Calexit

Page 3 of 11<123456>Last »
Poll
5 votes (62.5%)
1 vote (12.5%)
No votes (0%)
1 vote (12.5%)
1 vote (12.5%)

8 members have voted

November 23rd, 2016 at 7:15:26 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 99
Posts: 6300
Quote: Ayecarumba
Read my lips... okay... see my typing... N-E-V-E-R

If it was going to happen, Alabama or Texas would have done it in the 1960's, or Rhode Island would have been absorbed by Massachusetts a long time ago. Our system of government is cleverly designed to provide incentives to states to stay united, and disincentives to states who want to leave. As long as there is a USA, California will be part of it. Even if they were to try to leave, the rest of the Union would force them back in... by force if necessary. Access to the Pacific, and California's agricultural production are too strategically valuable to the Union to trust to a treaty.


Access to the Pacific, yes, very important. Access to ag would happen no matter what as they would have to move product. Not sure if "by force" would happen. Well, it would be tried, but how much support for it there would be is questionable. And again, this is just saying, "WE ARE THE USA!"

Reality is CA is the state that most could go it alone. If they could get a currency that was stable they could probably get enough foreign reserves over time to do it. They could even be invite to the G-7, making a new G-8.

If they get it on the ballot it will be fun to watch.
The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it
November 26th, 2016 at 11:56:38 PM permalink
Ayecarumba
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 81
Posts: 1315
Quote: AZDuffman
Access to the Pacific, yes, very important. Access to ag would happen no matter what as they would have to move product. Not sure if "by force" would happen. Well, it would be tried, but how much support for it there would be is questionable. And again, this is just saying, "WE ARE THE USA!"

Reality is CA is the state that most could go it alone. If they could get a currency that was stable they could probably get enough foreign reserves over time to do it. They could even be invite to the G-7, making a new G-8.

If they get it on the ballot it will be fun to watch.


Hehe... Now that recreational dope is legal in California, no one in the northern half of the state will have the desire to do the work required to leave. This should also quiet the health nuts wanting to tax large sugary drinks, as that would be double taxation.
November 27th, 2016 at 12:37:44 AM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 117
Posts: 4859
Quote: TheCesspit
Wouldn't San Diego be a sticking point, for the Pacific Fleet?


Just the fact that California is a coastal state (and a large one) gives it more than average strategic value.
No one has ever proven I am not God.
November 27th, 2016 at 9:49:15 AM permalink
stinkingliberal
Member since: Nov 9, 2016
Threads: 17
Posts: 731
Stupid insults about recreational pot and liberals aside, California by itself, or in combination with other socioeconomic units of "Cascadia," would be an economic powerhouse. It would no doubt go its own way politically, as many in California are outraged by, among other things, the retention of the Electoral College--the view in general is that the state is ruled by a federal government that is 3000 miles away and has a different cultural and social mindset than it does.

If you look at the Calexit site, one of their bones of contention--and reasons for secession--is that the federal government, with its high taxation to fund programs that do not benefit Californians, is a net drain on the state. Certainly, Californians aren't big on spending hundreds of billions to blow up Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. Also, an independent California (as well as the present version) would be a major Pacific Rim trading partner, so the Republican don't-trade-with-those-gooks posturing doesn't sit well with Californians. It also shouldn't be underestimated how much Californians resent their destiny being determined by ignorant rednecks in the flyover states.

A further consideration is that geographically, an independent CA makes sense. Between the Pacific coast and the Mississippi, there's pretty much a whole lotta nuthin' (and I include Texas in that nothing--ESPECIALLY Texas). A lot of the expansion in the 19th century was predicated on the premise that the Plains states, the Rockies, and the Great Basin could be settled to the same degree the eastern half of the country had been. But even now, all that is a barren (albeit often very scenic) wasteland, except for the about 1% of it that adjoins rivers.

Could this happen, as a practical matter? Oh yes. It's unlikely that the rest of the states would grant CA permission to secede, but if it did anyway, would the federal government try to stop it with military force? And would it win if it tried? We've supported breakaway movements around the globe, on the basis that people have the right to self-determination. Would an artillery regiment from Kansas be happy with shelling downtown Los Angeles? Firing on fellow Americans?

If CA does vote to break away, it would be likely followed by Oregon, and probably Washington as well. The urban areas of Nevada, being closely connected to California anyway, would be next to go. I don't know what the combined GDP of CA, OR, WA, and most of NV would be, but it would probably be in the top ten worldwide.
November 27th, 2016 at 6:57:50 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 689
Posts: 7926
Quote: stinkingliberal
I don't know what the combined GDP of CA, OR, WA, and most of NV would be, but it would probably be in the top ten worldwide.


California alone is slightly larger than France. Combined CA, OR, WA, and NV would be larger than UK and only 2% smaller than Germany.

But this new country would probably drag Hawaii and Alaska along as well.

1 California $2,448,467
13 Washington $468,029
25 Oregon $228,120
33 Nevada $141,204

1 United States $17,947,000
European Union $16,220,370
2 China $6,567,341
3 Japan $4,123,258
4 Germany $3,357,614
5 United Kingdom $2,849,345
6 France $2,421,560
7 India $2,090,706
November 28th, 2016 at 6:27:50 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 313
Posts: 10666
Quote: Pacomartin
California alone is slightly larger than France. Combined CA, OR, WA, and NV would be larger than UK and only 2% smaller than Germany.

But this new country would probably drag Hawaii and Alaska along as well.


And imagine what trump, Inc., the country formerly known as America, will do without a major domestic airline manufacturer, the world's two biggest tech companies and many of the rest, plus a great deal of agricultural production. Would they impose 35% tariffs on Windows10 or the Mac OS? How about apps? What if they take Colorado and New Mexico with them? And what about aircraft? Those tariffs will make Boeing products exceedingly expensive? make do with domestically produced Airbus A320s and A321s only?
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
November 28th, 2016 at 7:26:25 AM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 3
Posts: 832
Wonder what they would have to pay for the water in the Colorado R.?
"There is no sin but ignorance" Christopher Marlow
November 28th, 2016 at 11:08:30 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 99
Posts: 6300
Quote: kenarman
Wonder what they would have to pay for the water in the Colorado R.?


Would be a huge issue though current allocations could be made to a treaty. Maybe add a tax to the power made at Hoover Dam.
The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it
November 28th, 2016 at 12:37:56 PM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 3
Posts: 832
Quote: AZDuffman
Would be a huge issue though current allocations could be made to a treaty. Maybe add a tax to the power made at Hoover Dam.


There are many power generating dams on the Colorado. The USA pays Canada a fee for our dams on the Columbia river for the flooding they prevent on the US side. California could be asked to pay for that benefit. There is already little water reaching the ocean. Colorado, Nevada and Arizona could decide to keep much more of the water for their own irrigation since they could use the food they could then grow in their own deserts rather than irrigate the California ones.
"There is no sin but ignorance" Christopher Marlow
November 28th, 2016 at 2:37:53 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 99
Posts: 6300
Quote: kenarman
There are many power generating dams on the Colorado. The USA pays Canada a fee for our dams on the Columbia river for the flooding they prevent on the US side. California could be asked to pay for that benefit. There is already little water reaching the ocean. Colorado, Nevada and Arizona could decide to keep much more of the water for their own irrigation since they could use the food they could then grow in their own deserts rather than irrigate the California ones.
s

Sooner or later that part of the world will run out of usable water, they are probably already in shortage. I didn't know about paying for the dams in Canada.
The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it
Page 3 of 11<123456>Last »