Why would the majority of takers allow the makers to leave? Makers are feeding the takers, after all. Nothing short of a civil war (the red states vs. the US Army) will do. The takers are planning to feed on the makers until no more makers are left; then they will turn onto each other - as they always do; history is full of such examples.
I was already quietly envisioning this hypothetical before the election.
Would the US Army fire on armed seceders? Of course we all remember the terrible murderous assault upon innocent men, women and children at Ruby Ridge and Waco ... but that was done by the rogue ATF --and in the case of Waco, by Clinton's DOJ (headed by Eric Holder under a figurehead Janet Reno).
I don't believe the US Army would fire, at least not in the near future. However Obama is steadily destroying morale in our military, discouraging enlistment by the kind of soldiers they used to attract. Might not be long before we can easily imagine Obama ordering our military to fire on our own people.
However I think secession movements will be peaceful. Hence Obama will simply send in law enforcement to arrest those who refuse to pay their ObamaTaxes. Off to the gulag with them.
>>>Why would the majority of takers allow the makers to leave? Makers are feeding the takers, after all<<<
The vast majority of takers don’t see it that way. They think that Government somehow creates this massive pile of wealth and that the makers (they call them “the rich” or the “1%”) are stealing most of this mythical, government, created wealth, leaving the takers with far less than they “deserve”.
They believe that if they get rid of off the “rich” (makers) they will finally get their “fair share”. (Actually, they would get their “FAIR” share, but it would be next to nothing.)
I live in a Democrat state, I know how the takers think.