Richard wrote in
m:

On 11/13/2012 4:29 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
writes:
On 11/13/2012 1:17 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
writes:
Gramp's shop wrote:

With the Blue States in hand we will have firm control of 80% of
the country's fresh water, more than 90% of the pineapple and
lettuce, 92% of the nation's fresh fruit, 95% of America's
quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners) 90%
of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the
US low sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors,
all the Ivy and Seven

That's cool.

On the other hand, Texas controls 70% of the nation's refining
capacity.

25%, actually.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pnp_..._8pa_BSD_a.htm

That's enough to run Texas ok, and maybe a bit left over for
foreign aid...

Until one realizes that something like 70% of the federal income
taxes paid by texans are funnelled back into the state; which means
that even _if_ texas were to succeed at secession, they'd have to
impose high state taxes to cover the shortfall.

I think we are doing our math differently.
100% going out and 70% coming back?

I think we'd do ok.

And no "income" tax. (sacrilege!)

Not to mention that the border gets 400% longer and would cost a
great deal more to secure.

Not a problem.
Get the Feds out of the way and we can deal with the borders.

But it's just a pipe dream.

I think that Scott meant that of the Federal taxes paid by Texas, 70%
goes back to them (I didn't check the figures). That means that Texas
would save some of the money paid to the feds, but not really that much.
They would have to raise that 70% for themselves, plus they would have to
find a way to pay their own military, diplomats, etc.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid