Pros and Cons to California seceding from the USA?

Lol . How many Americans in California would be like Noooo What the hell are you doing?

The vast majority of citizens in Cali would never go for it. It will never happen.

We'll keep northern cali, and in exchange give them western washington as well . . . if they really push, they can also have oregon.

No state is going to be allowed to secede. The last time they tried that there was a huge war.

Besides, just imagine the loss of subsidies. No states government is going to forgo all that free cake...

usgovernmentspending

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist
I say don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on the way out. Not to mention, if CA votes itself out, that northern CA will probably split from southern CA and either stay a state, or become one of its own (northern CA is pretty conservative from my experience). It will be less than 1 year until they totally run out of money and will be begging to be a state again, and at that time we can give them the big middle finger

Well that is the beauty of being your own country. You just print your own money and everyone holding cash pays the inflation tax.

originally posted by: intrptr

No state is going to be allowed to secede. The last time they tried that there was a huge war.

Besides, just imagine the loss of subsidies. No states government is going to forgo all that free cake...

usgovernmentspending

No, certain states are allowed to secede while others are not. Texas can secede any time they want because they have lots of guns and would gladly use them against Texas traitors or any invasion force, up to and including any point where they are turned to rubble. They could also develop their own nukes. CA cannot secede because while they would be banning nukes and guns under their constitution. To the best of my knowledge the state militias can in fact develop nukes right now.
en.wikipedia.org...

But in fact any actual war waged against the a seceding state would now be challenged by distributed attacks coordinated over the internet leading potentially to a complete collapse of the entire country as the power grid and many other vulnerable services and logistics channels would be under assault possibly in every single state by sympathetic groups.

originally posted by: GodEmperor
80% of our food comes from California.

They can leave, but we would have to invade and wipe them out to take their resources.

Win, win.

No, 80% of our food does not come from California. 80% of our fruits and vegetables come from there. Grains and meats? Not so much. Additionally, other states could easily pick up the slack, as this story from none other than Mother Jones suggests...

www.motherjones.com...

a reply to: fractal5

No, certain states are allowed to secede while others are not. Texas can secede any time they want...

Yah, they do it all the time... Not.

Wait a minute....

Wait a minute...


If California succeeds from the union... are they going to build a wall to keep out the undesirables from the rest of their former country?

a reply to: Teikiatsu

cons ? - energy independance = zero

Brexit is a complete disaster for the UK and has kicked off the rise of the far right in Europe, the UK is going to be poor and fighting Nazis in Europe again.

When all is said and done, if California were to successfully secede, it would be a net positive for the rest of the US, while California's economy would suffer greatly. 4 of it's 5 biggest industries ( aerospace r&d, technology, agriculture, and tourism ) would see their numbers fall, in some cases dramatically. Conversely, within 5 years the rest of the US would pick up the slack and improve economically in these industries. I say let them secede, it will be fun to watch them come crawling back asking for re-admittance to the Union.

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
I don't know what So Cal is going to do, but I love the concept of Cascadia.

Regional ties are much stronger than national ties, honestly. The people of Vancouver, Seattle, Olympia, Portland have far more in common with one another than they do with the people of Mississippi. I'm not sure it is even possible to govern both without short-sticking one.

This is the reason why we are supposed to have a Republican system with states mostly governing their own affairs as they like and the Feds only really making sure they all play fair without taking advantage of each other.

It was recognized that there are very real differences in how people in different parts of the nation lived ... even that far back.

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
And what about states like Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, Georgia and Texas? While Obama was in office, they wanted to leave the union. Texas was the loudest, and keeps threatening it every time something goes wrong in DC.

Think very carefully on this, if California were to leave, then any other state that wanted to, they would have a legal basis to do such and then could, even the one you live in.

While as appealing as it is to do such, the real fight is to stay and make it work, to work towards and with others.

If the alternative was to descend into an open shooting war over who gets to sit their butt in the White House, which is the better idea?

originally posted by: RickinVa
Wait a minute....

Wait a minute...


If California succeeds from the union... are they going to build a wall to keep out the undesirables from the rest of their former country?

That's funny. No, California would be open borders so would really just be an area on earth that anyone could go to. So not really a country, more like a world Park.

But seriously, as a Northern Californian in a red County, this is just a symptom of the larger issue between dense big cities and rural/suburban America. Let New York, L.A., Chicago, etc . secede. Our become world parks.

a reply to: 0zzymand0s

Thing is that our original model WAS semi-autonomy and the power brokers in DC have so eroded it that we are here now. To the blue coast, the idea of even four years of Donald Trump is so intolerable that they would rather leave the country. It was not designed to be this way. Whoever was president was supposed to have so little effect in your day to day life that it really wouldn't matter as much, and it was your state government that was supposed to excite this kind of passion ... and it used to.

But the Federal Government has become too strongly centralized for that.

It will never happen, not enough people will ever be on board.
We have this discussion regarding Quebec ..there have been 2 unsuccessful votes on breaking away..last one in 95.
They drain the rest of Canada with a Greece like lifestyle..do not know how they get away with it.
My thought's to them are "don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya" ..it won't happen though, because the spoiled child at least know's it cannot do well on it's own..and we are stronger together in the world's eyes.

originally posted by: wdkirk
There's no legal precedence for secession provided by the Constitution. The Civil war answered the question as to whether or not a state can, however, those states lost and were brought back into the fold.

California could not exist on its own and an idea of secession is just a "shock" statement with no real merit behind it. It is nothing more than a shabby statement made by politicians that don't like that Trump won and that the government is swinging to the Republican side.

My personal opinion: have at it but don't come crying for handouts when you are bankrupt and fenced off from the rest of the union. You will need a Visa, passport and permission to travel the rest of the United States. Hollywood can die for all I care. Self absorbed, self important, jump on the band wagon, it takes a village morons.

ACtually the tenth DID allow for secession but LINCOLN coudnt have his CASH COW leave, SO afterwards with a Ill legally stacked supreme court and without the southern states voting on it he passed a amendment to make him look like he was the good guy. I say Repeal the amendment and let states choose their Loyalty.

originally posted by: bluesjr

originally posted by: RickinVa
Wait a minute....

Wait a minute...


If California succeeds from the union... are they going to build a wall to keep out the undesirables from the rest of their former country?

That's funny. No, California would be open borders so would really just be an area on earth that anyone could go to. So not really a country, more like a world Park.

But seriously, as a Northern Californian in a red County, this is just a symptom of the larger issue between dense big cities and rural/suburban America. Let New York, L.A., Chicago, etc . secede. Our become world parks.

Wall them off and they can become like giant prisons.

Seems like that was an idea I got from somewhere ...

a reply to: TeikiatsuHell yeah,I was stationed in that b-hole of the nation and despised the place then,`80`s,and it`s worse now.Good bye and good riddance on their way to hell.

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist
I say don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on the way out. Not to mention, if CA votes itself out, that northern CA will probably split from southern CA and either stay a state, or become one of its own (northern CA is pretty conservative from my experience).

CA would not split Norrh & South.

It would split West & East.