Would you vote for Calexit?

[Timsup2nothin]

So.. if California breaks away from the union, the golden gate bridge, Yosemite, and other chunks of lands as indicated on your map, will remain a part of the U.S... Huh? What sort of nonsense is this..

Jay standard. Among the most common kinds of nonsense.

I'm adding my photo album of all the heavily irrigated farmland in the San Fernando Valley here:

Okay, that was easy.

 

[onejayhawk]

It does not make sense.
How would the federal government stop the use of the run off water.

California would get its share of the national debt but would also get the nationally owned property within the state.

I would assume that the US military would want to pay to use their bases which would pay for water from the Colorado.

California could reduce its military spending to 2% which would free up money for energy and water conservation measures.

California pays more to the federal government than it gets back. So on the day it leaves and stops paying into the federal pot it would take over federal spending within the state. It would have money left over to pay for the diruption caused by the split.

They own the water and many of the reservoirs. They can charge the going rate to release the water. California has barely glimpsed water shortage. Go to the Middle East and see how things work.

California's share of the National debt is about 2 1/2 $Trillion. The comes due and must be paid in cash. Interest rates on the debt would jump significantly. They would also have to pay for the nationally owned property within the state and all the military whatever that they received. The military reservations alone are bigger than New England. The government also owns massive port facilities in several places.

Some things you may not have considered. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are all expensed, contrary to campaign speeches. They would not continue. Federal employment is a large part of the state's payroll. California routinely receives more in federal social spending than it sends in taxes (you had this wrong). That does not include military and other contracts or direct employment of workers. Civilian support for the military is a significant portion of the state's economy.

So.. if California breaks away from the union, the golden gate bridge, Yosemite, and other chunks of lands as indicated on your map, will remain a part of the U.S... Huh? What sort of nonsense is this..

What do you mean nonsense? Only half of California is owned by the people that live there. The rest is own by the federal government. Unless they pay for it, the new country does not get those parts.

We have seen all this before in Canada. Quebec made loud noises about going alone until numbers were crunched. They would have lost their pensions and medical but still carried a share of the debt. IIRC Having to raise cash to cover the debt ended the discussion as much as anything.

J

 

[warpus]

The Chinese government owns some land in California too. If California splits from the U.S., that land does not magically become Chinese soil.

 

[onejayhawk]

The Chinese government owns some land in California too. If California splits from the U.S., that land does not magically become Chinese soil.

Please. The government under California owns the land. Ownership likely dates back from a treaty. Even private land in California traces back to a royal grant from the King of Spain

For a proper comparison, use an embassy.

J

 

[tetley]

The federation is made up of the states, and if California exits then that means the Federal lands in California belong to California. The Federal land thing is just a lame cover for J wanting to keep California in against their will--and his refusal to admit it.

California's a drain on the U.S., who needs them...but he doesn't want to let them leave and makes excuses instead. The words and the actions don't add up. Never did.

 

[warpus]

I mean, it's not like California is ever going to leave the union, so all of this is moot anyway

 

[Lexicus]

The federation is made up of the states, and if California exits then that means the Federal lands in California belong to California. The Federal land thing is just a lame cover for J wanting to keep California in against their will--and his refusal to admit it.

I don't get why Americans like to pretend that the Civil War never happened.

 

[CavLancer]

I mean, it's not like California is ever going to leave the union, so all of this is moot anyway

Certainly. ...and even if there was a serious chance that Cali was going to try to leave, a discussion on an internet backwater like this would have no effect or purpose, except a bunch of folks getting together to have a chat, same as the current circumstance.

 

[onejayhawk]

The federation is made up of the states, and if California exits then that means the Federal lands in California belong to California. The Federal land thing is just a lame cover for J wanting to keep California in against their will--and his refusal to admit it. California's a drain on the U.S., who needs them...but he doesn't want to let them leave and makes excuses instead. The words and the actions don't add up. Never did.

Pure wishful thinking. These are lands that belong to the federal government and not to California. California has a claim to an interest in the lands. The exact nature would need to be decided or litigated. Some potential numbers--1/50th, proportional by land area, proportional by population, proportional by fair market value.

It does not really matter. It's clear you will not address the practicalities of secession. It is much more expensive and less workable than you wish to believe.

I don't get why Americans like to pretend that the Civil War never happened.

To quote a Judge, "the matter was settled by the [then] recent hostilities."

J

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Pure wishful thinking. These are lands that belong to the federal government and not to California. California has a claim to an interest in the lands. The exact nature would need to be decided or litigated. Some potential numbers--1/50th, proportional by land area, proportional by population, proportional by fair market value.

It does not really matter. It's clear you will not address the practicalities of secession. It is much more expensive and less workable than you wish to believe.

J

Wait, what? After all of your raving about how all federal lands would be forfeit (especially those watersheds feeding that dense agricultural zone in the San Fernando Valley ) all of a sudden you are acknowledging that the exiting state has some sort of claim on a share of federal lands?

By the way, here's a potential consideration for the nature of the claim: LOCATION. Since whatever rule you come up with is effectively establishing precedent you need to come up with something that works for any state. Any of the strictly numeric rules you proposed runs the risk of some state seceding and having a rightful claim to federal lands beyond their own borders. If you give Rhode Island a straight 1/50th of federally owned land they could claim a huge chunk of Montana or something. Proportional by land area and a big state with little federal land inside its borders gets to claim additional territory. Proportional by population and I suspect California, with 10% of the population and less than ten percent of federally owned land would get not only their own territory but a bonus chunk somewhere else. And there are no comps, so establishing "fair market value" on wilderness or big military flight test ranges (wilderness by any other name) is impossible. So really the only workable precedent is location...the seceding state's "fair portion" of federal land is that portion contained in its own borders.

But of course that renders all of your nonsense to this point clearly as nonsense. Naturally most people have seen that right along, which explains why they have not addressed what you have been claiming to be "the practicalities."

 

[Roller123]

Liberals are incapable of doing anything on their own and their masters do not have Calexit in mind. So no. An interesting pick for a name by the way, considering that Brexit is about isolating liberals from making decisions that matter. Double irony.

 

[tetley]

Liberals are incapable of doing anything on their own and their masters do not have Calexit in mind. So no. An interesting pick for a name by the way, considering that Brexit is about isolating liberals from making decisions that matter. Double irony.

Considering they are tech entrepreneurs who started Calexit--people with a proven track record of working tirelessly and making something out of nothing-- perhaps the irony indeed is there, but not the one you alluded to.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I don't get why Americans like to pretend that the Civil War never happened.

Yeah they barely ever mention it. It's not like it comes up in about 50% of all threads no matter what the topic.

 

[civvver]

wait wait wait a second, you guys are actually arguing how California would be better off not part of the union? What are you smoking? The state with the biggest number of illegal immigrants, the highest proportion of people on welfare, a state with a gigantic trade deficit, a state with virtually no water reserves?

Just read their wikipedia page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California#State_finances

"California imports more electricity than any other state, primarily hydroelectric power from states in the Pacific Northwest (via Path 15 and Path 66) and coal- and natural gas-fired production from the desert Southwest via Path 46.[173]"
"California, with 12% of the United States population, has one-third of the nation's welfare recipients.[166] California has the third highest per capita spending on welfare among the states, as well as the highest spending on welfare at $6.67 billion.[167] In January 2011 the California's total debt was at least $265 billion.[168] On June 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed a balanced budget (no deficit) for the state, its first in decades; however the state's debt remains at $132 billion.[169][170]"

The only way for them to sustain those policies would be to print their own money but it wouldn't be backed like the US dollar is so who would have faith in it? You'd get rampant inflation and economy falls apart. California is one of the worst off stats fiscally. I mean people can dream about some utopian liberal country where it's all like silicon valley everywhere but that's not realistic. They would end up either bankrupt or kicking people out/stopping immigration and/or having to cut spending dramatically. The only thing they have going for it is pure size and scale of economy but they'd still be dwarfed by the rest of the US.

https://www.mercatus.org/statefiscalrankings

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Considering they are tech entrepreneurs who started Calexit--people with a proven track record of working tirelessly and making something out of nothing-- perhaps the irony indeed is there, but not the one you alluded to.

Shhhhh! It is that kind of stupid nonsense that will cause the leech states to let us go. As long as they operate in their false reality that "da lib'ruls is aholdin' us back, hur de hur" we might actually get away.

 

[Lexicus]

The only way for them to sustain those policies would be to print their own money but it wouldn't be backed like the US dollar is so who would have faith in it?

How is the US dollar backed?

 

[tetley]

wait wait wait a second, you guys are actually arguing how California would be better off not part of the union? What are you smoking? The state with the biggest number of illegal immigrants, the highest proportion of people on welfare, a state with a gigantic trade deficit, a state with virtually no water reserves?

So...California is a drain on the union, then. Why don't you vote for Calexit? Don't you want to make them pull themselves up by the bootstraps?

 

[Lexicus]

So...California is a drain on the union, then. Why don't you vote for Calexit? Don't you want to make them pull themselves up by the bootstraps?

Evidently he thinks that "illegals" are parasites and that welfare expenditures are actually significant part of the state's budget.

 

[tetley]

As always, the words don't match the actions. "California? Who needs them? They need us more than we need them." And then their vote: against Calexit.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

As always, the words don't match the actions. "California? Who needs them? They need us more than we need them." And then their vote: against Calexit.

At least the Alt-Right clowns over at Breitbart are consistent. They are so deep in their hatreds they are all for CalExit...which they believe will lead immediately to annexation by Mexico and the enslavement of Californians by rapists and criminals. They are just as stupidly immune to facts, but at least they are consistent.