Reply With Quote
No different than Lakers fans wearing Heat or Warriors jerseys imo. Everyone wants to go elsewhere when they lose. When you live on the beaches of Cali, you want the world to go elsewhere.
When some people in Texas proposed secession, the West and East coast had a hemorrhage. Now those same people are proposing secession - and they think it's okay when they want to do it. The difference is, the people in Texas think it's okay for them to leave, too. The only laughter is at their hypocrisy.
It's funny how some people try so hard to imitate the people they claim to despise.
No different than Lakers fans wearing Heat or Warriors jerseys imo. Everyone wants to go elsewhere when they lose. When you live on the beaches of Cali, you want the world to go elsewhere.
If California were its own country, it would have the 6th largest economy in the world. And if it were its own country, its tax dollars would all go to the state (with no federal government to finance) which means it could easily finance a world class military. I doubt the US would stop trade with California. But if you wanna know the truth, I think it's actually much more likely that the whole union would dissolve if California left. I could easily see a Western States of America or something like that with California, Washington and Oregon, which are all very liberal, banding together. Then New York and others would probably follow in leaving.Like California would be the same as it is now without US military support, after all the military installations relocated, after the US Feds banned trade with "Calexit". Who would want to be based in a country that cannot trade with the US?
Exiting the Union, which will not happen, would be an incredibly expensive undertaking. Subtract the Federal funds, start funding your entire infrastructure and schools etc. and you have a pretty stiff bill to pocket. Not to mention the large tracts of Fed properties(national parks, military bases etc) that will need to be procured.
I don't think building a world class military will be on the agenda.
Doesn't California pay more to the federal government than it gets back? (in terms of infrastructure, military bases, federal operations, etc.) If the money just stays in California to start, it would might actually have an even larger budget without the federal pass through.
You're couching this as if the state sends the feds a check for taxes and the feds send a smaller one back. That's not how this works. Project timetables, production rebates, among many other policy dictated fiscal considerations completely distort your linear notion of pay/receive.
Cali will indeed have a larger budget. Think for a minute about what you just wrote.
Yes, I understand that but I'm putting it in as simple terms as I can to explain the cost/benefit. The people of California send their federal tax dollars to the federal government and the federal government spends it on things that benefit California and other states. I'm saying that if they sent the money that would have gone to the federal government to the state that the net benefit received would actually be greater for California.
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-mos...vernment/2700/
According to this analysis, California is ranked 46th in terms of states most dependent on the federal government (which it disproportionately finances relative to its size). And think of all the mistakes the federal government has made that California would not have such as the Iraq war which probably cost $3-4 trillion dollars.
You can put it in simple terms if you wish. It's just not accurate
It would also be the state (currently) with the 3rd largest welfare population. Do you think those blacks would sit idly by while their federal welfare program was stopped?
It's not even legal. People act like it's a business partnership. The US would go to war over it and California would lose. There are treaties old as dirt that tie California to the US. It's not a legal course of action.
Then explain why. How would a country with the 6th largest economy in the world not be able to fund its own infrastructure and a world class military (like top 15 strong)?
What is accurate is that the deep south and rust belt benefit from food stamps, unemployment, farm subsidides, and the federal teat moreso than the rest of the country.
Given the rhetoric coming out of there, there is quite a bit of a lack of self realization going on out there. It is reminiscent of the poor in the antebellum south.
Funny how people like FloppyNuffins cite states and regions but then fall back on popular vote arguments.
You actually think, as a state, removing yourself from the US doesn't negatively affect your economy? Never mind that you are at the mercy of the other states to even get there. None of your citizens would have federal support, except through the make-shift federal system you'd have in place and we know how well Cali's government runs. Maybe Brown or Arnold would return and lead you to the promised land.
Home values would plummet with no disaster aid or national insurance carriers wanting to touch the high risk properties without having a national base from which to pull funds. When that happens your property tax rates decrease. Right now Cali cannot keep up with the unemployment benefits from that many people, so if companies pull out of Cali all of those citizens suddenly have no jobs. Good luck keeping that "6th largest" ranking.
Last edited by DMC; 11-12-2016 at 05:32 PM.
No one can be this ing stupid.
You realize things....change....don't you?
I haven't made the popular vote argument, dim.
Once again you go for the simple characterization in lieu of anything substantive.
So this is where you hid at coward.
"People like"
In this scenario which I am only entertaining as hypothetical, I think the whole west coast would bail if you want to know the truth. Property values might actually increase with the number of people wanting to move there. You can cherry pick the good and the bad of such a move but as long as there isn't an all out trade war (which would likely not happen if it were a peaceful exit), then I think the economy would be just fine. And again, we're speaking completely hypnotically. What we have now is great, I'm simply making the case that a state like California wouldn't cripple the way you seem to think.
Feel free to include some substance in your next post. Your anger almost makes up for it but not quite.
You'll find that the 1% from the blue say pretty much the same thing. Your point?
Look up CHIP
lol Hannity.
I've been posting here for a decade. I stopped posting at punndits quite some time ago, it gets old going in the same circles with the echo chamber. This place is actually bipartisan.
Oh and go yourself, zrin.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions