-
Easymo:
Actually, i think it might be more sensible to kick New York, Florida, and California out of the Union. Nobody will fight to keep 'em, and they most certainly won't fight to stay.
Cabby
-
You know it's funny, there are eerie similarities between this election and the election of 1860. Bush basically swept the old Confederacy although Florida is still being contested. Based on the demographics of Florida today though, I guess except for the northern part of the state, it no longer really resembles the South. (Just a guess, I haven't been to Florida in some 18 years.)
Bush also took the Mountain West and Great Basin states which as far as social mores and values go, tend to be far more in sync with those expressed in the South. Same goes for the Midwest, save Iowa and the upper Midwest which is traditionally more liberal anyway.
Judging from Udie's map, I'd say Cabby has a grand idea, just let New York, California and the Northeast go. On the other hand, given the rich history of Texas, I kinda like the idea of a separate Texas Republic. Given the shoddy treatment of the Military by the current administration, I doubt they have the resources to mount an attack on Texas... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
On the other hand, something else to ponder. Suppose it was the same situation as 1860. So much of the Military has historically been supplied by the South. Military service doesn't carry the stigma in the South that it does in some of the more "enlightened" regions of the country. Perhaps there would be more scenes of Texan or Southern officers and men tendering their resignations in order to serve in the new forces. Wouldn't that alone gut the current military? Like I said, something to think about.
One other thing, many of us on this board have sworn an oath to defend the Constitution, if Gore continues to challenge the election results, could that be viewed as an attack on the Constitution? Just one more thing to ponder.
And before you liberals go off half-cocked and start flaming me for some kind of wild eyed militia-militant, belay that. I'm just posing some questions which open minded individuals ought to be able to discuss. I'm not advocating any extremist action. Just posing some things to toss about.
------------------
2nd Lt. Crapgame
62nd F.S.
56th F.G. "Zemke's Wolfpack"
-
Easymo, my great great uncle would not approve..
Steve '10Bears' Houston
-
Perhaps if 'ol Sam could have foreseen the current disregard for constitutional law. He might have been less eager to join the union.
-
where do I sign up?
------------------
Dnil---Skyhawk until I get Dnil back :)
Maj. 900th Bloody Jaguars
Part time aircraft restorer. www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer (http://www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer)
-
Please do not lump southeast Florida in with the rest of FL. We that live here do not. Palm Beach/Miami/Ft Lauderdale has for a time now been both culturally and politically 180 degrees out from the rest of our fine state. In an attempt to stay somewhat politically correct, I'll leave it at that.
Eagler
-
Originally posted by cabby:
Easymo:
Actually, i think it might be more sensible to kick New York, Florida, and California out of the Union. Nobody will fight to keep 'em, and they most certainly won't fight to stay.
Cabby
Oh, they'll fight to stay alright. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
How else can they get the direct, unwarranted transfer of wealth from the rest of the states through the US Income Tax?
Here are the latest breakdowns, release Oct. 16, 2000 by the IRS:
1998 Tax Statistics
% Of Taxpayers/Group's Share of Total Taxes/Income Split Point
Top 1% 34.8% above $269,496
Top 5% 53.8% above $114,729
Top 10% 65.0% above $83,220
Top 25% 82.7% above $50,607
Top 50% 95.8% above $25,491
Bottom 50% 4.2% below $25,491
The top 5% of taxpayers pay ~54%of the tax revenue. In Brother Gore's plan, these folks get NOTHING back in a tax cut. People who pay little or nothing in taxes get more back than they payed in.
Folks, that's "Free Lunch"...and that's why the "high population density, out of the top 10%" crowd voted Democratic.
You won't get rid of those states too easily. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Originally posted by Toad:
How else can they get the direct, unwarranted transfer of wealth from the rest of the states through the US Income Tax?
Where do you get your numbers, Toad, "Pravda" perhaps? I am not talking about the percentiles. Those have no bearing on your statement, but about the "wealth transfer".
New York pays much more per capita than it receives from the feds - about $1000 per person. New York subcidizes other states, not the other way around!
And lots of taxpayers in the top percentiles that reside in New Jersey and Connecticut are actually earning that money in New York.
What about Florida. Many people who live there are retirees who paid taxes all their life in some other state. Once they retire, they start getting some of that back. Is that what you call "free lunch"? Should people moving from one state to another lose the right to their pension just to make your statistics look better?
Easymo.
If Texas leaves the Union, who will subcidise it's oil production? Unless you all start working at Mexican wages, Texas oil is not cost-efficient to produce.
miko
[This message has been edited by miko2d (edited 11-14-2000).]
-
Quote:
" New York subcidizes other states, not the other way around!"
Pardon me, but wasn't it New York that needed a Federal bail-out a few years back to prevent the state from declaring bankruptcy? Hmmm????
And didn't the US taxpayers(thanks to Cry-Baby Al) fund several million barrels of crude oil from the Srategic Reserve to keep the "enlightened", "environmentally-concerned", "no-nukes", "we-don't-know-squat-but-we-sure-can-whine", Northeast from freezing their tulips off this winter?
Cabby
-
question miko, how is Texas able to get by without a state income tax?
------------------
Dnil---Skyhawk until I get Dnil back :)
Maj. 900th Bloody Jaguars
Part time aircraft restorer. www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer (http://www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer)
-
Originally posted by Dnil:
question miko, how is Texas able to get by without a state income tax?
same way Florida does, quite well thank you (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
We over charge the tourist....
Eagler
-
hehe eag, its a loaded question, has to do with oil and a superfund.
------------------
Dnil---Skyhawk until I get Dnil back :)
Maj. 900th Bloody Jaguars
Part time aircraft restorer. www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer (http://www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer)
-
Miko,
I think we're talking about different numbers here.
You do not dispute that to give the taxpayers who pay the most taxes NO REFUND and to give the taxpayers who pay the least taxes a REFUND GREATER THAN THE TAX THEY PAID is a direct, government-sponsored transfer of wealth?
OK...now look at those states, look at the major population centers in those states and determine which percentile of taxpayers the majority of that population falls into.
Free Lunch.
Miko: What about Florida. Many people who live there are retirees who paid taxes all their life in some other state. Once they retire, they start getting some of that back.
No, absolutely you do not get past taxes from "all your life" back. Refunds are on a year by year basis, Miko...you know that. They got the refunds that applied to them, in the states they lived in, when they qualified, in the year they qualified.
Should people moving from one state to another lose the right to their pension just to make your statistics look better?
Pensions? We're talking TAX REFUNDS here. Pensions, whether private from your company or business or public from your government (Social Security) have NOTHING to do with a TAX REFUND. Your pension is your pension. If it's large enough, you may have to pay tax on it. MAY. If so, then the tax you paid on it would possibly subject to a refund.
Miko, I don't understand where you're coming from or what point you are trying to make in 95% of that post.
-
Toad,
You stated that New York State gets wealth transferred to it from other states through the federal income tax.
I am saying that statement is a lie and that New York state is a net loser - it pays more money to the federal government then it recieves from it - about $1000 per person a year.
That is all I am saying.
That has nothing to do with proposed refunds (or lack thereof) to individuals. I am not arguing about that and I support Bush, being close to the top of the distribution you mentioned and earning every penny. But what does federal tax refund/cut has to do with the state? Even Gore said nothing about his refund applying differently to different states.
You mixed two unrelated issues in one post and I only have problem with one of them.
Cabby:
Care to name the numbers? So New York needed financial bailout once. Some states needed flood or hurricane relief, LA needed help with riot damage.
Are you sure that, say, over the last 10, 20, 50 years New York got more money than it paid?
I do not have any particular love to New York State, it being a democratic stronhold, full of welfare recepients and liberal millionaires.
But I hate lies and unsubstantiated statements even more.
Also, if North East was not prepared for the sudden jump in oil prices, we will be next year. The release of the Oil Reserves was in my opinion totally unnecessary and insignificant. Just a political move on Clinton's part. If you think we are short on oil here, you should see all those SUVs cramming our highways!
Besides, that oil was sold at the top of the market prices, not donated. So the fed must have made a profit on that transaction!
What about a bunch of idiots that live in areas that get hit with hurricanes and foods and fires and tornadoes every year while there is plenty sparcely-populated good land in US? Why wouldn't they move somewhere safe? It would cost less to move them once then to help them every year. We could actually cut the number of states in half then - fewer senators and congressmen!
Of course if they insist on living in those god-forsaken places, let them do it at their expense.
Guys,
I appreciate you all trying to support the republican cause, but face it - a few democrats here (Leonid, etc.) sound much more convincing then you because they do their homework and care to study the subject before arguing it.
Just think before you post unsubstantiated crap - you are hurting the cause, not helping it. There are lots of real arguments to support republicans, no need to come up with lies and guesses!
miko
-
woohoo...secession from the union!!!
-
sigh, you believe they bring facts?
ick, surprised they let you guys vote.
------------------
Dnil---Skyhawk until I get Dnil back :)
Maj. 900th Bloody Jaguars
Part time aircraft restorer. www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer (http://www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer)
-
Don't worry SOB, if Texas leaves the union I'll be moving. No way in hell I'm paying import tax on Beer and Wings.
-
double
[This message has been edited by easymo (edited 11-14-2000).]
-
Fatty. Texas has a couple of fine brewers. And if you have to catch your own chickens. You might be able to change your name to Lanky
[This message has been edited by easymo (edited 11-14-2000).]
-
Right easymo, shiner bock is good stuff, and honey brown lager ain't bad neither. Of course a chicken is still a chicken, but, buffalo wings just aren't right if you don't use louisiana hot sauce.
-
Any way Canada could work out a trade ?
Something like Quebec for Florida, or California?
Then Quebec would be happy leaving Canada and the rest of Canada would be happy to have a warm vacation spot that was Canadian soil (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Miko,
What you agree with is EXACTLY what I am talking about! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Miko:
That has nothing to do with proposed refunds (or lack thereof) to individuals. I am not arguing about that and I support Bush, being close to the top of the distribution you mentioned and earning every penny. But what does federal tax refund/cut has to do with the state? Even Gore said nothing about his refund applying differently to different states.
You mixed two unrelated issues in one post and I only have problem with one of them.
My first post and those that follow specifically talk about Gore's proposed tax plan.
Under Gore's plan, the money for the Transfer Of Wealth to the lower income groups is going to come DIRECTLY from the higher income taxpayers (there's fair for ya, AL! or does he only worry about fairness in ballots that name him for Prez?).
I haven't gone looking for stats, but intuition tells me that the largest groups of these "Free Lunch" recipients is going to be found in the high density population areas, like big cities.
Further, I suspect that it's going to take Transfers of Wealth from lower population areas (out-state areas) to supply enough money to pay off all of Gore's supporters.
As I said, I haven't gone looking for stats. If you have some that would indicate I'm way off base, I'd love to see them. It would make me feel better. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Constitution of the State of Texas (1866):
Be it ordained by the people of Texas in Convention assembled, That we acknowledge the supremacy of the Constitution of the United States, and the laws passed in pursuance thereof; and that an ordinance adopted by a former Convention of the people of Texas on the 1st day of February, A. D. 1861, entitled "An Ordinance to dissolve the Union between the State of Texas and the other States, united under the compact styled "Constitution of the United States of America," be and the same is hereby declared null and void; and the right heretofore claimed by the State of Texas to secede from the Union, is hereby distinctly renounced.
Passed 15th March 1866.
http://www.law.utexas.edu/constitutions/text/FOrd01.html (http://www.law.utexas.edu/constitutions/text/FOrd01.html)
US Supreme Court, Texas v. White, 1868:
6. When Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States. --Salmon Chase
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/historic_idx/74_700.htm (http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/historic_idx/74_700.htm)
[This message has been edited by Sancho (edited 11-15-2000).]
-
Alright, I have to ask, since if Texas secedes I am headed out the door and back to America...
If a bunch of states were to secede, does America have to quit saying it won the cold war? Would it be a tie? Or would we still win based on the fact that we splintered last? Or would it go to a count of new nations spawned, with the country spawning the most new nations being declared the loser? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Gordo