This is huge, and I had missed thinking about this at all. Being off the "grid" would kill an economy. People would literally have to be rationed power.
Odd. I mentioned it on the first page of one of the ten other threads on the issue.
Because people look at the whole picture, not just the point where one state has become independent.Why is there always the assumption that secession will result in lack of trade with neighboring lands? Do we shun Canada and Mexico? Does VA/MD shun DC? Does Italy shun the Vatican?
Follow me: No state will be allowed to secede peacefully. (No state with a positive influence on the US's economy anyway.) Ergo, the only means of secession will be through force. And a successful bid at secession would mean that the state-turned-sovereign nation bested the U.S. Just how do you think the U.S. is going to feel about that?
Now, each state is different. But no point is discussing other states since we live here. Indiana is land-locked with the exception of her northern border, which has a port accessed through waterways that are owned by the nation she just kicked the **** out of. The land surrounding Indiana also belongs to the nation she just kicked the **** out of. How do you propose Indiana imports/exports relevant products?
One way or another U.S. sovereign territory has to be crossed. The U.S. wouldn't have to lift a finger, just deny access. How long do you think Indiana would survive?
Of course, I think the U.S. would pummel Indiana in a military action. The disparity in available force brought to bear on the enemy is staggering. Even if you grant Indiana the use of all current U.S. military installations and materiel found within the state boundaries.