4 ms·
If states can’t rely on federal help for emergencies then there really isn’t a reason to be in a union. Secession is the next logical step.
by redczar 1y ago
If states can’t rely on federal help for emergencies then there really isn’t a reason to be in a union. Secession is the next logical step.
- nothercastle 1y agoFlorida is why we got Trump. They want this
- AnimalMuppet 1y agoHardly. Federal help in emergencies is not the only benefit from being in a union. Not the most significant, either.
- redczar 1y agoThe three main reasons for being in a union are shared resources, customs union, and mutual aid. If states can’t rely on mutual aid then eventually more and more people will wonder why they are in the union. Texas threatens to secede every time a Democrat is elected president.
- AnimalMuppet 1y ago"Mutual aid" is mostly defense. FEMA is a very small part of it.
- redczar 1y agoHowever you want to label things is fine with me. We disagree with the label and you think not helping each other out during a disaster is no big deal. You are wrong on this. As Trumps continues down the path he is taking the reason for being in the union becomes increasingly unjustifiable. If states that are liberal leaning can’t get aid from the monies they send the federal government then the people there will question why they should remain in the union. Texas Republicans think talk of secession is justifiable when a Democrat is President. A much more sane reason for questioning the union is not getting help from the federal government.
- msgodel 1y agoIt's been a long time coming. Huge parts of the country have absolute mutual disagreements on basic features of reality. Regardless of who's right people like that just can't peacefully share a state.