What if the USA went into 50 states sharing an army and a ..

[Tero]

..currency.

Seth's dream come through.

No FBI, CIA only acting abroad. Washington DC would remain a district, after all the federal government would have somewhere to mess around.

There would be only a state tax and the states would support the federal projects according to population.

A sort of US version of the EU.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Heck why not take Seth's dream to the logical conclusion and have barons controlling only so much land as they dominate from their castles.

[Horwood Beer-Master]

Heck why not take Seth's dream to the logical conclusion and have barons controlling only so much land as they dominate from their castles.

"...just so long as he's a baron." as Bush Jr would put it.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Heck why not take Seth's dream to the logical conclusion and have barons controlling only so much land as they dominate from their castles.

"...just so long as he's a baron." as Bush Jr would put it.

That's the Libertarian theme, I do believe, each man for himself and devil take the hindmost.

[Tero]

So we don't want the states either? Who owns the roads?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

So we don't want the states either? Who owns the roads?

Imagine I-64 being twenty feet to the left in Illinois.

[Seth]

..currency.

Seth's dream come through.

Pretty much. And the dream of the Founders as well, who envisioned Federalism as a weak central government in place to provide a military, negotiate treaties with other nations, and mediate disputes between the states, with most of the power being retained by the states and/or the people themselves.

No FBI, CIA only acting abroad.

Yup. There's nothing the FBI does that the individual states do not or cannot do either for themselves or through cooperative agreements between adjacent states, like regional task forces.

Washington DC would remain a district, after all the federal government would have somewhere to mess around.

Which was it's original intent.

There would be only a state tax and the states would support the federal projects according to population.

There would be no "federal projects" other than supporting the military and the diplomatic corps, that's the whole point. The Congress could levy taxes for the purposes of funding the military, and for funding the District itself, and the Diplomatic Corps, but almost literally nothing else.

The states would collect taxes to deal with state issues, using interstate cooperative agreements where necessary and desirable. This would prevent, for example, the people of the rest of the country from having to pay for pork-barrel projects like the "Bridge to Nowhere" or the "Big Dig" in Boston or any other federally-funded project that doesn't benefit the actual people who pay the actual taxes.

A sort of US version of the EU.

Not quite. The EU asserts quite a bit of economic and trade control that would be denied to the federal government entirely, with its commerce clause powers limited to arbitrating and deciding disputes between state governments brought to it by the states ONLY. It would have absolutely no economic power to meddle with commerce OTHER THAN to ensure that interstate commerce (including waterways) are not infringed by the states themselves.

This would be a great way to return to our founding principles. We don't even need "post offices and post roads" anymore.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Parody of a Libertarian, by Seth. A watercolor.

[Seth]

So we don't want the states either? Who owns the roads?

Well, the states would.

Under Libertarian philosophy, they would all be private toll roads built by people who invest and risk their own money in hopes of making a profit, but since the infrastructure is already there, changing things would simply vest title, and responsibility for the roads in the states.

As for misalignment, the states are perfectly capable of negotiating and cooperating with neighboring states to build through highways, and were doing so long before Eisenhower came along and proposed what is actually a network of MILITARY ROADS designed and intended first and foremost for the efficient movement of troops and equipment about the country. The fact that civilians get to use it is a secondary consideration to the prime purpose for establishing the Interstate Highway System. Since the states already take responsibility for construction, maintenance and repair of the Interstates, using federal funds that are first extracted from the states, sent to Washington to have the top 10 or 20 percent skimmed off to run the DOT bureaucracy, only to have what remains returned to the states (much depleted), there's no reason not to simply cut out the DC middle-men and let the states keep their money and use it to fix their own highways as needed. Sure, it means a bunch of bureaucrats at the DOT out of work, but that's a GOOD thing.

[Seth]

Heck why not take Seth's dream to the logical conclusion and have barons controlling only so much land as they dominate from their castles.

"...just so long as he's a baron." as Bush Jr would put it.

That's the Libertarian theme, I do believe, each man for himself and devil take the hindmost.

Your belief is mendaciously wrong, and you know it. Which makes it a lie.

[Seth]

Parody of a Libertarian, by Seth. A watercolor.

Portrait of a Netwit, by Gawdzilla. In oil.

[Warren Dew]

..currency.

Seth's dream come through.

No FBI, CIA only acting abroad. Washington DC would remain a district, after all the federal government would have somewhere to mess around.

There would be only a state tax and the states would support the federal projects according to population.

A sort of US version of the EU.

Sounds good to me - much better than what we have now, at any rate.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Heck why not take Seth's dream to the logical conclusion and have barons controlling only so much land as they dominate from their castles.

"...just so long as he's a baron." as Bush Jr would put it.

That's the Libertarian theme, I do believe, each man for himself and devil take the hindmost.

Your belief is mendaciously wrong, and you know it. Which makes it a lie.

Nope, I got that from one of them direct. I think...yep, it was you.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Parody of a Libertarian, by Seth. A watercolor.

Portrait of a Netwit, by Gawdzilla. In oil.

Parody of a parody, in fail, by Seth.

[Jason]

It sounds terribly ineffectual, slow and otherwise inefficient. For example, wouldn't your diplomats not only have to consult with the outside party but every member state on every significant, or maybe every, detail of every negotiation?

For internal affairs it doesn't sound so terrible, but on the world scene you'd be less effectual than the UN.