Is there a reason why North Amrica's borders aren't pic related? That should solve everyone's problems

Why? They even get to keep Mexico City.

Mexico has zero right to that land
Florida is not Southern
The borders are illogical on a practical level

Naive OP. If the Mexicans has Cali, Cali would instantly turn to a third world, cartel-ridden shithole and then they would start migrating to either Dixieland or America.

> Mexico has zero right to that land
On land that was Mexican for the fucking beginning?

North Florida is very southern.

Americans are really stupid

This made me literally laugh out loud for a solid minute. Have an ass

Here's a fun fact: slavery has been abolished since the mid 19th century and race riots in the modern US happen everywhere BUT the South. Now you know.

Mexico barely had presence in much of California and even if they did they lost the goddamn war so those little Aztlan shits can keep crying about it.

I think the country should be split in half like the Roman Empire did. It would alleviate pressure on the central government.
But more important than that; the obsolete state demarcations should be redrawn and remade from the individual or combinations of the Metropolitan statistical areas.

>This shit again

Outside of their strip of California coastline it was barely inhabited (mostly by yuro immigrants, nonetheless; Mexico did what any expanding nation did and stuck their new arrivals way out on the literally bleeding edge of the frontier) and contained butt-fucking nothing of value - too little water for farming, too rugged and hot for cattle, very little good timber or surface minerals (until right after they lost it, hilariously enough) and on top of that there was effectively zero infrastructure apart from trade routes and it was full of hostile natives who sustained themselves by stealing from them.

The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was the best fucking thing to happen to Mexico in its entire history to boot, even it was bitter medicine. And if their government at the time wasn't a revolving-door shitshow of cronyism, the US would probably have bought it for less money decades earlier.

Floridian. Can confirm.
Plus being full of angry natives.
>P-pero...mi tierra ancien :(
So obnoxious. By that logic they owe the whole thing back to Spain anyway.

Where in Florida do you live, because as soon as you leave the beaches, Florida is pretty southern.

Because of historical events such as the US failing to invade the north.

I'd still rather have prime minister handsome cuck then be a part of that shithole

>in half

Make every of those zones an independent country and distribute the land between them, respecting geographical and if possible cultural borders. Maybe the two californias should be included in the same country and of course the texan part of the gulf coast remains texan.

Let those independent states continue in a confederation that continues to cuck the rest of the world like the USA does and it's perfect.

>By that logic they owe the whole thing back to Spain anyway.

Actually at one point Mexicans tried to be ruled by the king of Spain again but were rejected, kek.

>Actually at one point Mexicans tried to be ruled by the king of Spain again but were rejected
citation? That sounds funnny as fuck.

Sorry the only thing I can give is to recommend you to search in the Veeky Forums archive. It was a latin america thread (pretty sure not the one that exists now).

The US doesn't have problems with inefficiency from being too big. It has inefficiency from bureaucracy being inefficient, redundant, and corrupt.

If anything needs to be cut in half it needs to be the number of government workers, fire 90% of the ones left, and restructure the entire thing so that they get paid based on results instead of existing.

Ah, ok, thanks. Ill pop in and ask one day.

Correct. It is North Cuba.

DIXIE
I
X
I
E

oklahoma isn't southern, even though they have conservative politics. It's midwestern.

>Mexico barely had presence in much of California
By that logic the US should give up Alaska, Guam, Puerto Rico, the entirety of the Mojave Desert, etc.

Drawing a map of secessions to Mexico based on this language map wouldn't be too hard.

If we can't defend it? Sure.

Depending on how things develop considering resources, I wouldn't be surprised if we become a world of a few superblocs rather than even more nations than now.

Dixieland wouldn't have stopped there man. Mexico would be boned.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Circle_(proposed_country)

>the fucking beginning
Not even half a century.

That's like saying that the way to save a failing restaurant is to fire its waitstaff and auction off its remaining inventory.

pic related, the government has a revenue problem. People want the benefits of a modern, peaceful society that advances technologically but they don't want to pay the taxes that go into maintaining them. They bought the fiction that capitalism magically maintains itself and foreign countries don't pick on places with weak governments.

Because they should be pic related.

What happened to the middle east, india, and south China?

if the USA were to Balkanize this is probably the shape it would take.

North America could have an western half that assimilates Mexico and Central America and an eastern half that assimilates the Caribbean.
South America could easily follow suit and divide itself into 3 territories.
Amazonias - Including the entire Amazon, Venezuela, the Guyanas, and parts of Colombia and Brazil.
Tawantinsuyu or Pacifica - Including all the Andean regions and everything to the West.
Cono Sur - Including Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, and southern Brazil.

Incidentally the continents could be renamed.
North America becomes - Yin Yang or Taijitu
South America - Triskelion or Tomoe

>African Union
>Owns Europe
top kek

thats a map from gundam, and a really stupid one at that.

It really isn't.

t. Gainesville

>as soon as you leave the beaches, florida is pretty southern
Not at all true. I don't know why some people are so eager to speak on matters they clearly know nothing about.

Much better alternative right here.

Any map that has all of Africa united is instantly disqualified and actually pretty racist. Do you know ANYTHING about Africa? Do any of you? They're ready to kill each other half the time.

They're independent as of 2102 in that timeline. By the late 2100s China is a region known as the People's Republic of Da Han Zhong (DHZ)

Some other things about this setting
>USN is based on that pan-american union that was pushed and had some headway during the clinton years, but at this point in the timeline basically everything that isn't the land of US or Canada is treated under colonial status by the US.
>OCU was formed in response to the formation of the USN. Japan is used as an R&D hub, the vast majority of the OCU's military is from Australia
>EC is basically just the EU.

This is 300 years after a nuclear war and total societal collapse. Everything is blocs to maintain order.

>Greater Appalachia
>Includes the Ozarks, a good chunk of the midwest and Texas

What the fuck?
Why even call it appalachia if less than half the landmass is the appalachians? Also that salient the deep south has in it its retarded and wouldn't fly in a map redrawing.

>Everthing about the midlands formation

These borders gave me autism

Still stupid. But then, all Gundam maps are stupid. All Sunrise maps as a whole are stupid.

Hey I'm not the one who posted it, I posted the Front Mission map. I was just giving context.

The CSA would just get drowned in darkies. Maybe they could just hold down the CSA with its black people, but add in Mexico, Haiti and all the rest? They'd be overwhelmed by a revolution that would make the Congo look like a paradise.

>20th parallel north
Naw man, you're not ambitious enough. I say America should annex everything from the North Pole down to Panama. Plus we throw in the entire Caribbean and maybe Greenland for good measures.

>my faggy hipster college town is representative of Florida as a whole
>what is the panhandle
>what is central Florida
But of course a fag from Gaysville thinks his gay town is the whole fucking world. Florida was a Confederate state, you stupid fuck, and most of it is still Klan country. The courthouse in god damn Brooksville still has the old lynching tree out front, and the so-called "nigger graveyard" there still has Klan meetings. You're retarded.

az gets its own country? you are maken me wet.

Why Yucatan? Did we just love Mayan ruins that much?

I also live in gainesville, and I don't know how long you've been here other gainesvillian, but this whole area is redneck as fuck.

My parents live near brooksville lel. Next time I'm home I wanna see that

>roleplaying faggot transplant from new jersey wishes he was a redneck
But by all means, please tell us more fantasies.

The US has a spending problem and a liberal problem. Advancing aggressive, inefficient welfare programs was what's killed revenue and fixing that shit can save trillions. Balkanizing would make the resulting states even poorer sans California and Texas which would become proportionately more wealthy since they would no longer be drained so heavily by welfare programs.

Texas would probably gut its welfare entirely if it became independent or a sovereign nation state heading several other nearby states.

>There are no rednecks in New Jersey
>What is a "Piney"

Commifornia would boost welfare programs since they don't have to support redneck welfare.

Spic here, there's no reason not to love those sexy ass ruins. I would have understood perfectly if America had tried to liberate them.

All the Caribbean islands, Canada and Central America should be fully incorporated into the Republic.

Veeky Forums is an 18+ website.

The states north of the Mason-Dixon line ought to absorb Canada, unite with Russia, and become the Austria-Hungary of the New World. Global hegemony for a thousand years.
>god
>guns
>wilderness
>white people
>slavish love of authority
>nuclear bombs
Everything is there.

Well neither is Texas to be honest. Most Texans aren't the traditional "Deep South" type. Don't get me wrong, we have "Deep South" hicks, but they are mostly contained in the east near Louisiana. South Texas and West Texas are essentially south western. West of Houston/Dallas to a little beyond Austin is essentially its own place. That's what I consider culturally Texan: friendly, good food, mostly annoyingly conservative, religious, but respectful of others. Oh and guns. But most of all, self reliant. Texas isn't like other southern states like Mississippi or Alabama because we aren't poor racists incestuous fucks. Texas is the only southern state that gives more money in taxes to the federal Gov than it receives back. Plus we have our own power grid, which is pretty fuckkin neeto

>Why even call it appalachia if less than half the landmass is the appalachians?
They call it "greater" Appalachia to show that its a culture born in the Appalachian region, but gradually spreads westward.

>Also that salient the deep south has in it its retarded and wouldn't fly in a map redrawing.
They were drawn up according to ethnic demographics and shared cultural values

>These borders gave me autism
The author who came up with them shows his homework, so maybe you were just born autistic?
amazon.com/American-Nations-History-Regional-Cultures/dp/0143122029?ie=UTF8&tag=bisafetynet-20
businessinsider.com/the-11-nations-of-the-united-states-2015-7

>The US has a spending problem and a liberal problem.
Look closer at that chart: we don't have a spending problem, we have a revenue problem. Revenues are at historic lows and even suggesting raising tax rates to what they were during the Reagan administration is sure to produce spittle flinging rages from conservatards claiming that Reagan was too socialist. And the only reason you think that the country has a liberal problem is because they're handily winning the culture wars and outflanking conservatives demographically and they're all depressed because nobody important believes in neoliberalism any more
fortune.com/2016/06/03/imf-neoliberalism-failing/

>Balkanizing would make the resulting states even poorer sans California and Texas which would become proportionately more wealthy since they would no longer be drained so heavily by welfare programs.
I agree that Balkanizing would make the country poorer, but the places hit the hardest would be places that think like you do, predominately rural states which take in more federal revenue than they pay out.
politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jan/26/blog-posting/red-state-socialism-graphic-says-gop-leaning-state/

>race riots in the modern US happen everywhere BUT the South
Except that isn't true.

it wouldn't surprise me considering how repressed and terrorized southern negros were

The federal revenue is mostly for political leverage, so I've heard. What I've read is that Texas prefers inter-state collaboration over federal aid in the spirit of this self sufficient ideal.

Though while we do have a genuinely robust economy for most states, a lot of our revenue is just from oil.

t. Austinite

>YC - Yucatan
>On map shows up as YK

fix it

...

>Revenues are at historic lows
Do you enjoy going on the internet and lying?

taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=203

Texas really does seem to be its own thing. Not falling neatly into any broader cultural designation. South-western is probably more accurate but it's still fairly distinct from places like Southern California and Arizona.

You don't get to keep land that you lost in a war that you also started, Paco.

Eat shit.

You believe this based on what documents?

I'm from the south and have many Floridian friends and can tell you it most definitely is. Pretending to be California doesn't change anything.

No, you have southerner friends who happen to live in Florida. Being Floridian and being Southern are mutually exclusive things. Florida has 20 million people and a European history that precedes the South.

It's not Southern, it's not Northern, it's not California 2. It's Florida. Why is this so difficult for people like you to understand?

>You believe this based on what documents?
a basic understanding of history
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws

Texas isn't dixie land
Texas is Texas

>Do you enjoy going on the internet and lying?
You only perceive it as lying because it rains on your little "tax cuts for robber barons fixes everything" parade, and you just can't divorce yourself from the sinking ship that is neoliberalism, this fiction that making the government weaker through tax cuts and deregulation produces dividends for everyone and not just a tiny cadre of property owners

>taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=203
Ohhhh, nice sourced gif. And did you even look at this citation before you posted it?

I think you'd be better off sticking to tired Reagan memes from the 1980's. At least you'll sound convincing to other conservatives.

And if the government supposedly has a spending problem, then how come Kansas is doing so shitty and California is doing so great?
taxjustice.net/2014/11/18/californias-tax-hikes-versus-kansas-tax-cuts-early-results-now/
nytimes.com/2014/06/29/upshot/kansas-tax-cut-leaves-brownback-with-less-money.html?_r=0
>washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/06/27/tax-cuts-in-kansas-have-cost-the-state-money-and-jobs/
sacbee.com/opinion/california-forum/article2604184.html
Shoot, California is actually producing a budget surplus!
lao.ca.gov/reports/2013/bud/fiscal-outlook/fiscal-outlook-112013.aspx#Surpluses_Projected_to_Grow_Steadily
Meanwhile poor old Kansas is forced to slash funding for schools in impoverished neighborhoods because their state government can barely keep their lights on.
cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/3-27-14sfp.pdf

How come most of the job growth since 2008 has been concentrated in places with high taxes? I mean not ALL of the growth has come from these places, but it sure does torpedo your "hurr gubmint is too big" meme
bls.gov/news.release/cewqtr.nr0.htm

>It's a poorly disguised shitty alternate history thread

I used to live if West Palm Beach and I can tell you there are no hicks at all.

NotIndependentTexas.png

user, Texas is too small to have proper independence, and would become part of the sphere of influence of its surrounding countries. Same thing with Quebec. Sure, Quebec is culturally distinct enough to be independent, but it would be economically dominated by its larger neighbor. They'd both be objectively worse and poorer due to decreased flow of labor and resources due to being separate states.

actually when you look at the GDP of Texas verses the rest of the states in the deep south the inverse would be true: it would be smaller, leaner and have fewer piglets feeding at the trough

Are you frustrated?

effectively turning those states that joined mexico into third world shit holes, congrats OP, you made more people suffer :^)

and to the mexican fags who think they deserve those states, I say this un-ironically for the first time, please kill yourselves

>Not Yumongous

fixed it for you.

Note that Texas gets a pass for being the only southern state not suckling at the federal teat but actually giving more than it takes.

>americas border stops exactly where my white wash wasteland is
I want to die

>A Northern-Midwest Superstate
ur makin me wet mang