Barry Smitherman stated last month that Texas could become an independent nation one day although the country collapsed. To prove Barry was wrong, Paul Burka gave his opinions on Texas Monthly with some particular reasons.
The definition of "independent nation" of Barry just only contains food, energy, water and roads. In the other hand, Paul has a wider explaination, and it seems quiet true to me. Any independent nation needs more than those. They need to stand on their own economy, education, agriculture, finance, and so on. If just like what Barry said, it is so easy to become an independent country for any other states not only Texas. In my opinion, the reply of Barry is exactly what I really want to say. Maybe in other content, Barry's idea can be true, but in this situation, I agree with Paul. Food, energy, water are not stable resources, they could be change in time. Just like what Paul mentioned, oil can be decreased in price as same as the way it is increased. Moreover, there are still some public services that are using funds from federal, not from the state's funds. What will happen if they are stopped funding? Could we be able to stand alone after that?
Becoming an independent nation is a very serious problem that we could not decide just by saying. It requires a lot of aspects to fullfill from the easiest to the hardest ones. We might survive after the U.S falls apart, but so not stand alone as a country.
No comments:
Post a Comment