Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

No need. Ca would catch fire and burn naturally in 2 years all on its own. It lacks the resources and infrastructure to live the polished white plastic lifestyle it now enjoys. It would experience true poverty and economic collapse from destroyed infrastructure very quickly.

It would beg to return to the union.

[smjjames]

Much like Texas did when it tried to go solo.

Americas infrastructure and it's, well, everything, is decentralized, everything takes from everywhere.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

Let's derail this to something more productive.  People are saying California would be screwed due to all the infrastructure needed for their infrastructure lying outside their borders due to US decentralization.  So in a hypothetical scenario where the United States gets dissolved and war just simply never happens for one reason or another (declared by other states or other countries), which would be the best off state?  Worst off?  And what would major trade deals be?

Edit: For more fun, let's have Mexico and Canada dissolve into their provinces as well and include them too.

[wierd]

None.

Coasts are too urban, and resource hungry. Middle states are only habitable with technology, and the infrastructure to design and maintain that is not local.

Us would become 3rd world.

[NullForceOmega]

Bonus: Russia and China part out North America between them.

[Baffler]

We'd probably see the states associating with each other again, though likely not as a government since there's presumably bad blood between the states if the whole thing fell apart in the first place. They'd need to band together to avoid collapsing into anarchy or being conquered by outsiders, though I guess that assumes the state governments still retain control over their respective territories. Whatever happened to the United States of America, I'm pretty confident the states would choose each other over a foreign power if there was any real pressure on them.

Or warlords from the states that have nuclear arsenals would start carving out empires from the ones around them that don't.

[wierd]

More, Russia and China argue over who has imminent domain.

US owes its soul to China on trade balances.

Russia is just the bearing straight away.


(Either has more might than any local strongman, and our people are soft and fat, unlike the generationally hardened and conditioned middle east.)

[smjjames]

New York would probably come off better than most due to NYC being a financial center, but where will it get food? I don't think NY has that big of an agricultural center.

The problem is that resources aren't distributed evenly (duh). About the only thing distributed evenly is air.

As for Canada, the northern territitories (the ones in the north, not the one called 'northern territories) would probably be mostly ok, but where do they get the food? electricty? other supplies?

For Mexico, the states would variously get taken over by cartels. Don't really know anything about the infrastructure or where farming is and stuff.

[wierd]

Money is not valuable in and of itself. It is a promisary note.

The value comes from the promise if goods and services tied to it.  In this hypothetical collapse, what services can NYC offer to give value to the money hoarded there?

[smjjames]

You forget that it's also a trading hub, which it may hypothetically still be.

Though in the hypothetical collapse, I'm not sure how it'd all work out.

Also, the tinier states like RI and Conneticuit won't survive on their own. Mass. may be able to get by on it's fishing industry, but there aren't a whole lot of farms over there. So, the tinier states would probably band together for survival.

[wierd]

It may remain useful as a trade hub, but the goods passing through will be substandard to the world economy.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

If state level seems to be too far, then we could use this map I found that says it roughly divides the population of the continent into evenly populated regions and speculate off of which is the best off.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Have Canada divided on a line between Saskatchewan and Manitoba running straight north, though.  It's too easy if they remain fully intact (and getting more land at that!) while the US and Mexico fracture.

[Baffler]

The commercial ports on the East Coast would probably be far more useful as a beachhead for an invader a humanitarian effort than for actual commerce.

Too easy? Canada's not exactly densely populated, or really that populated at all. Give 'em some slack.

It's populated enough, and considering the natural resource situation up there they'd be a bit OP otherwise. If the goal is maximum chaos though I guess we could do worse than an Alaskan revanchism movement.

[wierd]

For US, great lakes.

Has derelict but rebootable heavy infrastructure, farmland, and fresh water.

[Starver]

For US, great lakes.

Has derelict but rebootable heavy infrastructure, farmland, and fresh water.

I'm tempted to say "pick any two"...