• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Will California Split Into Two States?

You do realize that you have the wrong link, right? lol That was from 2009. You're talking about this one:

A 51st State? Southern California Secession Needs Sponsors - International Business Times

It's nothing new to CA as there have been quite a few proposals before, including the one you posted (I never saw that one). This proposal, like all the others, is going to fail as well. Funding is going to be a HUGE problem. Who's going to pay for it? The taxpayers. I'm sure you all know that creating a new state is incredibly cheap. :p I love his reasoning for funding:

"I don't think the funding is going to be a problem," Chief of Staff Verne Lauritzen told Bloomberg. "There are some large corporations that have been chased out of California that would be willing to assist."

Lets create a new state where the people proposing the issue "think" that funding isn't going to be a problem in this economy. Most of all... lets have corporations fund the new state! Brilliant idea!
 
Then of course theres also that pesky little US Constitution Article 4 Section 3 that says they cant without US Congress' permission

no democrat controlled congress is ever going to allow this to happen
 
In years gone by, consensus opinion from the state of California was that much of the populous would be happier if metro Los Angeles were to become a part of something OTHER than California...

To this day when I head from Arizona to San Diego for some time off, I'm treated and accepted better as a Zonie than I am if I mention that I was born and raised in Los Angeles... lol
 
a lot of states have a city like that........

growing up in Texas we never considered Houston to be part of our state..... its like a 3rd world country there

and now in IL its nearly the same with Chicago...... nobody wants to claim that trash town is part of the state
 
Martimus said:
In years gone by, consensus opinion from the state of California was that much of the populous would be happier if metro Los Angeles were to become a part of something OTHER than California...

To this day when I head from Arizona to San Diego for some time off, I'm treated and accepted better as a Zonie than I am if I mention that I was born and raised in Los Angeles... lol
Click to expand...

You have to keep in mind though... CA is kind of separated into 3 main groups: San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego. San Franciscans, Angelenos, and San Diegans tend to be proud of where they live and there's a bit of "rivalry", not like in football though. I beat up any San Franciscan I see. :p
 
Vihzel said:
You have to keep in mind though... CA is kind of separated into 3 main groups: San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego. San Franciscans, Angelenos, and San Diegans tend to be proud of where they live and there's a bit of "rivalry", not like in football though. I beat up any San Franciscan I see. :p
Click to expand...

In my experience California consisted of 4 regions: Northern Cal, Central Cal, Southern Cal, and Los Angeles. :D

It's actually not much different here in AZ... there's Arizona and then there's Phoenix. During the years I lived in Yuma, the city actually avoided anything that would make light of the fact that they were even part AZ. To many Yuman's, we lived in the remote suburbs of El Centro (CA). :p
 
Martimus said:
In years gone by, consensus opinion from the state of California was that much of the populous would be happier if metro Los Angeles were to become a part of something OTHER than California...

To this day when I head from Arizona to San Diego for some time off, I'm treated and accepted better as a Zonie than I am if I mention that I was born and raised in Los Angeles... lol
Click to expand...

Really? I was born and raised in LA and have never really been treated poorly.
 
If we add another state, then the flag would have to change...history books would be longer....people who have been to all 50 states will have to make another trip, probably to the same area, just to cover all states again...too much of a hassle. If it ain't broke, don't fix it
 
I actually think there is a lot of consolidation to be done. No need for two Dakota's. Merge states like Rhode Island into meaningfuler ones.

Hell just merge it all into one great Unitary state :p
 
New-States-of-California1.jpg
 
Dark Jedi said:
And when has the government ever do what the people wanted. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

When the people vote in large numbers and make their power known, the government does what it is told to do. The reason is simple: those that make the decisions and either vote for this or not vote for that, want to keep their jobs.

I seriously doubt helping the voter is something they truly care about; they want to keep their jobs so they make it look like they are helping. The last thing elected officials want is a highly educated voter that pays attention and votes in every election.

I also think they hate the net because it is easy for you to find out what they really do after being elected.

Despite what you might think, we the people STILL have ALL the power. The problem is we do not seem to vote or pay much attention.

Some people want no drilling but they also want cheap gas. Some politicians pray on our love of nature and pristine environments, tell us how much they are helping, prevent drilling, and the public is proud.
If there was a problem getting foreign oil and the cost of gas went to 10.00 a gallon, the people would scream and the politicians would change their minds.

When Obama Care arrives (?) and we the people are given the (estimated) $2500.00 bill at year's end, people will scream and changes will come because nobody in DC wants to be fired and most people that favor these kinds of plans do not know the facts and what will likely happen.

So vote with knowledge, watch your officials, do not believe the liberal media, learn a little world and US history, and you can make a difference. The government will do what we want.
 
Knewz said:
If we add another state, then the flag would have to change...history books would be longer....people who have been to all 50 states will have to make another trip, probably to the same area, just to cover all states again...too much of a hassle. If it ain't broke, don't fix it
Click to expand...

Relax, it is in the works. It must be, because according to Mr. Obama, we have 57 States. So double check your kid's maps from geography class; perhaps CA is two states by now.

‪Obama Claims He's Visited 57 States‬‏ - YouTube
 
Lol, no.

The dude supporting it is from Riverside. Anyone who lives in Orange County doesn't want to have anything to do with Riverside.

So, I agree with the motion, but only if Riverside is EXCLUDED.
 
Vihzel said:
"I don't think the funding is going to be a problem," Chief of Staff Verne Lauritzen told Bloomberg. "There are some large corporations that have been chased out of California that would be willing to assist."

Lets create a new state where the people proposing the issue "think" that funding isn't going to be a problem in this economy. Most of all... lets have corporations fund the new state! Brilliant idea!
Click to expand...

We will all be involved in the decision to create another state. Changing the Constitution is very hard, as it should be. Creating new states is a problem and in some cases, there is a certain logic to it.

I would love to live in a state where the goal of everyone with power in that state decided to eliminate state income tax or lower it to a truly reasonable level; make their state the most business friendly state in the country and then make things better. Eliminate or restructure all public welfare programs, so lazy people relocate or find jobs. Change tax laws that apply to business; make sure every proposed law/Bill/rule/ordinance passes constitutional muster and keep local government out of all business as much as possible. Eliminate all state agencies that do no good; eliminate teacher's unions and let smarter people decide our children's future education. Eliminate as many useless and pointless laws as possible, like most environmental laws.

Take the best ideas for running a state and the best ideas for attracting business, and open the state up to immigration (legal) so manufacturers across the planer would fight to be allowed in.

Aggressively go after manufacturers in other states and give them reasons to relocate that are so compelling, that not being located in the State of Bob unthinkable.

In other words, a state like most states in the United States circa 1950, for the most part.
 
It would be impossible, for 2 reasons.

1.) The congress would never allow it.

2.) Allowing any population to divorce its debt would create a finical backlash that would destroy the economic system we have today. And we would be unable to rebuild it.

You see divorcing their debt is the only reason why they want to do this. They want to create a southern California and dump all the debt on to northern California. Then northern california would have to declare bankruptcy and default on its debt, meanwhile southern california would be free to continue on its reckless way.

There is zero difference between this and having one spouse take out personal loans, paying off all the debt, divorcing the other spouse and declaring bankruptcy.


Even though the republicans in califorina, like the republicans around the usa, dont want to take responsibility for what is 50% their fault, allowing a state to divorce it debt would make any financial institution impossible.

Supporting is flat out dangerous and would create a system in which debt is not paid off.

If the republicans dont like the debt, they had the last 50 years to change their minds, instead trying to bolt out the back door when the check comes.
 
Bob Maxey said:
When the people vote in large numbers and make their power known, the government does what it is told to do. The reason is simple: those that make the decisions and either vote for this or not vote for that, want to keep their jobs.

I seriously doubt helping the voter is something they truly care about; they want to keep their jobs so they make it look like they are helping. The last thing elected officials want is a highly educated voter that pays attention and votes in every election.

I also think they hate the net because it is easy for you to find out what they really do after being elected.

Despite what you might think, we the people STILL have ALL the power. The problem is we do not seem to vote or pay much attention.

Some people want no drilling but they also want cheap gas. Some politicians pray on our love of nature and pristine environments, tell us how much they are helping, prevent drilling, and the public is proud.
If there was a problem getting foreign oil and the cost of gas went to 10.00 a gallon, the people would scream and the politicians would change their minds.

When Obama Care arrives (?) and we the people are given the (estimated) $2500.00 bill at year's end, people will scream and changes will come because nobody in DC wants to be fired and most people that favor these kinds of plans do not know the facts and what will likely happen.

So vote with knowledge, watch your officials, do not believe the liberal media, learn a little world and US history, and you can make a difference. The government will do what we want.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this. I am fairly sure the post you responded to was tongue in cheek. Then again, perhaps yours is too. ;)
 
RiverOfIce said:
2.) Allowing any population to divorce its debt would create a finical backlash that would destroy the economic system we have today. And we would be unable to rebuild it.

You see divorcing their debt is the only reason why they want to do this. They want to create a southern California and dump all the debt on to northern California. Then northern california would have to declare bankruptcy and default on its debt, meanwhile southern california would be free to continue on its reckless way.
Click to expand...

This is an angle I hadn't thought/read about. Very interesting.

I am not sure the people, who seem to be really the ones behind this "movement" are really thinking this far ahead. Certainly I could be wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom