Oh please, oh please...
Posted on 07/31/2017 2:39:22 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
So different from 1861, right ?
No matter; will never happen. Without California’s 55 electoral college votes Dims would not win another Presidential election for 100 years.
Oh please, oh please...
Cities are the economic engines of the economy. Any idea that they can be dispensed with profitably is just idiocy.
Without Chicago, Illinois would be just miles of land producing more food than it can consume because there are no cities.
Cities are so productive economically that governments try any and all measures to stop the influx from the countryside where there is stagnation. Young people flee the lack of opportunity in rural areas and go where the division of labor is the greatest and jobs most plentiful.
They are difficult to control and have been since Rome but keep growing. It is critical that the GOP begin to compete for their votes.
I wish they could leave. We’ve already had a Civil War, and the matter is settled. We are stuck with them.
Stop clouding the argument with facts.
Don’t fergit all the Metrosexuals in SiliCON Valley !!
Tell them goodbye, and tell them to say goodbye to social security checks, military retirement checks, medicare, federal aid of every sort and demand repayment for federal dollars already spent in the state. After all that is settled, then its, see ya. Far northern California wants to be separated from the rest of the state anyway. Use the West VA example to admit them or keep them in the Union and be ready for more Republicans in DC.
Good thing we got Parliament's approval before we left the United Kingdom.
Secession worked out so well for the last group of states that tried it. I bet it goes even better this time.
‘You all can go to hell. I’m goin’ to Jefferson!’
...like paying for their own defense forces. They can't use the Cal National Guard because the govt can withdraw all materiel issues to them.
The military bases there can be claimed under eminent domain and operated like GITMO is in cuba. Arizona would love to assume the mission of Camp Pendleton. Bremerton would like the fleet move from San Diego.
Mexican drug cartels would flourish (even more) and kalifornia would require a much more extensive law enforcement agency. Trust me, the bad guys would love calexit.
Their access to colorado river water would have to be renegotiated with Arizona an much of the water they take now would suddenly become more scarce and more expensive. Las Vegas could refill Lake Meade by simply diverting their Colorado river water before it even approaches kalifornia. Nevada and Arizona would only have to honor treaties and agreements subject to US law.
They would be subject to import tariffs on all their goods and mexico would love to become the port of entry for all goods coming to the US from the far east. Imagine new Toyotas and Sony TVS entering through Ensenada. Yuma AZ could become a huge port of entry for goods that used to enter kalifornia as it would become the closest us port of entry to mexican ports of entry for seafaring goods and is already a railhead and on I-8.
Yes kalifornia, bring it on. Think how many of your productive citizens would leave with the jobs that will go leaving you with lettuce, pot and In-and-Out Burger as your big income earners in moonbeams workers paradise.
How much has two Liberal Senators and a bunch of Liberal Congressmen cost the nation? Seems like Obamacare wouldn't have happened without that bunch of Liberals in Washington. Also what is it going to cost us to put all those illegals back across the border? Also how much does it cost us from Liberal propaganda made into movies and television shows?
I'm thinking there are a lot more costs to having California in the Union than just the tax receipts.
No. The Supreme Court did not say a Constitutional Amendment would be needed. It said, in Texas v. White (1868), that the obligations of the state of Texas continued although the state was in rebellion. The U.S., as the name implies, is “an indestructible Union composed of indestructible States.”
The argument could be made that the states have actually been destroyed by the accretion of power by the federal government, such that the original design of the U.S. is no longer recognizable. But, I digress.
The Court then stated, “There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.” This is called dicta. It wasn’t the issue before the Court. And, so, it’s not a binding precedent. But, it is informative. The Court imagines that States could withdraw from the Union WITH CONSENT or by (successful) rebellion. As to how a rebellion could be successful, I suppose this would involve a peace treaty between the parties, i.e., the seceding state and the Congress.
So, it wouldn’t require a Constitutional Amendment, but it does seem that it requires both parties agreeing, the seceding state and the remaining states, with the latter represented either by a convention of the states or through the Congress.
I wouldn’t mind California seceding, but I would be interested in how people in the various counties of that state felt about it. If this is basically the sentiment of L.A. County and the S.F. Bay region only, then no, even if they have more votes than the rest of the state. Let California figure out how secession is fair to its citizens, because as long as its citizens are also U.S. citizens, we are interested in that.
What I would prefer is to return domestic policy to the states so that if they want to be single payer and outlaw heterosexuality, whatever is within the broad discretion of states, they could. And other states likewise.
I agree with you in general, but we’re talking about a scenario of Calexit actually happening. It won’t anyway, but my point was it wouldn’t last long if it did.
Goodbye!
>
What will it be when they have to start paying for everything that the government provides them today???
>
IMO, I see no wrong here; didn’t Texas state ~same? I’m also not of the mind that Statehood = can’t back out...no contract is forever.
1) I seem to recall they PAY more than get back, so PRO for them.
2) GOVT provides *SQUAT*. It is the property theft of taxpayers govt uses to placate the masses (this is the biggest hurtle vs. the Left: Not only staying on message, but FRAMING it correctly as well).
Though, even if they DID ‘leave’ I don’t see a future where the # idiot stickers/product changes would disappear, they still would be a huge economic engine to placate.
This is true, but it was worse than that. The revenues produced by the South helped enrich the North as well, and if the South had been able to maintain their independence, hundreds of millions of dollars that went through the port of New York would end up in Southern industries instead, thereby creating a potentially serious financial competition for Northern Industries.
The potential prosperity of the South would have changed the economic world of New York, and it was a change that the movers and shakers of the North East did not want.
The South also had the potential to attract the not yet formed Midwestern states into their confederacy, and possibly even convince more states to join them, thereby weakening Washington DC even further.
An independent South represented myriad financial threats to Northern Interests as well as a massive revenue loss to the Federal government.
From the perspective of the North East, the South "Needed killin."
If they had been poor, Lincoln would have waved them good bye. Since they were paying 75% of all federal tax revenues, nobody was going to let that cash cow go without a fight.
Merely a diversion and distraction, while the dems spend CA further beyond reason.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.