The six-figure club.

Well we know without any doubt California would be the first state to fail miserably. Rightfully so too.

 

You might want to look at real data before making such an assertion. California can easily replace all Federal services/spending it receives without increasing it's current tax burden. West Virginia, Mississippi, and Alabama? Not so much.

 

Gonna have to disagree there. West Virginia, Mississippi and Alabama have resources that mostly would be turned back into industry again that's valuable to our wayvof life. If turned into their own countries, more than likely most of the regulations that destroyed those jobs that harvested those resources would be back and those "countries" would have major bargaining power with the other countries that need or want those resources.

California doesn't really have alot to offer in the way of resources and a actual survival. It depends alot on the rest of the country to survive.

 

This is ridiculous.

California is one of the largest economies in the world. If it were it's own country, it would be the 5th largest in the world.

Those who want to break up the United States are helping our enemies succeed. Divide and conquer.

Anyone who dismisses it as "Commiefornia" are forgetting that there's a whole hell of a lot of space between the cities. There are hillbillies there going to dirt tracks to watch sprint cars run around the track just like there are in Ohio and Indiana. Should we cut off our noses to spite our face?

New York City is the financial hub of the world, yet many Americans these days would rejoice if it were destroyed. I wonder if our country would rally around New Yorkers if 9/11 would happen nowadays?

We need to be Americans. Not red or blue tribes wanting to break apart from each other. There's a reason these messages are amplified. Remember: divide and conquer.

 

Since my first day at work I wanted to make at least $1,000 per year of my age. I just didnt have the drive to work hard. Took me 55 years, but here it is.

 

I think you're confused. Someone was saying basically "hypothetically" if the states each became their own country, who would prosper and who would fail. Nobody said they wished California would succeed, however I'm sure there's a fair amount of folks that would support it.

Personally, I think California would fail the quickest due to its leadership. Also, they don't really have much to offer the rest of said countries. Produce, Goods shipped in through the ports from countries like China to be shipped and distributed to the other said countries would be bout their only bargaining chips. Anything else they have to offer would easily be offered elsewhere.

 

You make a great point to eliminating the stupidity which is the federal government and all of its regulatory agencies.

If the state of California is so self sufficient, why are you exporting so much money to the federal government? Imagine how much more California (and everyone else) could do if they quit sending their money to Washington.

 

My point has been that some of the states with a reputation for high taxes a) don't really have much higher taxes than low tax states and b) those states tend to be the ones who are subsidizing states with "low" taxes.

Take a state like Alaska - it has very low state and local taxes and is very dependent on Federal money. I'm fine with that as I get a lot of value from those Federal dollars. Just in terms of weather forecasting and fish I think it's a fair trade off. When you add in all the natural resources it's a no-brainer that we as a society should subsidize the infrastructure needed to make living up there possible.

Taxes aren't theft. They are the most efficient way to pay for the services and infrastructure that are necessary for society. We can talk about how well our elected officials are spending that money, and if everyone is paying their fair share, but regardless of political philosophy or ideology taxes are a necessary part of any society.

@MACK E-6 - I don't think there is that great of a gulf between most people's thinking. The division is based solely on political parties. Switch to unified primaries and the candidates we have to chose from change dramatically. Eliminate any political spending from anyone who is not a registered voter in that district would have an even greater impact.

 

While I appreciate your perspective, I do want to push back on it. Federal aid is an insane concept. It's like giving yourself a blood transfusion from your right arm to your left and you end up spilling half the blood on the floor.

Let individual states keep what they have and then decide how they want to use the funds based on how they think they need it. What works for California isn't the same as what works for Montana.

This whole one rubber stamp fixes all things universally is irrational. Yet here we are with dozens of federal regulatory agencies passing hundreds, if not thousands of laws each year.

So yeah, there are solutions that will work, but those will come from individual states, and not from a bunch of bureaucrats and politicians in their own bubble in Washington DC deciding what is good for the rest of us.