CALEXIT: Would you support a secession? (Fresno: top, debt, Americans)

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by StanleysOwl

Correct, no one knows yet how the transition might be structured. But we do know it would be peaceful - or wouldnt happen at all. The US government does not have independent veto power. Secession is a function of state majority plus multi-state ratification in congress.

There is nothing "childish" at all about saying "we do not agree with the rest of the country." Examples of "childish" would be the gridlock of past recent decades of federal government. And especially the 3am tweet moron in chief's behaviors of this new administration.

Do you think 2/3's of states would sign off on California leaving?

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by StanleysOwl

Makes no difference whatsoever. The world has become global now. Corporations have operations in many countries at once. The reasons are varied but include tax advantages which could be offered in new California as well. Any new government would delight in the opportunity to recreate and incentivize on a clean slate that is not subject to other outside (current federal) controls.

Do you actually think California would have a more business friendly environment compared to other states/USA? Because that isn't the case now and it isn't even close.

Everyone keeps thinking that California would some how become an ideal place for businesses to stay when all of our elected representatives put regulations in place that stifle growth and burden business.

The tax rate would be ridiculous and would be shouldered mostly by the top 10% who would have even less reason the stay in the state. Couple that with the open border mentality to let anyone in from anywhere and massive welfare state, the worlds and countries poor and destitute would flock here without check and sink the economy and government that just took on trillions in debt as part of its share of the federal debt.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by expatCA

Really ? Try Russia, Venezuela, Cuba and more. They are not moderated by any non Socialist views.

Cherry picking countries that have problems not related to socialism doesn't prove your point. France, Germany, Australia and Ireland are socialist too. Why not cite them?

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by KenFresno

One thing nobody has mentioned so far would be the colossal brain drain the state would face post independence. The federal government finances a large amount of high tech and big science jobs at places like JPL and LLNL. Not to mention all of the Federal funding given to California universities for research. Stanford for example gets 81% of its research funding from the Federal government. Post independence California would be in an immediate quagmire to hold on to high educated graduates. Our top universities at Stanford, Berkeley and Caltech would be gutted. Without a ready supply of local grads, my guess would be the tech industry would simply move back into the US at a place like the Reach Triangle in NC. There would be no benefit to staying in California. Even if the new nation state of California could make up the costs, it would take years to organize the budget and tax plan. In the meantime businesses, scientists and professors will have uprooted themselves and left.

This has been mentioned but ya gotta read the thread to know that

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

The British empire had colonies thousands of miles apart. Not to mention generally non modern economies when split.

The world is a different place now compared to 50-100 years ago. Relocating a company from California to Texas is much different than India to Britain right after ww2 when Britain was rebuilding from bombings.

Exactly so predicting the same thing would happen like it did in this country 150 years ago is equally ludicrous.

[Gentoo]

One way to ensure other states don't leave the union in the future would be for the new state of California to fail badly. To be made an example of.

So you're saying that "making an example" out of CA to scare the other states makes more sense than maintaining an open trade relationship so both countries benefit? Hurt the whole country to make an example out of one former state. It's this logic that makes the USA broken.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Cherry picking countries that have problems not related to socialism doesn't prove your point. France, Germany, Australia and Ireland are socialist too. Why not cite them?

Nope, they have Socialist parties, but also conservative and other political parties. One party States/Countries would be like Russia, China, Venezuela, Cuba, etc.

There is a vast difference between socialist policies and Socialism.

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Exactly so predicting the same thing would happen like it did in this country 150 years ago is equally ludicrous.

So which 2/3 of states will sign off on California leaving?

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

So which 2/3 of states will sign off on California leaving?

Humm, maybe all the ones that voted Red last time and don't want Socialism to dominate the USA?

[StanleysOwl]

Originally Posted by KenFresno

Why would the remaining states want a cooperative transition with California? California leaving the union would diminish the power of the US, and have an enormous negative effect on its economy. So why would they want to smoothly help something that is going to badly hurt their position? California would go from being part of the team to being a competitor. Other states would jump at the chance to steal business from California.

One way to ensure other states don't leave the union in the future would be for the new state of California to fail badly. To be made an example of.

Also Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa were largely self sustaining entities prior to leaving the British Empire. California is heavily integrated into the economy and infrastructure of the US. Issues over power supply, borders, and water rights would be immediate issues.

Also post WW2 the British Empire was bankrupt and realized that sustaining a large empire was not financially feasible so the independence of nations like Canada, NZ and Australia was largely mutual. It is not in the interest of the US government for California to leave the union. A better comparison would be if Scotland left the UK, Quebec from Canada or Catalan from Spain.

This is getting tiresome. All your challenges have been met over and over throughout this thread. You need to go back and take the time to read more. Pretty much everything you claim here is poorly or not at all thought out. For example

California would go from being part of the team to being a competitor.

what "team?" Every state and corporation in the nation is a competitor with every other free market economies are better called free-for-all economies. This is a slit-the-other-guys-throat nation.

Other states would jump at the chance to steal business from California.

They do now anyway.

The British Empire was not bankrupt. And yes, the break ups were all mutual. Thats the point. Finding mutual benefits. The US has now become infamously nonfunctional in governance. Polarizations are becoming catastropic. Common interests are being lost in the dust of the trampling masses of discordant minion factions. Its time to restructure the whole shebang in common interest blocs.