dmarc117 Posted September 30, 2010 Share Posted September 30, 2010 (edited) http://www.cnbc.com/id/39404684 i would like to be the 1st one to thank texas! Edited September 30, 2010 by dmarc117 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
driveby Posted September 30, 2010 Share Posted September 30, 2010 http://www.cnbc.com/id/39404684 i would like to be the 1st one to thank texas! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted September 30, 2010 Share Posted September 30, 2010 (edited) There were some bright spots: Texas, Virginia and Nebraska were among states that have done a good job of controlling their finances over the years and aren't threatened as much. We shall call our newly independent wealthy country Nebtexaska Virgin. We will close the borders to the broke and desperate United States. Edited September 30, 2010 by TimC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted September 30, 2010 Share Posted September 30, 2010 I wouldn't be shocked to see the US be split into territories...so that there wouldn't be one President....there would be about 4 or 5 of them... a situation where one area wouldn't be responsible for bailing out another...they would be responsible for their own group of states and keeping it inside that bubble... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted September 30, 2010 Share Posted September 30, 2010 I wouldn't be shocked to see the US be split into territories...so that there wouldn't be one President....there would be about 4 or 5 of them... a situation where one area wouldn't be responsible for bailing out another...they would be responsible for their own group of states and keeping it inside that bubble... I wouldn't be shocked if nothing like that even remotely happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted September 30, 2010 Share Posted September 30, 2010 I wouldn't be shocked to see the US be split into territories...so that there wouldn't be one President....there would be about 4 or 5 of them... a situation where one area wouldn't be responsible for bailing out another...they would be responsible for their own group of states and keeping it inside that bubble... I wouldn't be shocked if nothing like that even remotely happened. I'd be surprised but not upset. If Texas was given the option to peacefully remove itself from The Union, I'd vote for it, provided that we were a stand alone nation, and not part of a group of surrounding states making up a new nation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 I wouldn't be shocked to see the US be split into territories...so that there wouldn't be one President....there would be about 4 or 5 of them... a situation where one area wouldn't be responsible for bailing out another...they would be responsible for their own group of states and keeping it inside that bubble... are you still pushing this: http://forums.thehuddle.com/index.php?showtopic=282355 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 I wouldn't be shocked to see the US be split into territories...so that there wouldn't be one President....there would be about 4 or 5 of them... a situation where one area wouldn't be responsible for bailing out another...they would be responsible for their own group of states and keeping it inside that bubble... a the old "hunger games" scenario . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 I'd be surprised but not upset. If Texas was given the option to peacefully remove itself from The Union, I'd vote for it, provided that we were a stand alone nation, and not part of a group of surrounding states making up a new nation. I'd vote against it under any circumstance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redrumjuice Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Pay those taxes. The Wall Street Journal editorial page explained that in 1999, then-Governor Gray Davis, in cahoots with the California State Employees Association, passed “the largest issuance of non-voter-approved debt in the state’s history. The bill...granted billions of dollars in retroactive pension boosts to state employees, allowing retirements as young as age 50 with lifetime pensions of up to 90% of final year salaries.” The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (known as CalPERS) promised that no additional state contributions were needed and that the plans would be “fully funded.” It was the ultimate something-for-nothing scheme: “They also claimed that enhanced pensions would not cost taxpayers ‘a dime’ because investment bets would cover the expense.”But CalPERS and Davis didn’t tell the voters that the state would have to pick up the tab if the ludicrous investment predictions (for example, that the Dow would hit 25,000 by 2009) failed to pan out. The shortfall turned out to be hundreds of billions of dollars. Nor did voters learn that “CalPERS’s own employees would benefit from the pension increases [or that]...members of CalPERs’s board had received contributions from the public employee unions who would benefit from the legislation.” Aahhh unions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.