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 »

- - - CNBC Special Report - - - California in Crisis tonight @ 9:00pm ET/6:00pm PT

http://www.cnbc.com/id/31923599

i probably won't watch it.

probably.

incidently, i think i have CNBC in high def

I think that California should move towards independence so they can obtain loans from foreign governments.

That or states should be given the ability to take out these loans themselves and not have to wade through the mess that is the federal government.

Also the imperial eastern empire does not care about the people of the west. To them we are competition.

I agree California should secede from the union. We could govern ourselves much better if we didn't have all the federal bullshit from the rest of the US.

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel I agree California should secede from the union. We could govern ourselves much better if we didn't have all the federal bullshit from the rest of the US.

Exactly.

I fully support a group of independent nations where Washington, Oregon, and California now exist!

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel I agree California should secede from the union. We could govern ourselves much better if we didn't have all the federal bullshit from the rest of the US.

As long as you agree to keep Nancy and her silly methods of funding healthcare

Out of curiousity, what "federal bullshit from the rest of the US" are you talking about?

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy As long as you agree to keep Nancy and her silly methods of funding healthcare Out of curiousity, what "federal bullshit from the rest of the US" are you talking about?

That federal laws govern what a state can and cant do is a drawback if your state tends to lean one direction more than other states do.

Also states like Washington and California give back more in federal taxes then it receives. If those states could keep all the money for themselves and spend it locally its citizens would more than likely be better off.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby That federal laws govern what a state can and cant do is a drawback if your state tends to lean one direction more than other states do. Also states like Washington and California give back more in federal taxes then it receives. If those states could keep all the money for themselves and spend it locally its citizens would more than likely be better off.

*sighs*

That people are still stuck in this antiquated mindset in the 21st century astounds me.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby That federal laws govern what a state can and cant do is a drawback if your state tends to lean one direction more than other states do. Also states like Washington and California give back more in federal taxes then it receives. If those states could keep all the money for themselves and spend it locally its citizens would more than likely be better off.

You mean in the direction of budget deficits?

Also, NY gives about the same that it gets in relation to tax benefits when compared to CA or WA. In 2005, NY was 42nd, CA was 43rd, WA was 38th. Additionally, I'm sure you're well aware of the spending on Homeland Security that doesn't trickle down to citizens like it would compared with a state like Washington.

FYI, New Jersey and Nevada consistently get fucked the most.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/...es-20071016.swf

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Additionally, I'm sure you're well aware of the spending on Homeland Security that doesn't trickle down to citizens like it would compared with a state like Washington.

Clarify, thats not computing for some reason...

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN *sighs* That people are still stuck in this antiquated mindset in the 21st century astounds me.

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.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby Clarify, thats not computing for some reason...

Are you joking?

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Are you joking?

No I literally did not get the sentence, are you trying to say we do get it or dont get it or what?

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby No I literally did not get the sentence, are you trying to say we do get it or dont get it or what?

NY state gets a ton of Homeland Security money to protect all the attractions so that the tourists don't get killed by terrorists, which is a big chunk of the federal benefits that the state receives. Spending money on security systems created in other states, OT for police, etc. isn't like the infrastructure spending that other states get. Other states get things that benefit the citizenry, we just waste money trying to "prevent" attacks.

As an example, NY received $283 million for this stuff (http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/press_0618091.html). Washington state got $30 million (http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/...ashington-state). But then again, what does Washington state have to protect, the Space Needle?

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy As an example, NY received $283 million for this stuff (http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/press_0618091.html). Washington state got $30 million (http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/...ashington-state). But then again, what does Washington state have to protect, the Space Needle?

Try 1,685 thermonuclear warheads? Not to mention our entire pacific boomer fleet... Thats not including the warheads that are at base when those boomers are in port, thats 192 warheads a boat btw.

Washington State has more nuclear weapons than all the other nuclear weapons nation states in the world combined except for Russia.

So yea, maybe we should get a little more, cause frankly I don't give a fuck if someone wants to smash a couple buildings in NYC, but I sure do give a massive fuck if someone wants to steal a shit ton of nuclear warheads.

Also forgot Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Eastern Washington, there is some seriously toxic shit laying out in the desert there...

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy As long as you agree to keep Nancy and her silly methods of funding healthcare Out of curiousity, what "federal bullshit from the rest of the US" are you talking about?

The amount of federal tax money that, if we were separate, would go to just what is now California. The innumerable amount of wealth that could be generated for us as a people in this place to provide things like universal healthcare, better roads, much better education, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy NY state gets a ton of Homeland Security money to protect all the attractions so that the tourists don't get killed by terrorists, which is a big chunk of the federal benefits that the state receives. Spending money on security systems created in other states, OT for police, etc. isn't like the infrastructure spending that other states get. Other states get things that benefit the citizenry, we just waste money trying to "prevent" attacks. As an example, NY received $283 million for this stuff (http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/press_0618091.html). Washington state got $30 million (http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/...ashington-state). But then again, what does Washington state have to protect, the Space Needle?

But would you agree that a smaller federal government could easily create a better reacting security personnel than the whole of the US Federal system?

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby Try 1,685 thermonuclear warheads? Not to mention our entire pacific boomer fleet... Thats not including the warheads that are at base when those boomers are in port, thats 192 warheads a boat btw. Washington State has more nuclear weapons than all the other nuclear weapons nation states in the world combined except for Russia. So yea, maybe we should get a little more, cause frankly I don't give a fuck if someone wants to smash a couple buildings in NYC, but I sure do give a massive fuck if someone wants to steal a shit ton of nuclear warheads. Also forgot Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Eastern Washington, there is some seriously toxic shit laying out in the desert there...

You guys have such shit security that people could actually steal those things? If so, then I guess I should give a fuck, but I really don't. It's a hell of a lot easier to bomb a site than steal something from it.

Secondly, do you think that you're entitled to those weapons if you seceded? I'm sure you don't believe that you'd have the activation codes for such weapons.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy You guys have such shit security that people could actually steal those things? If so, then I guess I should give a fuck, but I really don't. It's a hell of a lot easier to bomb a site than steal something from it. Secondly, do you think that you're entitled to those weapons if you seceded? I'm sure you don't believe that you'd have the activation codes for such weapons.

Wouldn't want them.

Right now WA would be hotter than the sun for many minutes in a nuclear war...

On the other hand I don't really want my federal tax dollars to go to protecting something I don't care about, like NYC, so I wouldn't expect you guys to want federal money coming out here either.

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel The amount of federal tax money that, if we were separate, would go to just what is now California. The innumerable amount of wealth that could be generated for us as a people in this place to provide things like universal healthcare, better roads, much better education, etc. But would you agree that a smaller federal government could easily create a better reacting security personnel than the whole of the US Federal system?

Do you think you'd be given the same trade arrangements to generate that sort of wealth? Do you think that if people needed a passport to visit you, you'd take in as much tourist dollars?

The fact is that many states, like my own, NJ, CT, etc. lose as much or more as a percentage of federal tax dollars paid vs. federal benefits reaped. For some reason, you guys are the worst off financially. NY isn't paying IOUs yet. NJ isn't, either, and they're 50th.

And no, I don't think that smaller federal government would create a better system. Regardless of who funded it, the systems are set up locally.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Do you think you'd be given the same trade arrangements to generate that sort of wealth? Do you think that if people needed a passport to visit you, you'd take in as much tourist dollars? The fact is that many states, like my own, NJ, CT, etc. lose as much or more as a percentage of federal tax dollars paid vs. federal benefits reaped. For some reason, you guys are the worst off financially. NY isn't paying IOUs yet. NJ isn't, either, and they're 50th. And no, I don't think that smaller federal government would create a better system. Regardless of who funded it, the systems are set up locally.

You do realize that if California was its own country they'd basically be guaranteed those trade deals... how else is good from China and Asia going to get into the US?

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby Wouldn't want them. Right now WA would be hotter than the sun for many minutes in a nuclear war... On the other hand I don't really want my federal tax dollars to go to protecting something I don't care about, like NYC, so I wouldn't expect you guys to want federal money coming out here either.

I think we can both agree that we don't want our money going to the top 5 beneficiaries - New Mexico (#1 since 1981, no joke, with the lowest tax vs. benefit in all 25 years at $1.78 benefit vs. $1 taxed), Mississippi, Alaska, Louisiana, and West Virginia.

Especially a fucking natural resources cartel like Alaska that takes our money and pays its citizens subsidies for gas/oil sales.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Do you think you'd be given the same trade arrangements to generate that sort of wealth? Do you think that if people needed a passport to visit you, you'd take in as much tourist dollars? The fact is that many states, like my own, NJ, CT, etc. lose as much or more as a percentage of federal tax dollars paid vs. federal benefits reaped. For some reason, you guys are the worst off financially. NY isn't paying IOUs yet. NJ isn't, either, and they're 50th. And no, I don't think that smaller federal government would create a better system. Regardless of who funded it, the systems are set up locally.

Have you ever worked for a large corporation? If you have, you would know that is a half truth. The federal government is managed like the worst corporation in the world in the sense of bureaucratic nonsense. They are even more out of touch with local needs than a large corporation like GM. If having it setup (jsut started, but not ultimately managed) locally does anything, then why is it still shit?

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby You do realize that if California was its own country they'd basically be guaranteed those trade deals... how else is good from China and Asia going to get into the US?

Panama Canal?

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel Have you ever worked for a large corporation? If you have, you would know that is a half truth. The federal government is managed like the worst corporation in the world in the sense of bureaucratic nonsense. They are even more out of touch with local needs than a large corporation like GM. If having it setup (jsut started, but not ultimately managed) locally does anything, then why is it still shit?

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.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Panama Canal?

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...

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