Tucson wants to split away from AZ

[longeyes]

It's proved several things.

It's not a beacon of success in our terms, but in their terms, it proved:

1. You can run a state, indeed an entire continent, on leftist policies for decades on end.
2. While doing that, you can maintain a decent standard of living.

Now, it's not ACTUALLY proof of success, but it's not OH GOD COMPLETE FAILURE either, in the way Zimbabwe or Mexico are.

Europe began with a powerful political legacy, unlike Zimbabwe or Mexico.  It's going to take longer to unravel, that's all.  Europe's future is either Eurabia, civil war, or both, thanks to the leftist technocrats.  That "decent standard of living" and the ethos that sustains it will be seen as a post-WW II bubble in a few years.

[Ben]

Or sooner.  The "state of Jefferson" movement in northern California and southern Oregon is largely conservative/libertarian driven.  So far, it's not a serious attempt at forming a separate state as much as an expression of contempt for the status quo in Sacramento and Salem.

Actually I'm not sure what the CA portion of that would gain anyone on either side of the political spectrum. If you're conservative, you're still stuck with San Francisco (unless they plan the border North of there) and if you're liberal, you're stuck with the very conservative / libertarian interior. CA politics are very much split on an East / West division (with the West being a pretty thin, highly populated coastal sliver), not a North / South one.

[Scout26]

Put it to a vote downstate, I bet we could kick Chicago out of Illinois.

And I bet alot of folks in Chicago would like to not be part of Illinois.

Secession YES !!!!

[Angel Eyes]

Actually I'm not sure what the CA portion of that would gain anyone on either side of the political spectrum. If you're conservative, you're still stuck with San Francisco (unless they plan the border North of there) and if you're liberal, you're stuck with the very conservative / libertarian interior. CA politics are very much split on an East / West division (with the West being a pretty thin, highly populated coastal sliver), not a North / South one.

Some background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_(Pacific_state)

The new state line would have been well to the north of San Francisco.

Yes, the political divisions nowadays generally run east/west, so reconciling the largely leftist Mendocino and Humboldt counties with the more conservative interior would be . . . interesting.

[PTK]

I love this idea. Let them try, set precedent, and then fail miserably. And then we'll make the Sovereign State of Montana.

[dogmush]

I love this idea. Let them try, set precedent, and then fail miserably. And then we'll make the Sovereign State of Montana.

The precedent has already been set.  They secede, and we kill half a million people in the ensuing war, then the federal gov. takes more power.

[AZRedhawk44]

The precedent has already been set.  They secede, and we kill half a million people in the ensuing war, then the federal gov. takes more power.

And the Statists win.

Again.   

[longeyes]

Secession can take many forms.  It does not necessarily have to end in a hot war.

[MicroBalrog]

Europe began with a powerful political legacy, unlike Zimbabwe or Mexico.  It's going to take longer to unravel, that's all.  Europe's future is either Eurabia, civil war, or both, thanks to the leftist technocrats.  That "decent standard of living" and the ethos that sustains it will be seen as a post-WW II bubble in a few years.

Eurabia continues to be a myth. THe birth rate of the Muslim countries that contribute most immigrants is below replacement fertility.

[roo_ster]

Eurabia continues to be a myth. THe birth rate of the Muslim countries that contribute most immigrants is below replacement fertility.

True only if you define "Muslim countries that contribute most immigrants" as Algeria and Tunisia. 
(http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2010/09/fertility_rates_of_muslim_and_nonmuslim_countries.html)

Still plenty of high TFR Muslim countries out there.  With Libya no longer stopping sub-saharan migrants, expect a whole lot more black muslim illegal immigrants in Europe.

[zahc]

Secession can take many forms.  It does not necessarily have to end in a hot war.

citation needed

[kgbsquirrel]

citation needed

citation provided

[Perd Hapley]

Secession can take many forms.  It does not necessarily have to end in a hot war.

Well, where's the fun in that?

[MicroBalrog]

True only if you define "Muslim countries that contribute most immigrants" as Algeria and Tunisia. 
(http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2010/09/fertility_rates_of_muslim_and_nonmuslim_countries.html)

Still plenty of high TFR Muslim countries out there.  With Libya no longer stopping sub-saharan migrants, expect a whole lot more black muslim illegal immigrants in Europe.

1. That document is out of date. I will be using the latest edition of the CIA World Factbook, the one from 2011.

2. The replacement fertility level varies from country to country. For Western countries, it is 2.15, for third-world countries it is as high as 3.0. The World Health Organizatoin suggests a rule-of-thumb level of 2.15.

3. Countries with fertility levels below the 2.33 cut-off include Turkey (fertility rate at 2.15. This is important because Turkey has provided the largest single group of immigrants to Europe to date (5 million immigrants). Morocco - another major source of immigrants to Europe - has a fertility rate of 2.21, which is also below replacement rates. What is also interesting is the fact virtually all these countries display fertility rate declines compared to their previous levels. According to the CIA World Factbook, quoted by your source, Morocco had a TFR of 2.51 two years ago, and Turkey maintained a TFR of 2.21.

4. Statistics have shown that the fertility rates of immigrants in Europe decline over several years to match those of the host nation. The fertility rate of German turks is 1.9, for example.

5. More importantly, the Eurabia claims are bunk because they are based on something which - time and time again - intellectuals are incapable of doing, namely predicting future birth rates. This is exactly what Social Security ideologues did - predicating their economic plans on a continued rate of population growth that failed to materialize - and what Malthusians like Holdren did. They were wrong. The Eurabia scaremongers are also wrong.

[longeyes]

And, just out of curiosity, what are the fertility rates in Israel and its surrounding neighbors...?  Any disparity there?

[red headed stranger]

These leftist secession movements could result in a lot more leftist US senators. 

[MicroBalrog]

And, just out of curiosity, what are the fertility rates in Israel and its surrounding neighbors...?  Any disparity there?

Have superior numbers helped these people in any wars so far?

Of course, Israel, per the CIA, has had a fertility rate of 2.7 children born per woman, while Syria has displayed 2.94. Jordan, Israel's ally, has displayed a fertility rate of 3.03 children per woman. On the other hand, Lebanon, populated by Israel's enemies, maintains a level of 1.77 children per woman, and Iran, land of the furious Ayatollahs, is at 1.8. Sure, Iran is not Israel's immediate neighbor, but we all know that they profess to be Israel's largest enemy.

Not that it matters. Demography continues not being destiny.

But why do you ask?  THe CIA World Factbook is available to you as well as it is to me.

[longeyes]

Demography isn't destiny if you're willing to circumvent it by drastic means--like war--you're right.  But then wars don't always turn out the way we want them to.

[Ned Hamford]

I think I recall reading that the same sort of argument can be made about many of the rural Western states: that they incur more Federal dollars of benefit than they pay Federal taxes. 

Sure, but is that controlled for actual benefit?  IE: X amount of money going to interstate highway doesn't really give X amount of benefit to the folks that just happen to have the road passing through them. 

[AZRedhawk44]

Sure, but is that controlled for actual benefit?  IE: X amount of money going to interstate highway doesn't really give X amount of benefit to the folks that just happen to have the road passing through them. 

There's also bajillions more square miles of Federal land in the western States.

More military installations (which get counted in those estimates).  More massive infrastructure projects.  More national parks.

The eastern States still enjoy the benefits of those military installations vis-a-vis defense from Pacific or other threats.  The eastern States still enjoy the benefits of things like Palo Verde Nuclear Plant and Boulder Dam, and their tie-in to the national electric grid and surplus power generation.  The eastern States would still vacation to those parks and pay park usage fees if they were AZ/NV/UT State parks rather than National parks.

[Tallpine]

There's also bajillions more square miles of Federal land in the western States.

Bingo!

If the federally owned land was converted to:

a) private land - we'd have a lot more tax revenue to support things like schools and roads

and/or

b) state land - we'd have the benefit of income from minerals, timber, grazing, etc managed the way we would manage it


I'd gladly trade the annual largess of stolen dollars for title to BLM, NF, and NPS lands.   

[MicroBalrog]

Demography isn't destiny if you're willing to circumvent it by drastic means--like war--you're right.  But then wars don't always turn out the way we want them to.

Demography isn't destiny because the shapes of nations are not shaped by the sheer numbers of their populace, neither in science, nor in economics, nor in war.

Demography isn't destiny because birth rates alter over time in unpredictable fashions.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

heretic!

[longeyes]

Of course birth rates alter over time in "unpredictable fashions."  Except they're not so unpredictable.  While I agree with you that one can't simplistically extrapolate present conditions forward, there are only so many things that can derail the iron rule of demography.  Historically, war, plagues, and ecological reverses have been the prime game-changers.  It's possible that technology and trade can alter the course of things, that's true, but the deep cultural momentums usually prevail in the end.

[MicroBalrog]

Which also alter. Observe the falling (over the past 30-40 years) birth rates in the Muslim world.

I should post the recent research my University produced on the topic of social attitudes in the Muslim world.