Do you think that it`ll be better if US separate into independent countries?

Answer 1

If Massachusetts, California, and Texas seceded, I wouldn't mind.

Answer 2

It depends on your proposal. If you were to keep the Federal government or not and work things like the EU, or to make totally seperated countries. With a EU style of national government, the sole reason for it's existance would be to negociate between the different laws of the different "nations." Just imagine the Northeast, and the superpower economy it would have. How about how Chicago and Detroit, they wouldn't want to be involved at all with the predominately conservative southerm mid-west. California and Nevada might be happy together, but if you take NYC, LA, Philly, Chicago and Detroit out of the "national" picture, all of the billions of tax dollars would go too. Without the big cities, the poorer states would crumble into the third world. If there was to be a disolution of the union, chaos would be the norm.

Granted right now there is a massive divide between the parties, and the people, but Bush won't be President for much longer, and the next guy can only be better at being a unifying force. No matter what you think of Bush, he has done massive damage to the way the debate between the left and right debate. It's not all his fault, but the President is the place where the buck stops in the political process. If the President is incapable of creating a good flow of ideas and communications in the legislative branch, partisianship reigns supreme. Bush, is no communicator, and horrendous at compramise, to say the least. Even if you do like his policy, you can't dispute that.

Answer 3

How about this: United States of The Americas. The nation would be a confederation of all of the nation states of Canada, the USA, Mexico, Central and South America.

Federal taxation would be collected by a centralized government located in Panama. Social services, defense, and other governmental agencies would be located there as well. The new nation could be called almost anything, even "The Commonwealth of The Americas---what a powerhouse!

Answer 4

After the 2006 elections, those states still left in the Bush red column, should break away form a new nation and call it Dumbphuckistan

Answer 5

If your talking about a liberal and conservative state, it would never work. The high-income, well-educated liberal states have been subsidizing their ignorant red state brethren for years. California, for example will pay a dollar in taxes, but only get 88 cents in services back. Oklahoma, however, pays a dollar in taxes, and gets $1.10 in services. Without liberals taking care of their sorry asses, the red states would become even crappier than they already are (and you thought Mississippi schools couldn't get any worse!).

Answer 6

America is the strongest wealthiest country on the planet precisely because we are a United Country.

Answer 7

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And to the republic for which it stands. One nation, under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Answer 8

You have to deal "Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." -- Ariel Sharon to Shimon Peres, October 3rd, 2001, as reported on Kol Yisrael
www.nowarforisrael.com
with the Israeli lobby !st.

Answer 9

Yeah, you can start with Massachusetts, that's half of the country's liberals all tied up in one corrupt state.

Answer 10

No. The beauty of our country is that we are allowed to voice our opinions and disagree with each other. Why split it up?