What seceding from the U.S. will cost you...!

beystr 2.0

Bench Warmer
Jul 9, 2006
1,983
0
#1
By Brett Arends... Market watch

Brandon Seidel / Shutterstock.com​
I have good news and bad news. The good news is really good. But the bad news is really, really bad.
We’ll get to them in a moment.
Talk of secession is in the air. The White House this week confirmed that residents in all fifty states had submitted petitions asking to leave the union. Will the last one left please turn out the lights?
Residents in seven states, all in the former Confederacy, submitted more than 30,000 signatures each — enough that some hapless bureaucrat or intern will now have to take a look at their petitions.

The news comes 150 years after the Civil War, and just in time for Steve Spielberg’s biopic of Abraham Lincoln, the man whom we have to thank — if that’s the word I want — for the continued forcible marriage of the once-independent states.

It’s only a couple of years since Texas governor Rick Perry hoisted a rhetorical secessionist flag in response to Obamacare. In the last few years, anti-federal “10th Amendment” resolutions, emphasizing the primacy of states’ rights versus those of the union, have passed the legislatures of 12 states in the South and West. In five states, the governors signed them, too. (The 10th Amendment to the Constitution says states’ rights come before those of the federal government. The last time anyone in Washington actually paid attention to it, the ink was still wet.)

But what would any of this actually mean for your taxes?


The upside is you will be liberated from the sheer living hell of the federal tax code.

I don’t care where you live, and how badly run your local state government is. Nothing could be worse than this monstrosity. I once calculated that it was three times as long as the complete works of William Shakespeare. The instruction booklet for citizens, once two pages long, is now pushing 200.

The federal tax code is the kind of punishment victors used to impose on conquered peoples, along with the gouging of eyes and the rack. That was in the days before the Geneva Convention. I still don’t understand why, in this country, people are simultaneously considered so monumentally stupid that everything has to come with idiotic warnings on the side (“Caution: Do not jab fork repeatedly in eye, or injury may result”), and yet are considered so brilliant that they can maneuver through Schedule C, Schedule F, Schedule X, calculate your passive losses, divide by the shoe size of your sixth grade primary school teacher, carry the 7 unless it’s a Thursday, and multiply by the square root of the I.Q. of the guy next to you on the bus, and so on.

It’s not the total amount of federal tax dollars I pay which makes me want to put on a grey uniform, it’s the awful, awful process.

Secede, and you will never have to file a federal tax return again. Bliss. That’s the good news.

Alas, there’s also some bad news.

For most of you in the New Confederacy of the South and West, if you secede you will end up paying more in taxes than you do now, and you will get fewer government services. Forget the so-called “fiscal cliff.” We’re talking about a fiscal Death Star. Your economies will go into recession, and fast.


That’s because your state receives far more back from Uncle Sam in government spending than you pay in federal taxes. If you go it alone, you’ll have to make up the difference yourselves.
Take Alabama. (No jokes, please). It’s among the seven states whose secession petition has landed 30,000 signatures. Its legislature has also passed, and its governor signed a 10th Amendment Resolution. But at the last count, Alabama got back about $1.66 in federal spending for every dollar its citizens paid in federal taxes. The gap — the subsidy the rest of America paid to Alabama — totaled about $3,800 for every person in the state.

Louisiana is also among the seven petitioning for secession. A 10th Amendment resolution has passed both houses of its legislature.
At the last reckoning, Louisiana got back about $1.78 from Uncle Sam for every dollar its citizens pay in. That was about $4,200 per resident.
These figures are admittedly long in the tooth. They date back to 2005. They used to be calculated every year by the Tax Foundation, a conservative-leaning, albeit independent, Washington think tank. Alas, the Foundation says funding dried up for the research. Conservative-leaning donors became reluctant to pony up. You can see why.

While the foundation is no longer doing the math, the general trend has remained the same. The allegedly “low tax,” conservative red states of the South and West are heavily subsidized every year by the federal government. In other words, they are subsidized by the New Union: the states of the Northeast and the West Coast.
The picture was astonishingly consistent year after year as the Tax Foundation did the study.
Take the seven states which have gathered 30,000 or more signatures to secede: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.
In the last year for which the Tax Foundation ran the numbers, their residents paid about $473 billion in federal taxes and received about $533 billion in federal spending. In other words the seven states which want to secede the most pocketed a $60 billion subsidy from Uncle Sam. That works out at about $700 for every household in the rest of the country.
Meanwhile, most states in the Northeast, around the Great Lakes and on the West Coast paid in more than they got back. Californians paid $1,300 more in taxes than they got back in federal spending at last count, according to the Tax Foundation. New Yorkers paid $2,200. New Jerseyans: $3,200.
The real mystery is why voters in these states continually vote for more federal programs. They’re turkeys voting for Thanksgiving.
Some years ago, over lunch, I put this to a Massachusetts Congressman. He had no response.
Bottom line?
If you live in the New Confederacy, and the local secession movement really gathers momentum, you may want to make two smart financial moves.
The first is to sell your home, and rent.
The second is to withdraw your money from your local bank before it gets forcibly converted into Confederate dollars. Can I recommend Swiss francs?
 

beystr 2.0

Bench Warmer
Jul 9, 2006
1,983
0
#2
What this guy forgets to mention is..each states share of the National Debt...If they go by state's share of GDP....then an Alabama may have to pay something like half a Trillion...?..350 Billion perhaps..?

I'm surprised Florida is also a state which has many Ceseders...
 

Flint

Legionnaire
Jan 28, 2006
7,016
0
United States
#3
What this guy forgets to mention is..each states share of the National Debt...If they go by state's share of GDP....then an Alabama may have to pay something like half a Trillion...?..350 Billion perhaps..?
..
Alabama can legitimately claim third world status and have their debt immediately cancelled by the IMF. If no out right session, could at lest the proud blue people all move to blue states so they can tax each other to oblivion?
 
Oct 18, 2002
14,471
5
Antelope Valley,California
#4
Although session movement is a serious attempt by those who have filed for the petition and is being supported by the sore losers behind the scenes, but is nothing new.
It has happened before, but they hardly had the minimum 25,000 signatures ( article says 30,000) for consideration by the white house.


The only reason that confederacy states are making more noise about this and actually seven of them have made the quota required for consideration, is that US president elect is AFRICAN AMERICAN.....

This is only one of many noises that republicans of south will be making. Their big "thing" is continuation of voter suppresion efforts. The lead on this with Alabama.. Not only internal statewide voter suppresion measures are going to be legislated ( if they have not already), but albama has taken the lead by challenging the voter protection act ( which was basically imposed on southern states to protect the voting rights of african americans). Supreme Court will be hearing the case soon.

This case was already heard been heard by courts few years back, but the outcome was not considered favorable by the confederate symapths.

If this nuts would actually believed in numbers and fact, they would not have been in the deep shit as they are in today. One thing they have in common with IRI is that hate prevails common sense.They will pay any price and take any cost just to show their hatred for a black man in charge.
 
Oct 18, 2002
11,593
3
#5
Secession of Louisiana will likely be supported by all other 49 states!

It is like the threat of Quebec independence. In Canada the idea of an independent Quebec has the support of 30% of those who live in Quebec, and 60% of those who don't live in Quebec!:)
 

beystr 2.0

Bench Warmer
Jul 9, 2006
1,983
0
#8
I would be for flat tax rate if I lived in U.S...but chances of that happening is probably close to nil...

I still say...U.S. should take a page of Dearest IRI method of Governance and just enforce the hell out of the current code.....U guys would be surprised to see what kind of taxes we pay ...ofcourse like U.S. that is if u receive a paycheck...otherwise almost freakin' nothin'.
 
Feb 22, 2005
6,884
9
#9
I support separating the Blue and Reds into 2 different countries. Let those that love the Republican extreme right wing laws go live in Kentucky, Missouri, Georgia, etc.
 
Oct 18, 2002
14,471
5
Antelope Valley,California
#10
LOL.....The "movement" has reached California!

I live in a burb near LA that is mostly Democrat but there is a sizable group of Old Money/White boyz club/ tea party presence. In fact I found out I was the only registered independent!
I saw a table set in front of our post office which attracts a lot of foot traffic. Table was decorated by a poster of president Obama ,with a Hitler style mustache drawn on it and large font word "impeach"...
They had two "petitions" on the table :eek:ne for impeachment and the other for secession of (Northern) California:)
Funny thing was that they were being largely ignored by passerbys. The only couple that cared to argue with them ,were a couple with Tea Party affiliations!

These white men are really going nuts with realization that they have lost their grip to power........
 

beystr 2.0

Bench Warmer
Jul 9, 2006
1,983
0
#11
Wow..what is their reason for impeaching Obama..?..that is kind of petty and sour....this whole impeaching business from Nixon to Clinton is something I find anti-patriotic...

that said...Biazar jon...would California not be another Qatar or so if it was a Country?

I'd say...Union is still the biggest gift or acheivment from the forefathers..and If Americans loose focus on it and let this " Indivituality thing" get out of hand...they'll wake up one day not too far away and find this precious jewel gone....I myself think that only Governments ( good Gov's ofcourse) and that is the collective will of all....can do big things...not an individual.. not a corporation nor a State...
 
Last edited:

ChaharMahal

Elite Member
Oct 18, 2002
16,563
261
#12
technically Texas only gets 90 cents for every 100 dollar it sends to national government.
but up until 10 years ago it was the reverse and many years before that Texas got lots of money out.

but what is not often considered is a State like Texas is a huge beneficiary of enormous u.s military spending Ala fort hood. huge ton of money protecting border.
navy installations. san antonio airforce base. waco airforce base.NASA airforce base.

technically though. It is only possible for Texas to become independent in the U.S because of mass energy resources and independent electricity grid.

but texas will lack independence in food production,lack of water. all big rivers in Texas originate from a state like Colorado. and very likely mexico will not be friendly to a Texas Country.
 
Oct 18, 2002
14,471
5
Antelope Valley,California
#13
Wow..what is their reason for impeaching Obama..?..that is kind of petty and sour....this whole impeaching business from Nixon to Clinton is something I find anti-patriotic...

that said...Biazar jon...would California not be another Qatar or so if it was a Country?

I'd say...Union is still the biggest gift or acheivment from the forefathers..and If Americans loose focus on it and let this " Indivituality thing" get out of hand...they'll wake up one day not too far away and find this precious jewel gone....I myself think that only Governments ( good Gov's ofcourse) and that is the collective will of all....can do big things...not an individual.. not a corporation nor a State...
No reason for impeaching needed now days. Not even a BJ. It has become fashionable by hate media.
Here in America, if you get a BJ, regardless if she swallowed or not , Republicans impeach you.
You can screw the world and your country's economy 100 times over because your vice wanted some contracts for his haliburton, and nothing happens.

It appeares that they have not found a "politicaly correct" way to express nicely that being black is the reason for impeaching..They are citing ben gahzi now as the reason................


And about Secession of California :

This not exactly a new concept. It came about 2 decades ago and then disappread and reemerged after this election.

It is not about California Secession from the Union, but Spliting California in 2 or 3 States (Secession of North). It is totally politically motivated by the right wing, as the geographical split points do not even make sense. These people basically want a State composed of of most northerly Californian rural counties poulated by the Republicans. To them, even Sacramento and SanFransico are concidered South!
 
Aug 26, 2005
16,771
4
#14
They've wanted to impeach him for the same reason the people wanted to impeach Bush: they've conducted illegal wars. That's no little or trivial thing.
 
Oct 18, 2002
14,471
5
Antelope Valley,California
#15
Editor's note: Timothy Stanley is a historian at Oxford University and blogs for Britain's The Daily Telegraph. He is the author of "The Crusader: The Life and Times of Pat Buchanan."

(CNN) -- Nothing says "sore loser" like threatening to leave the country after an election defeat. And that's what hundreds of thousands of Americans have done by petitioning for their states' secession on the White House website. It's reminiscent of the great British tradition of right-wing celebrities threatening to leave the UK if the Labour Party wins power. Alas, they never do.

From the demography and geography of the vast majority of signers, it's tempting to conclude that this is just a Republican cry of rage against four more years of President Barack Obama. But it's more significant than that. Strip away the right-wing fantasies about whether or not secession is really possible (it isn't), and you have a movement that testifies to the extraordinary divisions within American politics. The far right feels angry and dispossessed. Rather than getting even, it's threatening to run away.



Timothy Stanley

If it weren't for the sheer number of signatures, the media wouldn't be paying attention. Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana describes the secession movement as "silly" and Gov. Rick Perry of Texas has dismissed it, too.

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank points out that many of the petitioners live in states that are net beneficiaries of federal largesse: Louisiana gets $1.45 for every $1 it pays in taxes and Alabama gets $1.71 for every $1. Given how much they take from the less mutinous states, he cheekily suggests that the secession petitions "give the opportunity to create what would be, in a fiscal sense, a far more perfect union."



Become a fan of CNNOpinion
Stay up to date on the latest opinion, analysis and conversations through social media. Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion and follow us @CNNOpinion on Twitter. We welcome your ideas and comments.





Meanwhile, The Southern Poverty Law Center notes that the secession effort has attracted a predictable rogues' gallery of racists and neo-Nazis. Given that there was no similar large-scale effort to secede when Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton or George W. Bush won re-election, liberals can't be blamed for detecting a particular white fury at Obama's success.

Legally, secession is impossible, and all attempts to do it have failed. But it's not a philosophically unattractive idea. A democratic society works best when it's rooted in the principle of free association: We all get along with one another because we choose to. Good will is maintained because the individual's membership in the community is voluntary -- were it compulsory, that would breed resentment. But free association only works so long as the individual is free to disassociate when he or she wants.

As with individuals, so with nations. In the case of the United States, the states are historically there by choice. Although there is no mechanism for secession, the generous distribution of powers to the states reflects a spirit of voluntary federation.








Secession: Legitimate or sour grapes?
Since the end of the Cold War we've witnessed the surprising fluidity of supposedly fixed national identities. The Soviet Union broke up, adding 15 new countries to the map. Yugoslavia witnessed terrible wars for national self-determination. Belgium is on the permanent brink of fracture. And my native Great Britain is getting ready for a historic vote on the independence of Scotland. The complexities of Scottish independence illustrate that secession doesn't have to mean a violent rupture sparked by right-wing nationalism.

The domestic program of the Scottish nationalist movement is broadly liberal; it will seek to join the European Union and its leaders often insist that the Scottish people will remain culturally British.

In Europe's case, the motor for secession is ethnicity. In America, however, it's a politics turned toxic. The 2012 election encouraged the idea that the U.S. is split into two camps that are politically and culturally alien and with opposing economic needs. Mitt Romney's infamous formula of the 47% (reiterated in his equally ugly post-election remarks about "gifts") played upon an old idea that one half of the country feeds off the taxes paid by the other half.

Secessionists are likely to be those who see themselves as disadvantaged by the redistributive federal state: as taxpayers bled dry by freeloaders, and businesspeople penalized by liberal regulation. WKRG-TV found an eccentric example of that when it interviewed the founder of the Alabama petition and discovered that he was furious at the government for shutting down his topless car wash: "He said he was arrested and charged with obscenity by city officials in 2001. 'The government ripped my business away, and now they're choking America to death with rules and regulations,' he said."

But the 2012 election introduced the idea that the welfare-recipient minority is now the majority. A common theme in conservative post-election analysis is that the Democrats now have an unbeatable coalition of ethnic minorities, single women and socially liberal youth that is turning the U.S. into a European social democracy. (Mark Steyn: "Tuesday's results demonstrate that, as a whole, the American electorate is trending very Euro-Canadian.") If that is the consensus among the conservative talking heads, then it's rational for conservative grass-roots activists to conclude that the only viable future for the conservative minority is to form its own country.

The call for secession will be mocked and dismissed. But while it is built on a legal fallacy, it does articulate honestly the feelings of a growing number of conservatives who feel emasculated in 21st century America. It's now the duty of the Republican Party to try to integrate them back into mainstream, legitimate politics.
 
Oct 18, 2002
14,471
5
Antelope Valley,California
#16
Bottom line is as Ron Paul said if they want out,there is no legal way but they can fight for it.

If you recall during 2009 elections, it was mentioned that Sarah Palin's husband was member and associate of a secessionist group in alaska led by Kohlhaas . I believe Kohlhass vs State was heard by the court and rejected, meaning that States can not put the issue for vote......................

So is turning out that this wasteful attempt is nothing but venting out some frustration...
 
Oct 18, 2002
14,471
5
Antelope Valley,California
#17
I'm not sure if the order is correct, but this the list of top 20 federal spending recipients per dollar taxed...Interestingly good majority went red :
.
•New Mexico
•Mississippi
•Alaska
•Louisiana
•West Virginia
•North Dakota
•Alabama
•South Dakota
•Kentucky
•Virginia
•Montana
•Hawaii
•Maine
•Arkansas
•Oklahoma
•South Carolina
•Missouri
•Maryland
•Tennessee
•Idaho
 
Last edited:
Oct 18, 2002
14,471
5
Antelope Valley,California
#19
US is indeed a welfare state ,welfare of red states by blue states (except Texas) :

Comments:

Let the red states stop paying Federal income tax, and cut-off their Federal dollars. It's about time the blue states stop subsidizing the the anti-Federal government states.


Like
Reply
2 years ago
80 Likes
F

.






Dougboyd



The blue states which receive the fewest Fed. Taxes also have the largest cities, where there are more unemployed and more people living on the tax payer dollars. If you let the red states stop paying taxes, there would not be enough money to hand out to these people. There would not be enough money to pay the "Big Government" politicians.


Like
Reply
1 year ago
in reply to THX-1138
11 Likes


.






TB Lee



Let's try it and see. California represents 25% of the US economy alone. Throw in NY, NJ, OR, WA and the rest of New England and you are approaching 50% fast.

The Blue States can take care of their inner city poor with our 50%, and the Red States can pay all the welfare payments to their farmers, build their roads and run their state colleges with their 50%.

I am so tired of conservatives complaining about the federal government that I wish they would leave the Union and form their own third world country before they turn mine into one.


Like
Reply
1 year ago
in reply to Dougboyd
79 Likes


.






Caromia



...What is more plausible is if the 'Blue' states quit sending all their hard-earned tax dollars to 'Red' states; It is likely that the Red states would go 'BROKE'.

What is more accurated is that many states such as California, Illinois, New York, New Jersey...etc. send more money to Washington; From 20%-40% of tax dollars collected from these states have 'never returned'. That is TRILLIONS of dollars that go to support Red states...
.
Blue states are overtaxed....they have Taxation Without Representation.
.
This presents a dilemna;
A. If the monies go to these Red states...it is 'Socialism'.
B. It is the Blue states that are supporting the government and keeping it afloat...as Red states do not pay their share...they get Blue state welfare.
C. If the monies were returned to the states who pay the most, then many Red states would have to start paying State 'sales & income' taxes
D. Blue states have sales and income taxes to balance the 'gap' created by Red states that live on Federal welfare....
E.



Like
Reply
1 year ago
in reply to Dougboyd
26 Likes


.






Horatio Snowblower



That's not even remotely how math works. If the blue states both stopped paying and receiving tax money they would still have more money in total. Yes, welfare roles are also calculated into this. Not only would there be enough to hand out to these people, there would be more than in the current situation.

The red states are only paying taxes in the sense that they give the government a dollar and the government gives then $1.50 back (except Texas, Good job Texas)

Considering the amount of corporate subsidization and tax breaks found in many red states not only are the blue states paying for YOUR unemployed, they're chipping in for your employed too.
 

Flint

Legionnaire
Jan 28, 2006
7,016
0
United States
#20
I'm not sure if the order is correct, but this the list of top 20 federal spending recipients per dollar taxed...Interestingly good majority went red :
.

•Idaho
You have inadvertently made the case that Republicans, whatever they were in the past, are now the party of the poor. Stereotypes are sometimes useful. The guy in Alabama driving a 25 year old pick up truck with missing teethes votes Republican. The white woman driving a Lexus and living in the Upper East Side is a Democrat. Not to mention the entire Hollywood and a lot of Wall street. Who is the party of the rich again?