"Greater Idaho" movement continues
As a side note, this would make the "Greater" State of Idaho the third largest - surpassing Montana. What is also critical is that it would give the "Greater" State of Idaho access to the Pacific Coast. I could very easily see a pipeline from Montana and the Dakotas running through Southern Idaho right alongside a new rail line. (There's plenty of desert out there to run those right-of-ways through.)
They'd have to build a border wall to keep all the leftest out and create a potential citizen vetting process.
That being said, it would be totally awesome. Idaho would get a major deep-water port which already has a rail line running right to it. This would be a huge boon for all the agricultural products the Greater State of Idaho produces - which includes those world-famous potatoes.
If this happened what I would expect is that WV would pick up all of Virginia west of I-95, except the parts in the DC and Richmond metro areas. This would make WV a big state and pretty much all red except Roanoke, while VA gets the two big cities plus Virginia Beach.
I'm urging them to push ahead with it now, because the state's Republican legislature and governor won't likely last past this term.
Perhaps it should be expanded to include the non-urban counties of Washington state, too.
As to Washington, its leftist population centers are a little more spread out where Oregon is dominated by Portland and Portland alone. While I certainly wouldn't turn down the inclusion of some counties in Washington, I doubt you'd get Pullman (across the state line from Moscow, home of the traditionally leftist University of Idaho campus) or Spokane (across from also-liberal Coeur D'Alene) to back such moves. The demography of Washington just isn't nearly as conducive to realignment as Oregon.
That being said, there may be several counties in northern California which might join in...
I came up with one of my own which would divide the state into east and west parts rather than north and south as everyone else seems to want to do.
# "Left California" would be the coastal counties from Marin to Los Angeles, plus Alameda, Contra Costa, and Santa Clara counties in the bay area, and those parts of Riverside and San Bernardino counties that are part of metro Los Angeles. So they get nearly all the major cities, and the US 101 corridor to connect it all.
# This would leave "Right California" owning San Diego and Orange counties (both conservative majority) plus nearly all of the rural parts of the state, including the whole Central Valley, the Sierras, the wine country, and the north coast (Sonoma and above).
This is mostly based on who is the majority in each area, except that it awards Sacramento to the right to make both states reasonably contiguous. But what will really irritate the left is that Right California gets most of the water supply.
I will predict a large problem will be the position taken by "NGM" - Nevada Gold Mines. They are the giant merger between Barrick and Newmont that occurred in the last 3 years. Major global producers of gold in Northern Nevada. Both of them have always been heavily invested in buying off the same rotten politicians and their policies that have been attacking and polishing off private property rights in the public lands for decades.
The other large so far unstated issue is that the discussion revolves about "getting permission" from the problematic governmental entities, fed and state included. While that is correct while any semblance of economy and "rule of law" (snic) is in place, the minute the "lights go out" (think the final act in AS) the need will actually present itself as self-evident. Therefore it makes sense to have all the ground work laid for such a wise contingency.
The new country of Absaroka! There is new state formation history behind that one too!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absarok...
My concern is Idaho is the hottest real estate market in the country today.
The Californians are trying to "fix" Idaho.
We're starting to see it level off slightly but I'm predicting another crash to come. We saw one about ten years ago that lasted about 3 years. Turned a lot of homeowners into renters. This home boom has gone the other way as renters were kicked out so the owners could sell.
A corporate culture can't be developed over a laptop in the kitchen with screaming kids in the backround.
As to the remote working, several of my gaming buddies work from home despite their children. They say it isn't ideal, but nobody cares about corporate "culture" anymore except the woke - and them for all the wrong reasons. And now that everyone has been working remotely effectively for more than a year, I don't see too many businesses going back. They've already had to pour tens of thousands of dollars into laptops and wireless hotspots for their employees and many of the people in my office argue that they are more productive at home. When you add in the costs to the individual worker in travel time and transportation expense commuting, working from home can quickly become very attractive even before gasoline prices skyrocketed.
I agree that it is very difficult to create and sustain an effective corporate culture when so many people work from home. But I think that ship sailed and many businesses are going to be pressed to keep it that way. My company owns corporate real estate and finding renters/lessees is EXTREMELY difficult right now. Corporate real estate prices have plummeted despite the personal real estate boom.
Just like when Washington was making noises about splitting the state...why let the liberals keep the "Washington" name, for their half? They probably don't want it, anyway. Let them come up with their own name, like Chavatangakwunua, and let the east siders keep Washington.
:P
Changing the state boundaries is good, but a drawback is people on the wrong side of the border, e.g. people living in north Oregon who are culturally southern Oregonians and vice versa, would be worse off.
We really need a spirit of liberty and state and local control, so it doesn't matter what state you live in. I support changing the boundaries, but the real issue is liberty.
Ideally, I agree with you that liberty should be the primary focus. But let's get real: Democrats want control and use coercion to push their ideology. It's incompatible with liberty. The only way to return to liberty is to return to Constitutional values as a nation. At this point, I don't think that's going to happen short of another civil war or divine intervention.
Los Angeles 9.2M (units in TEU)
Long Beach 8.1M (17.3M total for LA)
NWSA (Seattle & Tacoma) 3.3M
Oakland 2.5M
Coos Bay about 2M ?
Hey, I love Coos Bay. And they’re really the best choice for a major Greater Idaho/Jefferson port on the West Coast (unless San Diego can be finessed).
A huge problem with CB is that it’s not really Red country.
Coos Bay is historically a Democratic stronghold. Every precinct within the city voted for Obama in the 2008 and 2012. Virtually all the politicians they’ve voted for are Leftys.
Ports appear to collect Democrats.
Still, gives one things to consider.