Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For those of you people that think California pays more than it gets from the Fed. government....you do realize that there are some severe flaws in that "study"?
For example, where does CA's nuclear waste get shipped? That state gets huge federal dollars to have a nuke waste dump.
Who paid for hoover dam? What state "gets" the federal money in the example? Which states use the resource?
If farm subsidies go to Iowa or timber subsidies go to Wisconsin.....do the people in Calfornia use the paper or eat the food?
I'm not saying the whole study is bunk.....it's just badly abused by the innumerate.
California should defenitely succeed. However, we need to take Alaska, part of British Columbia, Oregon, Washington, and Baja. That would be a great country.
Did you forget Nevada, California's twin? Maybe you should merge Nevada and Baja California into California and take all of British Columbia.
But as it stands right now, Alaska should secede into Canada. The culture is very different and they like to look down on the "lower 48." They even sound like Canadians.
Ted Stevens is siphoning off massive amounts money into his young, isolated, and lightly-populated state while being bribed at the same time, embarrassing both his state and his party.
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?
Blue jeans
Skateboards
Barbie Dolls
Bikinis (Modern version)
DirectTV
"Chinese" Fortune Cookies
"French" Dip Sandwiches
Famous Amos' Cookies
Mrs Field's Cookies
Boysenberries
Wine Coolers
Shirley Temples (The Drink)
Actually, I am not sure. I left the state when it was "dealing" with its economic issues at the time. Remember the PG&E scandal, the increased taxes on over usage to everyone in the state, the recall of the governor which led to Arnold's entry?
They had HUGE problems and were heading to bankruptcy at the time. Arnold had plans to help deal with the issue which is why most people were voting for him at the time (he was business strong).
My point is, a state with all those claims and it was going bankrupt? *chuckle*
Also, someone mentioned the Hoover Dam. That one would be funny considering that much of southern California power comes from that source. Imagine how many windmills they would have to get to deal with that?
*chuckle*
Personally, I could care less. If California wants to secede from the US, by all means. Though preferably I would wish it to be in the terms of sliding off into the ocean, but then thats just me.
Of course, I think I'd prefer that the South just went and made its own country -- they seem to hate being part of the United States. I think if the South were its own country, we'd be better off. The more educated and affluent people would be left in the other states, the South could be the Confederate again, and elect its own kinds of people. The rest of the country, including the hated California, would surpass the world in computers, inventions, agriculture, and tourism. We would be willing to continue to have educated scientists and other professionals live here without being considered a terrorist.
And we already have a European governor who understands both sides of the ocean and immigration. Either we could secede or the South could secede -- or both of us. We could be the "Sort-of-United States."
Still, my vote goes to the South leaving -- they seem to have great disdain for any other United States citizens moving there (especially "Yankees") and that would solve that problem because they could keep out those snooty educated folks who want to transport some of their culture to the south. They already have their own flag -- the Confederate flag. They could vote a president like Bush again. Only, if they decide to start war on some other country, like Iran, we don't help them at all! Let it be their war. And since they love it so much and their culture, and don't want our help or presence, I say Go Southerners -- God loves the confederacy and since there are so many churches in the Bible Belt, God will just buckle it up and give them all grace. How could they lose with God on their side?
And then California can either secede on its own or join up with other progressive states, immigrants might be thrilled to know they are part of an emerging new nation, and we'll have lakes, rivers, reservoirs and the ocean for water. I think California, aside from all the Californian jokes, has a lot more going for it than most states. It might be an interesting turn of events to see it become a country.
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.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
