TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- - - - CNBC Special Report - - - California in Crisis tonight @ 9:00pm ET/6:00pm PT
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby Yes because the companies are going to pay for that to ship their goods to the east coast? LMAO, we just set our rates to be slightly less expensive than what it would cost to ship it allll the way down there. Also I am pretty sure that the Canal could not handle that sort of demand...

I think you're underestimating the number of things brought through there already at a less expensive rate than sending them to California. If it were constantly more expensive, why would we need it at all?

Secondly, your secession would make you a competitor with Canada and Mexico. I'm sure they'd be willing to lower their trade rates to compete, too.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby What? I think we could do it better if we didn't have the more conservative and slow mid-west and eastern seaboard to deal with. Why should we have to put up with their crap? For the most part the Pacific Northwest could be very self-sustaining in terms of agriculture and economy.

Honestly, this is almost as bad as theresa�s questions re the parachuting on a plane.

As groundhog has pointed out there are mammoth costs associated with forming your own republic; not just in the transfer process, but in the general day-to-day activities of any nation state. You�d need to do things like form your own IRS, create your own currency, create an entirely new level of government to perform the activities that your constitution has given solely (or in part) to the current federal government. This includes having to develop entire government departments to conduct business activities you wouldn�t have even heard of, that are currently the purview of Washington.

In other words, please let me have whatever you�re smoking. The secession of California from the US would be an almighty clusterfuck that would ruin your state. It would cost you far far more in tax revenue to be self-sufficient than you�re currently being jewed by the distribution of tax income.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Honestly, this is almost as bad as theresa�s questions re the parachuting on a plane. As groundhog has pointed out there are mammoth costs associated with forming your own republic; not just in the transfer process, but in the general day-to-day activities of any nation state. You�d need to do things like form your own IRS, create your own currency, create an entirely new level of government to perform the activities that your constitution has given solely (or in part) to the current federal government. This includes having to develop entire government departments to conduct business activities you wouldn�t have even heard of, that are currently the purview of Washington. In other words, please let me have whatever you�re smoking. The secession of California from the US would be an almighty clusterfuck that would ruin your state. It would cost you far far more in tax revenue to be self-sufficient than you�re currently being jewed by the distribution of tax income.

Did I say it would be easy? No.

Could it be done? Yes.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby What? I think we could do it better if we didn't have the more conservative and slow mid-west and eastern seaboard to deal with.

I just re-read this with PKC's quote and I can't believe I passed over it before

Do you really think that the Eastern seaboard is fucking you? Are you kidding? Please take a look at the dollars paid vs. dollars received from the Maine to Florida in that link I provided. NY and NJ ($168B & $86B ($254 B total) pay almost as much in taxes as CA ($289B) and receive less, too (roughly $205B for NY & NJ (.80 on the $1 vs. $242B for CA ($.84 on the $1). Add in CT and the numbers get worse for the Eastern, which contributes far more to the federal coffers than CA, WA, and OR.

The fact is, the Eastern Coastal states pay 2x the federal taxes that the West Coast 3 do. Even remove everything south of D.C. and the East Coast still contributes more. And that's with all that trade money from China.

BTW, I'm not going to disagree with you on the Middle States.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy I just don't think you'd be able to fund it. Coastal states and more highly developed states (like Illinois) do reap higher homeland security benefits because they've got more to hit. Secondly, you make it sound like the use of the funding is entirely dictated by the federal government.

The use of funds has never been dictated entirely by the federal government, nor will it ever be. There are always people in the regional and state based agencies that make decisions. And while this works for small states, or states with small populations, California on the other hand, is like 2 totally different states. Northern and Southern California are like two totally different worlds. I was born and raised in the North but I prefer and love the south where I have lived for 5 years. Most of the shit that works in the north does NOT work in the south. Neither can be managed as one and the same, but because we are the same state they can't be treated differently.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy I think you're underestimating the number of things brought through there already at a less expensive rate than sending them to California. If it were constantly more expensive, why would we need it at all? Secondly, your secession would make you a competitor with Canada and Mexico. I'm sure they'd be willing to lower their trade rates to compete, too.

I think you are underestimating the time cost. The time to ship goods down through the Panama Canal is significant. By the time a ship gets to the canal, a train can be half way across the US with the goods. Or even delivering it to some of the places along the way. Thereby negating the cost benefits, because goods are delivered and sold.

Furthermore, if you equate time with money, the time lost going all the way around is innumerable to just paying a slightly higher toll to offload on the west coast.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN create your own currency

This is utterly false. Just like there are countries using the Euro but aren't part of the EU and as such aren't part of the Euro Zone. We don't HAVE to create our own currency. Is it advised? Probably.

I don't disagree with your points that it would be a massive financial undertaking that could and very well run us broke. That doesn't mean that it isn't possible or even fathomable.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby Did I say it would be easy? No. Could it be done? Yes.

No, but your argument is based solely on the fact that you would be better off, and this is demonstrably incorrect. Your budget would balloon like you wouldn�t believe, and how you gonna pay it, considering you can't pay today's?

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy I just re-read this with PKC's quote and I can't believe I passed over it before Do you really think that the Eastern seaboard is fucking you? Are you kidding? Please take a look at the dollars paid vs. dollars received from the Maine to Florida in that link I provided. NY and NJ ($168B & $86B ($254 B total) pay almost as much in taxes as CA ($289B) and receive less, too (roughly $205B for NY & NJ (.80 on the $1 vs. $242B for CA ($.84 on the $1). Add in CT and the numbers get worse for the Eastern, which contributes far more to the federal coffers than CA, WA, and OR. The fact is, the Eastern Coastal states pay 2x the federal taxes that the West Coast 3 do. Even remove everything south of D.C. and the East Coast still contributes more. And that's with all that trade money from China. BTW, I'm not going to disagree with you on the Middle States.

I dunno about Nou, but I don't see the eastern seaboard as fucking us. If anything, I see them as equals. They pay more in tax by percentage per capita, but total revenue is the same as us. California just has lots of mismanaged programs. Too many in my books, but thats for another day. We can get out of this financial crisis by doing a lot of things, but sadly, our state is all about just working with what they have and yet demanding more programs.

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel This is utterly false. Just like there are countries using the Euro but aren't part of the EU and as such aren't part of the Euro Zone. We don't HAVE to create our own currency. Is it advised? Probably.

but then you're just at the whim of the rest of the US in regards to monetary policy, so how exactly would this be a REAL secession or how would you retain any independence re things that matter?

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel I don't disagree with your points that it would be a massive financial undertaking that could and very well run us broke. That doesn't mean that it isn't possible or even fathomable.

Of course its impossible. Right now your budget is completely fucked. Explain to me how you would incorporate all the additional government expenses into your budget. Take a look at all the roles of your federal government and try and imagine how costly they would be to carry out at the state level. The costs per capita would be (hugely) in excess of what those services currently cost.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN but then you're just at the whim of the rest of the US in regards to monetary policy, so how exactly would this be a REAL secession or how would you retain any independence re things that matter?

Because monetary policy doesn't dictate where funds go nor what they are for. Nor does it dictate how your country is run. Also, isn't if I remember correctly, the world so hungry for US bonds? Wasn't it the US that caused the global financial crisis? So much for having independent monetary policies and currencies. One country fucked them all.

quote:

Of course its impossible. Right now your budget is completely fucked. Explain to me how you would incorporate all the additional government expenses into your budget. Take a look at all the roles of your federal government and try and imagine how costly they would be to carry out at the state level. The costs per capita would be (hugely) in excess of what those services currently cost.

Impossible implies it is never, in any future situation possible. So, while I don't disagree that in our current fiscal crisis as a state, we cannot afford it, that doesn't mean that we can't fix it and be even stronger and be able to afford it.

Just a word of warning, I will no longer be posting here tonight, as I am on my 3rd beer and I don't want to get shit confused. So I will post tomorrow.

ps: pkc, I am quite uninformed in monetary policy, so feel free to mock my wholly unknowing of it all. I should probably study up on it a bit, so if you have any helpful resources, they would be greatly appreciated.

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel Because monetary policy doesn't dictate where funds go nor what they are for. Nor does it dictate how your country is run.

No, but you would always be beholden to Washington and hardly independent if you had no means to manage your own currency.

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel Also, isn't if I remember correctly, the world so hungry for US bonds? Wasn't it the US that caused the global financial crisis? So much for having independent monetary policies and currencies. One country fucked them all.

Well firstly, monetary policy didn�t fuck anyone, that�s a completely different kettle of fish. That economies are intertwined is just the nature of modern states, but that�s completely different from being able to effect meaningful monetary policy for the good of your country. Indeed, you wouldn�t be able to effect monetary policy at all unless you had your own currency, because there�s no way in hell that the US would let you print US dollars. Who is going to help you create your central bank btw? All the American banks are already members of the federal reserve, so where is your economic and currency stability going to stem from?

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel Impossible implies it is never, in any future situation possible. So, while I don't disagree that in our current fiscal crisis as a state, we cannot afford it, that doesn't mean that we can't fix it and be even stronger and be able to afford it.

Well, for as long as you and I are alive, it is quite impossible. You could never afford it. As I have mentioned like 3 times already, the activities performed by your federal government cost you less now than they ever would if you made your own country.

This is going to sound like hyperbole but, if California can emerge from this budget crisis with TONS of programs cut, and a real budget.

Imagine how well positioned they'll be when this current economy turns around?

With such a large state, with ports, and silicon valley, and hollywood --- cutting a little fat out of their government will set them up perfectly when this economic cloud passes.

That's my 2 cents.

Based on what I've heard on NPR, guesses, and assumptions.

(at least I'm honest)

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel ps: pkc, I am quite uninformed in monetary policy, so feel free to mock my wholly unknowing of it all. I should probably study up on it a bit, so if you have any helpful resources, they would be greatly appreciated.

Well, im hardly better than you really, so I�ll leave you in the hands of wiki

quote:

Monetary policy is the process by which the government, central bank, or monetary authority of a country controls (i) the supply of money, (ii) availability of money, and (iii) cost of money or rate of interest, in order to attain a set of objectives oriented towards the growth and stability of the economy.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN No, but your argument is based solely on the fact that you would be better off, and this is demonstrably incorrect. Your budget would balloon like you wouldn�t believe, and how you gonna pay it, considering you can't pay today's?

I have been meaning to get something rolling on this in the form of a non-profit to study the sustainability and survivability of a free and independent Northwest.

http://jeffersongroup.org/

I been lazy though.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby I have been meaning to get something rolling on this in the form of a non-profit to study the sustainability and survivability of a free and independent Northwest. http://jeffersongroup.org/ I been lazy though.

haha, i know it sounds all fun and awesome but the reality is that an independent northwest would have a negative impact (on the people of cali) in many different ways, and there will be huge repercussions in areas you would never have predicted. like, i dunno, war

i also think you're greatly trivialising/dismissing the benefits of being part of the union in the year 2009, especially given the current economic climate. remember, there is nothing from preventing california from re-discovering the huge deficits of 09 again and again in the future. indeed, its probably guaranteed if you look ahead for long enough.

federalism isn't perfect but its a fuckload better than the state-based alternative.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN haha, i know it sounds all fun and awesome but the reality is that an independent northwest would have a negative impact (on the people of cali) in many different ways, and there will be huge repercussions in areas you would never have predicted. like, i dunno, war i also think you're greatly trivialising/dismissing the benefits of being part of the union in the year 2009, especially given the current economic climate. remember, there is nothing from preventing california from re-discovering the huge deficits of 09 again and again in the future. indeed, its probably guaranteed if you look ahead for long enough. federalism isn't perfect but its a fuckload better than the state-based alternative.

Washington isnt california though... for the most part we dont even like californians.

They fucking move up here looking for jobs then bitch and moan how its not like california!


Washington has a very diverse economy as well as strong ties to asia and canada. The northwest as a whole is an agricultural powerhouse, producing a majority of the nations potatoes and hops as well as many other major crops.

I know a lot of these are far fetched dreams and I do not see them coming to fruition in my life time, but I love the Pacific Northwest with a huge passion and a lot of people here feel the same way about it. We often feel detached from the rest of the nations views and goals anyways. We are also often ignored in the media and thought of as savages or rednecks on the east coast.

My Washington State History teacher in 9th grade was from New York and when she said she was moving to Washington, at first no one even thought of the state, but DC, and when they found out it was the state they'd ask questions like "Do they even have electricity there?" or "I heard there arent any roads, its all forest!"

Its not that we hold much animosity towards our eastern masters, its just that we feel we could do it better on our own give the chance.

On the other hand, if it came to war we would defend our land with a zealous passion. Western Washington and Oregon is very strategically situated with a long series of mountain ranges on its eastern and southern border and our northern border is that of Canada. To the east of the mountains is rugged desert terrain. We could hold our own if need be till international aide is allowed in.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN No, but your argument is based solely on the fact that you would be better off, and this is demonstrably incorrect. Your budget would balloon like you wouldn�t believe, and how you gonna pay it, considering you can't pay today's?

Am I the only Californian here who actually agrees with this? We're dealing with a huge budget deficit and you guys think seceding from the Union is a great idea? How are we going to fund money on our own military, to protect our borders in case the Mexican drug cartels become more emboldened to set up shop here? Other government agencies and tax services that will need to be setup, all costing us even more fucking money to do. If it ever came to do that, I'll move to Colorado then.

is seceding an actual serious option that people are talking about?? i thought all of you guys commenting on that were just taking the piss

quote:

Originally posted by Omega_Blue is seceding an actual serious option that people are talking about?? i thought all of you guys commenting on that were just taking the piss

Its not a serious discussion yet, but anyone with half a brain could see it being a real possibility if things get too bad.

I mean thats a long long ways off, but I don't think anyone is doubting it. We aren't talking bloody revolution or anything, but something legislative...

Nothing will happen probably.

^
No, it's not. I'm just a bit surprised some on here actually do find it a novel idea.

quote:

Washington isnt california though... for the most part we dont even like californians. They fucking move up here looking for jobs then bitch and moan how its not like california!

LOLOLOLOL

quote:

Originally posted by Zharen ^ No, it's not. I'm just a bit surprised some on here actually do find it a novel idea. LOLOLOLOL

Its true!

Seriously fucking annoying.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby Washington has a very diverse economy as well as strong ties to asia and canada. The northwest as a whole is an agricultural powerhouse, producing a majority of the nations potatoes and hops as well as many other major crops.

California produces way more agriculture for the US than Washington state does. California is a much larger ag powerhouse than WA is.

quote:

Originally posted by Omega_Blue is seceding an actual serious option that people are talking about?? i thought all of you guys commenting on that were just taking the piss

I was drinking and thought it would be something fun to debate. Do I think it is a realistic possibility? Not in the near distant future. As pkc said, probably not in our lifetimes.

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel California produces way more agriculture for the US than Washington state does. California is a much larger ag powerhouse than WA is.

I never said it was bigger than Cali.

If you combine, WA, OR, ID you get something roughly comparable though with about the same amount of area.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby I never said it was bigger than Cali. If you combine, WA, OR, ID you get something roughly comparable though with about the same amount of area.

Right but I was referring to the fact that California's economic power with agriculture in the US, is just insane. Everyone always forgets that California produces a large portion (I think it was like 50% of all crops for consumption in the US) of the agricultural product for the nation.

Washington and Oregon are the largest Apple and Pear producing states in the country, in fact Washington alone accounts for 60% of all apples grown in the US.

The west coast basically produces the countries entire High Value Crop sector, as well as a large part of of its normal cash crops (grains, mainly barely and wheat).

I mean, with out Washington states hops hardly anyone would be able to brew domestic beers.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.