Should California Secede from the US? (death, top 10, Chicago, elect)

[lionking]

Originally Posted by califantastic

Imagine how much better we could make the schools, infrastructure, environment, economy and other things in California if we invested all of the tax money the Federal government steals from us to blow up Iraq and instead invested that money in making California a better place.

.

since the government is investing money unwisely in war,what makes you think they would invest wisely in anything else?Or is it ,that it's not how well they spend the money but just what they put it toward?

How about this,instead of sending that money to the federal government,send the money to your state and local government where the state needs will be known better by people within the state?And no I don't think California should leave the union,50 is a good number.

[jessemh431]

Originally Posted by lionking

And no I don't think California should leave the union,50 is a good number.

Make Puerto Rico a state. Or divide Texas in half. Or take in Midway Island or the Marshall Islands or some other territory.

[Bellinghamite]

Maybe the U.S. should secede from California

[Glitch]

Originally Posted by Mach50Thunderdart

Californians,

In the top 10 largest economies of the world, with prodigious industry, a diverse population, rich natural resources, and a growing rift with the federal government, why is California sharing a budget with the rest of the states when we could be enjoying our very own Republic?

I realize it federally cannot happen. However hypothetically, if California were able, would it be better off as its own country?

Economy of California - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Consider the source. California isn't even in the top 10 anymore.

GDP Ranking By Nation In Trillions of US Dollars from the CIA World Factbook:

1. United States ($11.517 - after subtracting California's contribution)
2. China ($10.21)
3. Japan ($4.218)
4. India ($4.164)
5. Germany ($2.632)
6. United Kingdom ($1.928)
7. France ($1.902)
8. Italy ($1.756)
9. Russia ($1.746)
10. Brazil ($1.655)

California ($1.543)

If it wasn't for the rest of the states, California wouldn't even rank 11th in GDP among other nations. It is precisely because the other states purchase California's produce that gives California its economy.

As to California's "rich natural resources", the state has to import everything from water to oil from other states, without which it couldn't survive.

I don't know if California would be better off without the rest of the United States, but I do know that the United States would be better off politically without California.

[Hawkeye48]

If California did leave the union it wouldn't be free. The US government has a lot of wealth out there in California and would want to be reimbursed for it. In addition, California wouldn't get off scott free. We have a huge national debt and the golden state would have to assume a good chunk of it in order to secure their independence.

So the state itself would immediately go from one with a balanced budget, to one where it was deep in debt. Which could effect it's economics, interest rates, inflation, housing prices ete. So it wouldn't be all gravy for the golden state.

Also California imports a lot of water and power from the rest of the country. On the plus side, they probably wouldn't want to spend so much money on defense as Washington does. So would California be able to keep all those defense contractors? Or would the government in Washington start awarding the contracts to defense contractors in the other states? If so it would be a huge blow to the California economy.

Although I don't think this would be very likely, if something like this was ever pulled off it would more likely be Alaska that would do it. Besides, if one state did it most likely a number of other states would do it. Namely Montana, Alaska, Idaho, and others would form two or three state nations. Basically if California was allowed to break off from the union it would mean the end of the United States as we know it.

What I think would be actually more likely would be a united 50 states, but a union with a very weak central government. We would all use the same currency, have a national army, but state governments would become much stronger and the federal court systems would have no say so over individual states. Something closer to what the nation was originally when we first won our independence.

[jessemh431]

So it seems like no one like being part of the US because they believe that everyone is doing something bad. Maybe it would be better if we became individual countries.

Plus, everyone hates CA around us. Colorado, Oregon, and Washington especially. I don't know why though, because we like them.

[Artliquide]

When the big one comes and Cali falls into the ocean (learn to swim ), are you all going to move to Arizona as refugees? Oh wait you're already doing that. Lol. Just kidding. Be your own nation, we'll just charge you more for all the power you buy from AZ.

(edit: I don't hate CA. I'm just in a sarcastic mood)

[boiseguy]

california does have a big economy, but it is very much dependent on the rest of the US.. the us supplies water, electricity, market share, as well as firefighters...
but I do think its funny that we are horrified that a state would want to secede.. while we travel the world over supporting every OTHER state seceding from their mother countries...

[faith10]

No, so many parts of CA are third world now due to illegal immigration...it's both scary and miserable, we need to deport all illegals or our entire country will be living in Mexico conditions in a few years.

[faith10]

Originally Posted by Visvaldis

I like this idea best. It sure would be great if the progressive states formed a union without the bible belt. Actually, the bible belt should be its own country. That would be a big relief for many, including me.
I think California is a great state in many ways.

Isn't Kentucky where you are, in the Bible belt?