Assuming (for the imaginary sake of argument) that Californios could actually come up with a necessary majority to vote for secession and that the U.S. could be persuaded to let it go, that would still leave California with the probability of its own civil war. (See Ireland, Yugoslavia, and similar historical incidents. Czechoslovakia and the USSR are not good precedents because the seceding regions tended to already be rather harmonious in their desires, (Georgia/South Ossetia, Chechnya, Armenia/Azerbaijan, etc. notwithstanding).)
However, if California ever pissed off the U.S., the U.S. would simply shut off the water being taken from the rest of the Southwest. (This is not a majority of the water California needs, but it would be a terrific hit on an already drought plagued state.)
I know America is the biggest dog on the planet but do you really think shutting down another country’s water supply simply out of malice would be without consequences?
It’s a Trump world, now, and the Calexit movement is inspired by his election. If they get silly enough to pursue this, they should count on that response.
I do not think that the issue will even arise because I seriously doubt that there are the necessary more than half a million registered Californian voters that will be willing to sign the petition before the late June deadline to get it on the ballot.
All the anger and personal feuding on this thread over a situation that will never occur has been both amusing and saddening.
:smack: Vietnam relies heavily on the Mekong River. Are they stealing China’s water? Is Hungary going to dam the Danube when they want to teach Serbia a lesson??
Most of California’s water that “comes from” Leftoverland is diverted near the Mexican border. Is it your assumption that Trumpia (what is the preferred name for the rump-U.S. ?) will abrogate the 1922 Colorado River Compact? How are you going to honor the 1944 Treaty with Mexico if you halt the Colordao River flow? What is your actual plan to deny California access to the Colorado River? Expand Lake Mead? Arizona also gets much of its water from its border with California. Is it your plan to poison the Colorado after Lake Havasu (and aquaducts further downriver feeding Phoenix), but before the All-American Canal?
And, with the feeble Colorado getting even feebler, is it the plan for the Great Wall of Trumpia to be extended along the California-Arizona border?
Is it your “plan” to become a military protectorate of Trumpia? What do you do when octopus follows up with his threat to quench the Colorado River?
Economy of scale has diminishing returns. Tiny Luxemburg manages to have one of the very richest economies in the world; don’t expect California to suffer from being too small! (Indeed, if you believe the political “thought” dominant in Leftoverland, a smaller country should be more efficient. )
But at least you noted my sarcasm. Morgenstern seemed to really believe that I was comparing California to other miniscule countries like Germany and Brazil. :eek:
For Brexit, it is estimated that two long years of complex negotiations will be needed to disentangle UK from EU, and that UK will be presented with a bill for many tens of billions of dollars. And EU-EC is a much looser union than the union connecting California to Leftoverland. UK already has its own central bank, its own military, its own diplomatic corps, pension system, etc.
Disentangling California from Leftoverland would be hugely complicated, even if done amicably. With the Trumpsters in full control of Leftoverland — indeed that’s the main reason for the secession movement’s surge in popularity, no? — one can hardly expect dissolution to be amicable. What is the plan if some super-majority of Californians vote for secession and Trump says No? I guess they’ll just say “oh! … well nevermind then” since the threat of force is off the table:
[QUOTE=Morgenstern]
Why would CA want to seize military assets? You seem really confused about this.
[/QUOTE]
To me the whole topic seems very … well, Alternate. :rolleyes:
Speaking of #Brexit, I notice that 3/4 of UK’s young people want Remain. I really do not understand why the Queen and Her Government don’t stage a “Second Referendum in case you Voters have Come to your Senses” or such. (At least with November 8’s #SanityExit, we have the excuse that the only obvious way out is a Second Amendment Solution.)
CA has banks (state chartered). It has a pension system (17% of the budget IIRC). Diplomat corps, wow, look how easy that was for Trump. Apparently any idiot is qualified for that one.
Force was - ready for this - NEVER on the table. Not once has anyone suggested that violence/riot/guns/force was appropriate. I’ve only said that, what, 25 times? Somehow you;ve missed that point. We’ve gone through the other points you make too many times to revisit it. Let me point out one big thing 99% of the people posting here are missing.
Time. It’s on CA’s side.
It’s a stepped process. Each step moves CA one step closer.
1st step, change the CA constitution. 2018
2nd step, a year later, vote for independence. 2019
Now, assuming those 2 are successful, then there is NO TIME LIMIT for the rest of the process.
3rd step. Begin working on the separation process. 2019, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 etc.
If 1 and 2 pass, the process continues. It continues, restarts if necessary, from the 2019 point, because the framework is set. Hopefully it takes less than 4 years, or god forbid 8 years, because We’d really like to get out before Trump totally fucks up what we’ve got left, like he’ll do with the rest of the US.
Many of us feel Trump is the worst thing to happen to California since the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. We need to keep the Orange plague out of CA as much as we can, and firing him seems to be an appropriate way.
The US will not have to do anything the abrogate the the 1922 Colorado River Compact, because it’s an interstate compact. Once Calexitfornia becomes an independent country, it’s no longer a US state and so no longer part of any interstate agreements. This is pretty basic to the concept of seceding and become an independent country, but Calexit supporters don’t seem to understand that being another country means you’re no longer a state and no longer get the benefits of being a state.
US states like Arizona have contested the terms of the 1922 Colorado River compact in court, and some states like Nevada would really like to get more water from the river today. Once Calexitifornia is no longer a part of the compact those states would push strongly for Cal-less US to allocate more water to them, and there wouldn’t be any real internal opposition to it.
You’ve also been vague on what Calexitfornia will do about the 45% of it’s land that the US government owns, which includes several military bases. You have implied that Calexitfornia will seize the land, since you’ve talked about charging the US rent on it. I’m sure you will just dance around the issue and make spurious claims about me like you have been for more than twenty pages, but the fact is your position is a lot less clear than you would like people to think.
You are wrong again. The short story. Arizona was late to that agreement. They agreed that they would take what’s left over. Then mexico complained that there was no water left in the Colorado when it reached them. Appears that the US overreached it’s authority and poor Arizona had to give up water when water was in short supply. See, it’s has international reach.
Further, with respect to the water issue, per Cal Nat Party.
90% of the water California uses comes from within California
Our water infrastructure leaks millions of gallons a year but we don’t have funds to fix it because so much of our money goes to subsidies and waste by the US government.
The American government doesn’t believe climate change is real, but that’s not stopping climate change from drying up the Colorado river. Growing populations up-river also mean less and less water is available to us. So staying with the status quo will dry up LA and San Diego.
Recent studies in Southern California show the region could be self sufficient if we invested in water recycling, rainwater capture, and other simple solutions. The same goes for most California cities.
Our farms also have massive potential to save water by upgrading to modern more efficient irrigation systems. We want to help them do so. This is a win for farmers who will save huge amounts of money on water and a win for our whole nation.
Plus, desalinization is improving and remains a viable option.
Water is a non issue to an independent CA. We’ll do fine. Remember, your military bases located herein get their water from us. What will they do, ship it in?
The whole ‘net contributor’ thing doesn’t mean nearly as much as Calexit supporters want to make it mean. A very large portion of the balance sheet for ‘net contributor’ is Social Security benefits, so a lot of what ‘net contributor’ really means is that a good chunk of people work in California but retire in states with a lower cost of living. Splitting out from Social Security would be very complicated to negotiate, and it’s pretty unlikely that California would come out ahead of the deal since the US would have the upper hand in negotiations.
Also, a lot of other Federal programs are things that California derives great benefit from while being in the US. The more sparsely populated states around CA get a disproportionate amount of highway (and railway IIRC) funds, but a lot of CA’s economy involves transporting goods on those highways to the rest of the US for profit. If Calexit were to happen, Calexitfornia would likely have to continue to pay for those highways, though the money would be collected in the forms of tolls or tariffs on vehicles or goods crossing the border.
)