Calexit!

[ClearwaterVol]

I was the youngest child. Started kicking my older brothers' * at age 14. The funny thing about little brothers is they surprise you one day.

Other than that, you've become little more than a troll in this thread. Congrats on becoming what you apparently want to be.

Come on OC. That was not a troll. Just a joke. I even left a winky face.

I haven't been trolling in this thread, but a bunch of people have taken what I said and turned it the US couldn't survive without Cali. Not really what I was arguing. Losing Cali would severely hurt the US economy. People around here don't seem to grasp that for all of its faults California brings a lot to the table.

 

[Grand Vol]

Come on OC. That was not a troll. Just a joke. I even left a winky face.

I haven't been trolling in this thread, but a bunch of people have taken what I said and turned it the US couldn't survive without Cali. Not really what I was arguing. Losing Cali would severely hurt the US economy. People around here don't seem to grasp that for all of its faults California brings a lot to the table.

You still have yet to answer the questions I put forth. Hence, you know I'm right and avoid it because it destroys your delicate argument of how much California would suck if they were to go independent.

No, I'm not going to go back and track them down. I know you saw them.

Face facts, if they were to secede, they'd be a third world country within five years from the over-taxation, political policies and flight of conservative people (and likely a lot of liberal "rich" folks) from the new "country."

 

[Orange_Crush]

Come on OC. That was not a troll. Just a joke. I even left a winky face.

I haven't been trolling in this thread, but a bunch of people have taken what I said and turned it the US couldn't survive without Cali. Not really what I was arguing. Losing Cali would severely hurt the US economy. People around here don't seem to grasp that for all of its faults California brings a lot to the table.

My bad; I missed the winky face. I apologize for calling you a troll and missing the joke.

With that out of the way, I would be interested in your thoughts per Grand's response. The main reason I thought you trolling is that you've made a lot of outlandish claims and then failed to go back and deal with counterpoints that seem to deaf said outlandish claims. You seem to freeze where things supposedly are now and extrapolate that out forever. You ignore the support CA gets from the US fed dollars, the mass migration out of CA by both residents and business due to failing policy (even while they are under US care, much less the mass exodus once they're Northern Mexico Lite), the influx of businesses and industry into the Southern states you claim eternally helpless and hapless...

You just seem to throw feces on the wall in order to get responses but never get around to going back and wiping the feces off.

(The thing about feces is that you can almost always find partially digested nuggets in it. It's still feces.)

 

[ClearwaterVol]

You still have yet to answer the questions I put forth. Hence, you know I'm right and avoid it because it destroys your delicate argument of how much California would suck if they were to go independent.

No, I'm not going to go back and track them down. I know you saw them.

Face facts, if they were to secede, they'd be a third world country within five years from the over-taxation, political policies and flight of conservative people (and likely a lot of liberal "rich" folks) from the new "country."

I have stated before I think they could actually lower the tax burden on the citizens and come out better. Admittedly, their current leadership doesn't seem inclined to take that route, but Cali could do just fine under the right leadership. Regardless of what happens to Cali, the US does take a economic hit without them.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

My bad; I missed the winky face. I apologize for calling you a troll and missing the joke.

With that out of the way, I would be interested in your thoughts per Grand's response. The main reason I thought you trolling is that you've made a lot of outlandish claims and then failed to go back and deal with counterpoints that seem to deaf said outlandish claims. You seem to freeze where things supposedly are now and extrapolate that out forever. You ignore the support CA gets from the US fed dollars, the mass migration out of CA by both residents and business due to failing policy (even while they are under US care, much less the mass exodus once they're Northern Mexico Lite), the influx of businesses and industry into the Southern states you claim eternally helpless and hapless...

You just seem to throw feces on the wall in order to get responses but never get around to going back and wiping the feces off.

(The thing about feces is that you can almost always find partially digested nuggets in it. It's still feces.)

Cali pays more into the fed than it takes out. Therefore, by eliminating that burden they can still come out ahead.

 

[0nelilreb]

Come on OC. That was not a troll. Just a joke. I even left a winky face.

I haven't been trolling in this thread, but a bunch of people have taken what I said and turned it the US couldn't survive without Cali. Not really what I was arguing. Losing Cali would severely hurt the US economy. People around here don't seem to grasp that for all of its faults California brings a lot to the table.

No what your argument was is that the South would lose its welware program because apparently you believe Cali supports the south s social programs . They can’t even support their own so how do they support other states ? You were either trolling or just lacking facts .

 

[Orange_Crush]

I have stated before I think they could actually lower the tax burden on the citizens and come out better. Admittedly, their current leadership doesn't seem inclined to take that route, but Cali could do just fine under the right leadership. Regardless of what happens to Cali, the US does take a economic hit without them.

Cali is like the annoying neighbor kid that can't take getting their *** handed to them, so they cry and threaten to take their ball and go home.

(Speaking of such... LG still around?)

 

[Orange_Crush]

Cali pays more into the fed than it takes out. Therefore, by eliminating that burden they can still come out ahead.

I'd like to see your source for that. Seems we're constantly funneling money into FEMA for wild fires, relief and such.

 

[Orange_Crush]

No what your argument was is that the South would lose its welware program because apparently you believe Cali supports the south s social programs . They can’t even support their own so how do they support other states ? You were either trolling or just lacking facts .

Actually, the rectal part was extrapolating that the South is too helpless and hapless to live without Cali and would wallow in poverty without them forever. I ahve no problem with facts if Cali does in fact pay more than they take (which doesn't mean they alone support other states). I did, however, take opportunity to point out the attitude on display by one of our resident liberals toward the poor and those on welfare.

It sounds pretty despicable, and in line with the goal of generational slavery to welfare.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

o what your argument was is that the South would lose its welware program because apparently you believe Cali supports the south s social programs . They can’t even support their own so how do they support other states ? Y

Cali is run terribly, but do to the shear size of its economy, it takes in less federal money that it pays out.

Which States Are Givers and Which Are Takers?

 

[Grand Vol]

I have stated before I think they could actually lower the tax burden on the citizens and come out better. Admittedly, their current leadership doesn't seem inclined to take that route, but Cali could do just fine under the right leadership. Regardless of what happens to Cali, the US does take a economic hit without them.

Which brought my next question.

Since when have politicians, especially those in DNC controlled states, lowered taxes?

And what makes you think Cali would vote in "the right" leadership?

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Actually, the rectal part was extrapolating that the South is too helpless and hapless to live without Cali and would wallow in poverty without them forever. I ahve no problem with facts if Cali does in fact pay more than they take (which doesn't mean they alone support other states). I did, however, take opportunity to point out the attitude on display by one of our resident liberals toward the poor and those on welfare.

It sounds pretty despicable, and in line with the goal of generational slavery to welfare.

My comment was a little over the top, but it was meant to be directed at the states in general not as some indictment of the people. I used "welfare" in its broadest sense meaning it would include all federal money given to the state regardless of the earmarking of those funds.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Which brought my next question.

Since when have politicians, especially those in DNC controlled states, lowered taxes?

And what makes you think Cali would vote in "the right" leadership?

I have no idea when that might occur. I don't see a ton of hope for it, quite honestly. However, California under the right leadership could be quite a country. Under the wrong leadership it would suffer tremendously, but the US economy would miss California.

 

[0nelilreb]

Actually, the rectal part was extrapolating that the South is too helpless and hapless to live without Cali and would wallow in poverty without them forever. I ahve no problem with facts if Cali does in fact pay more than they take (which doesn't mean they alone support other states). I did, however, take opportunity to point out the attitude on display by one of our resident liberals toward the poor and those on welfare.

It sounds pretty despicable, and in line with the goal of generational slavery to welfare.

No one state supports another state’s programs , helps yes , supports to the point of collapse , not a chance . You can say Tennessee residents help support UC Berkeley and be right in a trickle down economic way but can’t say if Tennessee residents all stopped paying their Federal taxes Berkeley would fold . Was the point I was making .

 

[Grand Vol]

but the US economy would miss California.

Not quite as much as you think, I believe.

 

[0nelilreb]

The ones that want It to be it’s own country have not thought very far in advance . The day after the US pulled it’s bases and military from Cali is the day they become a part of Mexico , the drug cartels would flood the entire state along with their paid armies bearing Mexican flags . Then what?

 

[Grand Vol]

The ones that want It to be it’s own country have not thought very far in advance . The day after the US pulled it’s bases and military from Cali is the day they become a part of Mexico , the drug cartels would flood the entire state along with their paid armies bearing Mexican flags . Then what?

Here's the thing. The secession talk is not going anywhere, but is a continuing ember of the butthurt from certain portions of the California populace from the 2016 elections. They still can't grasp Trump won.

Now, the plan to split Cali into three or four states? That's probably more realistic, though still improbable.

CWV says the US needs Cali. The opposite is certainly true.

 

[BeecherVol]

Come on OC. That was not a troll. Just a joke. I even left a winky face.

I haven't been trolling in this thread, but a bunch of people have taken what I said and turned it the US couldn't survive without Cali. Not really what I was arguing. Losing Cali would severely hurt the US economy. People around here don't seem to grasp that for all of its faults California brings a lot to the table.

Haven't noticed that.

Did notice objection to you narrowing it to a specific region. And then wonder why you got the responses and reactions to the way you worded it.

 

[Orange_Crush]

As I expected, the claim that California supports other states by paying in more taxes than they get back is at best a gross exaggeration, and at worse an outright lie when one figures in other federal help that isn't factored into the base tax numbers.

The biggest claim is from a 2007 study that showed that Cal got back $.78 per dollar of tax paid to the federal. The problem is that that study used imaginary numbers and made unreal assumptions per federal budget. More recent studies without the assumptions and imaginary numbers showed that Cal basically breaks even ($.99 per dollar of tax), and that doesn't even count every benefit they get from the federal gov't.

To say that California supports the hapless idiots in Mississippi borders on a bald face lie.

The reason Cal does so well is the younger work force and the number of billionaires. One huge thing that happens is that Californians live and work in Cal then retire to other areas such as the south, where the cost of living ois much lower. They move to other states to draw their Social Security benefits that they paid in.

So, fewer people draw SS in Cal. Californians go elsewhere to draw those benefits. And California and CWV get to falsely paint the picture that Cal is bankrolling the infirm Southerners.

Does Washington shortchange California on taxes? No, not really

 

[BeecherVol]

My comment was a little over the top, but it was meant to be directed at the states in general not as some indictment of the people. I used "welfare" in its broadest sense meaning it would include all federal money given to the state regardless of the earmarking of those funds.

But why was that limited to the "south" in your original response?

Given the content I don't see a direct connection to their throwing a fit over election results, exiting, and it pointed at a specific region as the reason. Maybe I overlooked that.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

As I expected, the claim that California supports other states by paying in more taxes than they get back is at best a gross exaggeration, and at worse an outright lie when one figures in other federal help that isn't factored into the base tax numbers.

The biggest claim is from a 2007 study that showed that Cal got back $.78 per dollar of tax paid to the federal. The problem is that that study used imaginary numbers and made unreal assumptions per federal budget. More recent studies without the assumptions and imaginary numbers showed that Cal basically breaks even ($.99 per dollar of tax), and that doesn't even count every benefit they get from the federal gov't.

To say that California supports the hapless idiots in Mississippi borders on a bald face lie.

The reason Cal does so well is the younger work force and the number of billionaires. One huge thing that happens is that Californians live and work in Cal then retire to other areas such as the south, where the cost of living ois much lower. They move to other states to draw their Social Security benefits that they paid in.

So, fewer people draw SS in Cal. Californians go elsewhere to draw those benefits. And California and CWV get to falsely paint the picture that Cal is bankrolling the infirm Southerners.

Does Washington shortchange California on taxes? No, not really

So, Mississippi which takes in almost 3 times what it pays in is really just a bunch of transplanted retired Californians? I read the article and it brings up some valid points, but it still concedes that Cali pays in a ton because of a young workforce and a crap ton of millionaires. The U.S. is much better for having Cali in the union.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

But why was that limited to the "south" in your original response?

Given the content I don't see a direct connection to their throwing a fit over election results, exiting, and it pointed at a specific region as the reason. Maybe I overlooked that.

I used the south as an example because as a region it typically gets a good ROI on the federal tax dollar it sends in and because just everyone here is from the south so it is applicable.

 

[Orange_Crush]

So, Mississippi which takes in almost 3 times what it pays in is really just a bunch of transplanted retired Californians? I read the article and it brings up some valid points, but it still concedes that Cali pays in a ton because of a young workforce and a crap ton of millionaires. The U.S. is much better for having Cali in the union.

As I said, it's an exaggeration to the point of lies. Let's see what the metrics are when the Californians have to apply for visas to immigrate here and reap the benefit of our lower cost of living. And they all stick around in N. Mexico Lite to grow old, increase their socialized medical costs, and support their retirees at home.

Arm wave all you want. Getting back .99 of every federal tax dollar while exporting their old folks is a pretty good deal. It's not quite the picture you initially painted, now is it?

It doesn't seem much like paying for Mississippi's crap-fest. It sounds like they are breaking even while sending some of that overhead out of state.

 

[Orange_Crush]

I have stated before I think they could actually lower the tax burden on the citizens and come out better. Admittedly, their current leadership doesn't seem inclined to take that route, but Cali could do just fine under the right leadership. Regardless of what happens to Cali, the US does take a economic hit without them.

You still think they'll lower their tax burden when they become their own nation and stop exporting old people to the US? What will happen to their socialized medical costs? Their pension and retirement/social security parallel? We're not even talking about all the industry (and millionaires that go with it) migrating out of country to either the US or other nations. We're just talking about the normalized population aging of your citizens aging at home.

 

[BeecherVol]

I used the south as an example because as a region it typically gets a good ROI on the federal tax dollar it sends in and because just everyone here is from the south so it is applicable.

Its applicable if the "south" is pushing for this exit in the story.

Outside that it's a petty shot that you overplayed.