Does Southern California also want to secede? (Riverside, Nice: health insurance, credit rating)

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by sav858

I explained what was "comical" about all of this and birthright citizenship wasn't really part of that explanation.

I never said anything about being born somewhere defining one's value. What you're talking about is a rather scary slippery slope too.

Perhaps I misunderstood you. But I don't think so. It seems you were saying that the majority of folks who have moved to California are pretty much a bunch of airheads - compared particularly to persons born in the state. I don't get that sense myself. I think you are correct in identifying that LOTS of airheads live in California, yep. I don't think those born here are any better simply by virtue of birthplace though.

"Slippery slope"? Again I don't agree. It's a flat out challenge to contribute to earn your 'rights'. You want to have a say in governance and benefits? Earn that privilege.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Perhaps I misunderstood you. But I don't think so. It seems you were saying that the majority of folks who have moved to California are pretty much a bunch of airheads - compared particularly to persons born in the state. I don't get that sense myself. I think you are correct in identifying that LOTS of airheads live in California, yep. I don't think those born here are any better simply by virtue of birthplace though.

"Slippery slope"? Again I don't agree. It's a flat out challenge to contribute to earn your 'rights'. You want to have a say in governance and benefits? Earn that privilege.

I never said anything about anyone being "airheads". I'm not even sure why you brought that descriptive term up or how that is what you deduced from my post.

Ok well good luck with deciding who can and can't be a citizen simply based on "character traits". Like I said very slippery slope and an extreme and scary one at that. I feel sorry for all the disabled people that can't be citizens in your society because they didn't contribute enough

[radiolibre99]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

That general rule doesn't make it "comical" that other residents might feel they also belong, is my point. I've been here longer than most of you reading this have been alive. And contributing to the state you call home with your sense of entitlement. There are probably 10 millions of me who aren't airhead newcomers.

I'm not offended by your comment. I am curious why anyone would think birthplace somehow defines a value. As I said, I feel the same about U.S. citizenship. I don't agree that being born American means squat. How you live your life here does. I favor voluntary community / civic service of some kind and ongoing contribution of effort to qualify for, and maintain citizenship.

I may differ with sav on this but my point was that you could have two transplants who contribute but one gets in his head that that CA values should be defined one way and only this way, gets all exclusionary and then wants to secede? On top of that they're a recent transplant. Cmon what do you expect natives or longtime residents to think?

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by sav858

I never said anything about anyone being "airheads". I'm not even sure why you brought that descriptive term up or how that is what you deduced from my post.

Ok well good luck with deciding who can and can't be a citizen simply based on "character traits". Like I said very slippery slope and an extreme and scary one at that. I feel sorry for all the disabled people that can't be citizens in your society because they didn't contribute enough

Right. You didn't use the term "airheads". I take that as your inference from

Originally Posted by sav858

It's comical because this state attracts certain types of people because of the stereotypes and what people think it's all about. And now many of them want to try and get CA to secede based some of those perceived "CA values" or whatever. It's ridiculous.

"Certain types of people" subscribing to stereotypes and California illusions.

To which radio adds

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

Tulemutt I second sav858s sentiment here. It has a lot to with this. The state does attract a certain type that are attracted to the stereotype of CA and they proceed to define CA based on these stereotypes. What's worse is some tend to act superior and begin acting as though they're CA representatives defining "CA values". Sometimes they can be a bit exclusionary.

Between the two of you, I perceive you are both typecasting outsiders as largely shallow personalities. I disagree that shallowness - which I agree exists - is present any more often or to any greater degree in people not born in the state.

As for disabled people, where did I suggest they couldn't contribute - or be excepted if they were incapable? Service can be military. Or caring for indigent or elderly. Adopting foster kids. Maintaining trails in the parks. Monitoring wildlife. It can be stuffing envelopes or picking up litter or sweeping sidewalks. Any number of things that need doing to benefit the place we all live. Doesn't need to be dramatic or dangerous or physically taxing. Just a bit of volunteer time to pitch in. Nothing "slippery" about it.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Right. You didn't use the term "airheads". I take that as your inference from
"Certain types of people" subscribing to stereotypes and California illusions.

Yeah again not sure how you deduced "airheads" from that...

To which radio adds


Between the two of you, I perceive you are both typecasting outsiders as largely shallow personalities. I disagree that shallowness - which I agree exists - is present any more often or to any greater degree in people not born in the state.

Nothing I said suggested I think these transplants are "shallow".

As for disabled people, where did I suggest they couldn't contribute - or be excepted if they were incapable? Service can be military. Or caring for indigent or elderly. Adopting foster kids. Maintaining trails in the parks. Monitoring wildlife. It can be stuffing envelopes or picking up litter or sweeping sidewalks. Any number of things that need doing to benefit the place we all live. Doesn't need to be dramatic or dangerous or physically taxing. Just a bit of volunteer time to pitch in. Nothing "slippery" about it.

Of course not, Hitler thought he was doing the right thing by trying to create a society with people of certain "character traits" too.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

I may differ with sav on this but my point was that you could have two transplants who contribute but one gets in his head that that CA values should be defined one way and only this way, gets all exclusionary and then wants to secede? On top of that they're a recent transplant. Cmon what do you expect natives or longtime residents to think?

Radio, I have no idea why it's good conversation to create such specious fictional scenarios. If a toad had wings it wouldn't bump its ass every time it hopped. So what?

And I note you have now inserted "longtime residents" at an apparent equivalency to "California-born natives". sav wasn't so magnanimous. Under sav's system, I, at over 50 years of residency, wouldn't be a citizen because I came from Minnesota in the military at age 18.

[radiolibre99]

I think we are defining a pretty narrow group that seem to define their identity with these perceived notions of CA values which are largely based on stereotypes. I don't like it when they start saying CA is XYZ and if you don't like it get out, or in this case that they're leaving

[04kL4nD]

Originally Posted by sav858

So the guy behind this "CalExit" BS, Louis Marinelli, is an out of state transplant from Buffalo, New York! Is anyone else actually surprised by that? I know I'm not which is why I looked it up. It would be interesting to see how many people who support this are even native Californians. Out of state transplants leading the way to secede a state from the union that they are not even originally from....... comical to say the least.

So from what I've gathered the "Yes" movement and the California National Party share a common goal (independence), but after doing a little reading it seems that the CNP gave Marinelli the boot because he's nuts. He's trying to establish a CA embassy in Russia and everyone is laughing at him. Anyway, The CNP platform is this:

Join the California National Party to build a better future for California

CNP= registered political party, "Yes" is a PAC.

And according to the CNP, anyone who's lived in CA continuously for 5 years would be eligible to apply for citizenship- at least according to what they have on their website. If that's the case, at 12 years, I'd be A-OK! Sorry natives, I'd be one you

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

I think we are defining a pretty narrow group that seem to define their identity with these perceived notions of CA values which are largely based on stereotypes. I don't like it when they start saying CA is XYZ and if you don't like it get out, or in this case that they're leaving

You might like it if they "left".

[RosieSD]

I don't have time to read through the entire thread, but has anyone considered the effects that California breaking away from the U.S. would have on higher education for California students and parents?

Let's start with the California public higher ed system -- UCs, Cal States, Community Colleges. The California higher ed system is perpetually on the brink of financial disaster. Without the Federal funding provided by Federal financial aid programs (and Federally financed research as well), the "country" of California would have to come up with the difference.

Just looking at financial aid, the Federal government provides contributes almost $7 billion a year JUST to public colleges and universities in California. The state of California only contributes $2 billion in financial aid to public colleges here. Basically, the Federal government subsidizes the UC, Cal State, and Cal. Community college systems through Federal financial aid, research grants, and other Federal support.

As it is, the UC and Cal State systems are more expensive than many other states for in state residents. While it's nice to talk about "free public higher ed," the money to pay for it has to come from somewhere.

Then, there's also the effect of withdrawing Federal financial aid, research and other support for the OTHER colleges and universities in California. Without Federal support, those colleges and universities will have to make up the difference somehow.

Also, California students who wish to study at colleges in other states would be "international students" if California is no longer part of the U.S. International students are not eligible for ANY Federal financial aid. As a result, only a very *tiny* number of U.S. colleges offer financial aid to international students; most expect international students to pay full freight for costs out of their own funds.

How would the "country" of California make up the effect of losing all that Federal support for higher education -- not just public higher ed, but for all Calif. colleges? And, who is willing to pay considerably more to attend, or have their kids attend college, either here, or as an "international student" in the U.S.?

Just something else to weigh in any discussion or consideration of California withdrawing from the United States.