Resolved: Texas would best serve its interest by seceding from the Union

CON has provided weak evidence for a Civil War. Historical data is not good for modern times with quite a bit of technological and cultural changes. While there might be natives to foreign countries the US invades, they are of a minority. The majority of people know Texans. Furthermore, the US going to war to overthrow dictatorships can be justifiable. Going to war against a democratic nation, not so much. If the US invaded Texas, this would be the first time in over a century that the US would directly invade a democratic nation. The idea that US hegemony contributes to stability is also weak. CON even concedes that our ability to create stability is poor through stating that “it proves that some problems continue to be intractable. Hegemony isn’t a magic wand” My source shows that the US directly contributes to terrorist acts, they do not create stability. The sources used were the Heritage Foundation and the University of Chicago, hardly poor sources. While Con might think the Heritage could be bias, the Heritage foundation supports a stronger military, so if anything it should be bias towards more troops, not less troops in the Middle East. The UN will live on, and has been a greater force in the formation of internal law and human rights watch. Con’s whole argument rests on companies moving, yet if Texas marks the end of hegemony, there’s no reason why companies would support the US over Texas in the first place. The assets and infrastructure the companies obtain are mainly immobile. If it was easy to move these companies, they’d move to China where labor is cheaper. Yet it is very difficult to move companies, so they would remain or at the very least be sold off. If a company does not have the immobile infrastructure that comes with the mobile infrastructure, they aren’t going to keep the mobile ones. They’d sell it off since they’d have no use of it. CON states that global prices of oil would increase as a result of exporting tariff. Yet this does not take into consideration local prices. If Texas is not exporting oil, it’s using its own oil, which drives down prices. Countries in oil producing countries pay less than a dollar for oil, while the US pays way more for oil then them. The timeline for financial Armageddon is “decades” down the road, but more like a decade. Congress has shown itself quite incompetent to even pass a budget, never mind balance a budget. The “deficit cuts” that Obama cut were just cuts from the higher deficit spending down the road. In no way does the US come even close to balancing the budget. All budget proposals that have been introduced to balance the budget like “Paul Ryan’s Budget” have been shot down and labeled as “social Darwinism”. This debt is crippling and threatening and Texas needs to leave the union to avoid this collapse. It could be affected from it, but they’d still be a lot less affected then the US itself. While it is possible that Texas could become corrupt, there is no guarantee it will. However, with increasing government spending, and a congress divided, corruption is rising and inevitable in the federal government. Congress’s approval rating is only 14%; lower the cockroaches [1]. While Texas government policy might not be able to satisfy everyone, it can satisfy a lot more people than federal policy ever could and much less vulnerable to corrupt like the US government is. The time for Texas to secede is now. They have ports that would allow them to trade, and are a net-tax generator, not a net-tax drain which would allow the Texas government to use its funds to improve themselves and can do it better then the federal government could because Texan’s know better how to deal with their problems then the federal government could. America’s problems have been getting worse, not better. While the transition might cause some difficulty for Texas, they will more likely lead to prosperity then the US could.