3 ms·

> The only situation I see where this would become problematic is if a state chose to stop sending tax dollars to the federal government. This is not generally

by jehb 4y ago

> The only situation I see where this would become problematic is if a state chose to stop sending tax dollars to the federal government. This is not generally how taxes work, though; instead, individuals and businesses send taxes to the federal government (and sometimes, also to their states), and the federal government returns a great deal of the money to the states and localities, directly or indirectly. Leaving the federal government wouldn't mean the states would stop sending the feds money, it means they would be completely unable to pay for all sorts of infrastructure and entitlements that they receive money from the federal government for.

codefreeordie 4y ago
The states would have to pass laws prohibiting the businesses and individuals within their borders from paying the federal taxes -- and that probably would get some sort of reaction.
- lumost 4y ago
  But probably not a military one, the feds could just arrange for garnishment via banks. States would have to force customers to use different banks which don't do garnishment - and the feds would probably cut those banks off from the rest of the banking system. Worst case scenario, I'd see some byzantine system of declarations required when doing something across state lines or people using "fed taxed" and "state taxed" financial institutions depending on their objectives. Given the current state of military affairs, a war over Rhode Island would be a complex endeavor - a war over Texas, California, or New York is a practical impossibility.
  - codefreeordie 4y ago
    Yeah. The thing is, though, "the enemy" is already inside. Every state -- even the bluest ones, have red populations. Every state -- even the reddest ones, have blue populations. The state that tried to leave might find itself with a civil war as the two sides within it -- the majority of whom already believe that the other party represents the most mortal enemy imaginable -- duke it out for control.
    - lumost 4y ago
      There are few issues in the US I see motivating such an extreme reaction within a state border for the majority of US states. The only breaking points I see are reasonably well handled through a legal decoupling of states and the federal government. The big item issues such as - Federal bans on abortion - Controversial Presidential elections - A series of unfortunate Supreme court decisions - Immigration - Infrastructure spending Are all issues which can be handled with a legal decoupling. If all sides remained notionally in Congress, then there is very little likelihood that Congress would address the matter. A sensible supreme court would leave it as a political issue for a few decades before declaring a defacto status as was done for West Virginia's statehood. For all intents and purposes, a de facto decoupling would look more like a return to State relationships prior to 1900 then a secession. While some may wish for a military based solution to stop a legal decoupling... there simply does not seem to be a plausible route for any military solution by any party. Russia made it ~100km into Ukraine before being stopped, it's 2900 KM between Houston and Boston - all means of ending such a stalemate would escalate to MAD as the military remains spread across states for political and defense purposes. Even in the civil war, the North was unable to enforce integration of the south through reconstruction.

by jehb 4y ago

codefreeordie 4y ago

The states would have to pass laws prohibiting the businesses and individuals within their borders from paying the federal taxes -- and that probably would get some sort of reaction.

lumost 4y ago
But probably not a military one, the feds could just arrange for garnishment via banks. States would have to force customers to use different banks which don't do garnishment - and the feds would probably cut those banks off from the rest of the banking system. Worst case scenario, I'd see some byzantine system of declarations required when doing something across state lines or people using "fed taxed" and "state taxed" financial institutions depending on their objectives. Given the current state of military affairs, a war over Rhode Island would be a complex endeavor - a war over Texas, California, or New York is a practical impossibility.
- codefreeordie 4y ago
  Yeah. The thing is, though, "the enemy" is already inside. Every state -- even the bluest ones, have red populations. Every state -- even the reddest ones, have blue populations. The state that tried to leave might find itself with a civil war as the two sides within it -- the majority of whom already believe that the other party represents the most mortal enemy imaginable -- duke it out for control.
  - lumost 4y ago
    There are few issues in the US I see motivating such an extreme reaction within a state border for the majority of US states. The only breaking points I see are reasonably well handled through a legal decoupling of states and the federal government. The big item issues such as - Federal bans on abortion - Controversial Presidential elections - A series of unfortunate Supreme court decisions - Immigration - Infrastructure spending Are all issues which can be handled with a legal decoupling. If all sides remained notionally in Congress, then there is very little likelihood that Congress would address the matter. A sensible supreme court would leave it as a political issue for a few decades before declaring a defacto status as was done for West Virginia's statehood. For all intents and purposes, a de facto decoupling would look more like a return to State relationships prior to 1900 then a secession. While some may wish for a military based solution to stop a legal decoupling... there simply does not seem to be a plausible route for any military solution by any party. Russia made it ~100km into Ukraine before being stopped, it's 2900 KM between Houston and Boston - all means of ending such a stalemate would escalate to MAD as the military remains spread across states for political and defense purposes. Even in the civil war, the North was unable to enforce integration of the south through reconstruction.