All Righty!! Post 100!!! (about damn time!)
I thought this would be apropos for my 100th post, since I lived in South Dakota from 1954-2001. LouisB, thank you! I’m glad to know that I’m not the only one who knows the wonder that is the vast open spaces of South Dakota, the beauty of the Badlands at sunrise, the crisp clean scent of the Black Hills, the overwhelming friendliness of the locals…
sits weeping in the corner, realizing that I now live in (sob) New Jersey!!!
…gathers himself together…I’ve always thought instead of North/South Dakota, there should be an East/West Dakota. East-River tends to be farming, while West-River tends to be ranching. East=very flat. West=rolling hills. (Make your own jokes here). And if there ARE any jerks, they’re East-River.
We could definitely get rid of Texas, though. According to them, they didn’t join the Union, the Union joined them. What a bunch of insufferable arrogant people. Hell, the NFL exists just so the Cowboys can have somebody to play with…
lorinada said about Texas, after I said it first about South Dakota,
South Dakota doesn’t have pollution but Texas does. South Dakota has a large Native American population, but Texas doesn’t. I believe that Texas may be the only state in the Union that that refused to set aside land for the displaced Native American population. South Dakota has public hunting lands, in Texas a lease is necessary.
More importantly, South Dakota doesn’t breed Texans.
Wisconsin and Illinois should be merged into Michigan. Then we would have no challengers to our hegemony in the region. All those people who want to take the UP from us just want our precious precious iron.
I love this idea Kalashnikov. I live in the Adirondacks which could not be more unlike NYC. Besides that, we pay the highest auto insurance rates in the country due to auto theft/fraud in the city.
Awww…but it just wouldn’t be Bud Seligish without a little numbers-fudging!
I have the feeling that if it were up to Selig, Minnesota would be merged with shudder Wisconsin.
Toaster52, You like South Dakota, I like South Dakota. It’s a nice place with some friendly people. Let’s face it, though, it’s just not pulling in the numbers needed in today’s market. People like new states–just look at how popular Hawaii is! And yet your people have repeatedly refused to accept economic realities and build a new state with more revenue potential. Sure, you’ve got Mount Rushmore, Wall Drug, and the Corn Palace. And they are nice, but they are just too far away from major airports for the average American. Just imagine how many more people would see and enjoy these great national treasures if we moved them to Wisconsin Dells! Why, they’d be just a hop, skip, and a jump from the new Miller Park, yet another national treasure. What could be better than that, huh?
If you’re against that, well then, the terrorists already have won.
[sub]OK, maybe I am going a bit too far there.[/sub]
1.) Texas. It’s full of Texans. You folks seem to be under the impression that the rest of the contry is jealous of you for some reason. NEWSFLASH: We’re not. Please leave. Now.
2.) The area between Erie, PA and Chicago. Some people call it “The Midwest.” I call it “unnecessary.” It’s flat, ugly, polluted, overpopulated, humid, depressing, and full of people who think places like Sandusky, OH “aren’t that bad.” I say flood the Great Lakes and give the folks in northern Kentucky beachfront property.
3.) Southern California. Give it back to Mexico, and let them do something productive with it, like using it for a landfill. Wait, we’ve already done that. Hmmm—maybe a parking lot for Tijuana taxis.
4.) Florida. The-Midwest-meets-Southern-California. We could increase the distance between the U. S. and Cuba by simply allowing the peninsula to slide into the Atlantic. Hell, if we’re really so keen on pissing off Castro, why not just give him Florida?
5.) Washington, D. C. Not to be confused with the other Washington, which is Heaven-on-Earth. Let’s make D. C. a themepark, and open up the monuments to spelunkers and rock-climbers. Also: See 1.) above.
6.) New Jersey. I like a good toxic wasteland as much as the next guy, but it would be nice if its inhabitants spoke English and didn’t wear makeup to the beach. Hey, I think I just figured out where all that toxic waste comes from…
Government by the Census Bureau: divide states along the lines of the Metropolitan Statistical Areas, which would give places that share economic interests the same government, regardless of current state lines. Advantages: destroy single-party governments (democratic inner cities and republican suburban counties), provide for resolution of “nimby” issues, and enable coordination of transportation (anyone who lives in DC will sympathise). Every time the census bureau determines that growth had economicallly pushed a town into a neighboring MSA , that town would be sucked in - no choice. For sweetener, newly-MSA’d towns might get extra tax benefits to pay for growth - such as new roads and schools as needed. But in return, their residents wouldn’t be able to simply move away from poor people and leave them behind in another jurisdiction.
Tamex, I agree with you completely. As much as I love South Dakota, this has always been my major complaint about it. F’gawdssake, join the modern world, why doncha?? Geez, with all the FLAT LAND out there, you’d think finding room for a little old airport wouldn’t be a problem.
lurkernomore
Hey, I’m crazy, but not THAT crazy!!! I followed my beloved out here to NJ, but there’s NO WAY that she and I would EVER go down there!!!
IIRC (& I may not) There was a map of the US in the 1975 ed. of **The Peoples Almanac **by David Wallechinsky that divvied the lower 48 up by logical geological features: like Lakes, Rivers, mountains etc.
I think they had (insert made up number here) like 36 states all divided regardless of history, population or politics. Iconoclasts.
One consolidation that was somewhat vaguely seriously considered in recent years, though not a state, is to put non-federal Washington, D.C. back into Maryland for taxation w. representation purposes.
