Oh California!
Oh California!
47 comments
-
-
-
The sad but mostly hilarious part is that the remaining red states would make an obscenely poor country with nearly zero economic prospects. The blue states have been subsidizing their existence for decades.
-
-
If they weren't cowards they would sign an asylum bill to let USians immigrate without delays
-
Wait, so now that Americans need somewhere to go, unlimited and unregulated immigration is the answer?
Hopefully you've not made any jokes about immigrants. Like... ever.
I mean that's completely possible, I just hope you haven't.
-
-
We accept. Please send troops.
-
Just make DC, Puerto Rico, and hell, Guam a state and you can still keep the flag the same. Or split up Texas into three gerrymandered states to guarantee a forever republican government.
-
We can't make Hell a state because we already have Texas.
-
-
New York too, please!
-
Please do. Would love to be able to visit NY again.
-
Vermont would also like to sign up.
-
-
Rather neglectful of the east coast and midwest
-
Make your own country and we'll be friends, but dont join in.
-
California is probably the only state that could do absolutely just fine as a country. It has a top-tier economy on it's own, the necessary population, the internal food surplus, and the access to ocean ports, needed to run independently
-
The biggest issue is water, and it would be difficult for them if they lose access to the Colorado River. Currently, only 10% of the river's flow reaches Mexico, so it's not unreasonable to believe that California would be in trouble if they don't secure control of the upper basin. In any case, it would make for a complicated legal battle between an independent California, the United States, and Mexico.
-
-
-
Alaska too
-
I'm not in favour of this, as a Canadian. The power imbalance is too great. It would make Canada a Californian state, rather than California a Canadian province. They would never accept rule from Ottawa.
-
What policy differences would you expect? Canada has a better "states rights"/provincial system than US in that equalization payments let the Provinces spend as they want.
-
You bring up an interesting issue with equalization payments. California would be a "Have" province and hefty transfer payments would probably be expected.
But mostly, I'm just concerned that California would immediately become the dominant political entity in Confederation. Right now, the centre of the world is basically Toronto. Suddenly, the financial, technological, and industrial centre of Canada would all be in California. I can't see that going super well. People and businesses would migrate en masse. It could lead to an impoverishment of other Canadian provinces as the capital all moves to California.
Population, GDP, culture.. Canada would be eaten alive by California. They wouldn't change. We would.
-
-
-
Washingtonian here...
PLSPLSPLSPLS
-
Canada should take Alaska. Makes sense.
-
Don't forget Michigan!!
47 comments
Part of me would rather have Washington, Oregon, and California become the new Republic of Cascadia.
The other part of me would be happy to become a Canadian.
Either way works for me. Somebody just roll out the bill and I'll sign.
Why not bring in Nevada too? Having Las Vegas without crossing international borders would be nice.
Water supply could become a problem for Vegas if they wouldn't join
I'm not from the USA so don't know much about your history but the last time a few states were trying (really trying, not just signing bills) to make their own country in 1860s it ended badly. Modern Americans are still mocking those who lost that war.
Its almost like the reason to secede would be completely different in 2025 than in the 1860s. Are you suggesting that the 2025 secession would end badly? And for which side is it going to end badly for?
In the original Civil War, the Confederacy had the land advantage and a surplus of people willing to fight.
The North had just as many people willing to fight, but also money.
And because they had money, they had better weaponry, better cavalry, and healthier, happier soldiers.
Further, there were many people in the South who did not agree with the Civil War and who supported the North's conquest of the South.
The South was in a very bad situation financially and organizationally to fight a civil war, whereas Cascadia, being Washington, California, and Oregon would have quite a bit in its favor, Especially if we did something outlandish like ask the Chinese for help in exchange for a trade agreement.
Having a new country pop up between America and the far west would be disastrous for America's financial stability.
I am not saying that we should start a civil war or that we should actually secede from the union. I am just saying that this would not resemble the civil war at all, and barring an early blitzkrieg or a nuclear assault, they could win.
*western Washington, Oregon, and California
I mean, yes, or we could annex the tip of Idaho and exile everybody that voted for Trump Or that does not swear allegiance to the new Republic of Cascadia.
Nah, some motherfuckers would try to make the state of Jefferson to fuck up demographics.
Let 'em make Jefferson. I worked in the parts of the Sierra where the idea was popular (even though this county wasn't even included in the proposal lmao), and it would make the poorest state in the union. It'd be even poorer than W. Virginia and Mississippi. Let's see if maybe they like San Francisco and Sacramento a bit more once they realize who was paying for CalFire.