I think we can split it up into several countries:
The People’s Republic of Pacifikstan
New New England
The Confederate States of Rednecland
North and South Flyoveria
The City-state of New York City
Texas
I assume you mean on a acre for acre basis. I didn’t know that, but will take your word for it. But the OP is still proposing to get rid of the bread basket region and even Wisconsin (no more cheese for joo!). You would still get to keep Idaho, though at a guess if you were really splitting this over the gun issue then they would probably go with the new nation…so, no more potatoes either!
Just give Mexico back Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and Southern California. It’d be better for both countries.
Hopefully you are talking tongue in cheek here. If you are serious, then you need to consider upping the voltage and getting a reality check on what would be better for both countries.
We get the nukes and airbases here, and you guys take Mississippi.
Sounds win-win to me!
Why give? Let’s sell them - even France was smart enough to not give land away 
I didn’t say it was a good idea. 
True, but the importance of the great plains States remains paramount in terms of agriculture, especially agriculture that feeds people.
Iowa is just one of those states and at 30m acres used in agriculture is substantial. California has either 25m acres used for agriculture (link buried in here I see 25m suggested) or 43m (link) no idea on the why there is such a discrepancy. Either way, California’s agricultural output is about 43bn while Iowa’s is about 30bn. But $11bn of California’s output is tied up in nuts (almonds, pistachios, walnuts), berries, grapes, and flowers. While I like more or less all of those things, it’s hard to feed a large population on nuts and berries as a staple food…Iowa just produces mountains and mountains of staple foodstuffs.
Same for the rest of the plains…and not something that should be ignored in terms of importance.
You guys know that every country doesn’t just limit itself to eating food grown within its borders, right?
I’m a fan of the idea. Hey South, it’s us, not you. Really. We can still be friends.
The idea that it’s more desirable to live with a diversity of opinion is fine when that diversity is not preventing important changes that would improve everyone’s lives.
I’ll even spot them their existing share of the debt. At least they won’t be continuing to add, disproportionately, to future debt.
As far as having to watch the disadvantaged suffer without being able to do anything about it, we already have that. Measures of pretty much every undesirable indicators/outcomes are routinely higher among the south than anywhere else. And they are presently planning (see Jindal, e.g.) on making things even worse by getting rid of state income taxes and making up the differences in sales taxes. There’s just nothing we can do about it now.
So, look, we need to talk. We’ve grown apart. It will be better this way. Hey, when the next millennium rolls around, if neither of us have dates then, we can get together again.
Actually, they have plenty of cannon fodder. The last time I checked, it wasn’t the dirty fucking hippies who were populating the military.
Seriously, take a look at the composition of the US military: it skews more rural and Southern than the nation at large, as well as more right-wing. (Which in my mind is a problem; it’s not good to have a military which isn’t broadly representative of the larger population. It’s not causing us problems now, but might n the future.)
We are getting rid of sales tax on food in Arkansas. I never heard of the state income tax thing.
Which would immediately find itself in deep, deep trouble, as those California farmers are relying on water for irrigation that comes from the Colorado River, which originates in the Rockies and would be in Redistan for most of its length. Somehow I don’t think the folks n Redistan would be willing to freely share their water with the citizenry of Bluecoastia.
We’d run into all sorts of these issues if the country ever seriously decided to divide in two. (Just think of the electric grid, for another example…) And they’d be a huge mess to untangle. Enough of a mess to make any sort of a succession thoroughly impractical, even if people actually wanted to do it.
It isn’t like we’d rule out international trade. We would still need Coca-Cola, for instance. At least, temporarily.
And whatever else of value the south might presently provide to anyone.
Yes, that’s a problem, but the US military is far too loyal/patriotic an organization for that to matter much as far as some hypothetical right wing uprising goes unless it’s a conservative government that turns them on the public. Potential cannon fodder that obeys the other side isn’t much use.
The discussion here is reminding me of that scene in Ghandi where, after Pakistan is formed, displaced people from both sides of the conflict are passing by each other going in opposite directions on opposite sides of a ditch…
Is our country heading to such polarization that we will not be able to live side-by-side with each other?
When people moved from Blue America to Red America it would raise the average IQ in both places.
I’m quite certain that Arizona, Utah, Idaho, and Alaska would want to leave as well. Probably Nevada and the eastern portions of Washington, Oregon, and California too. And I’m certain that most of the old South wouldn’t want to stay in your liberal nirvana either.
You guys would still be cool with that, right? We could send our poor people across the border into California to get health care and food stamps, right?
What’s the % of the military that’s registered Republican again?
Does Canada have similar conservative and liberal portions? Maybe we could mix them into this too. New England and Quebec seem made for each other. Maybe there are conservative portions of Canada that can join with North Dakota and the redneck, conservative utopia.
What worries me is that if the trend continues long-term, we might evolve the American equivalent to the Prussian Junker class: people who have a long family tradition of military service which leads them to being more loyal to the military as an institution than to the larger nation. I don’t see that happening any time soon, but who knows what the distant future might bring…
But for the purposes of this thread, which was discussing partitioning the country, I was pointing out that Redistan might find itself with most of the uniformed troops, while Bluecostia might be scrambling for a bit.
(Which raises another question: how would existing military assets be proportioned out? With all the coastline it would possess, it would make sense for Bluecoastia to get most of the Navy, while Redistan would be more in need of ground troops (except they’d need naval vessels and bases for the Gulf of Mexico regions) - but how would the Air Force be divided up? Problems, problems…)