3 ms·

NorCal would get the worse deal, as it would be stuck with the huge and mostly economically useless part of the state between Oregon and Napa/Sonoma. In additio

by rdouble 16y ago

NorCal would get the worse deal, as it would be stuck with the huge and mostly economically useless part of the state between Oregon and Napa/Sonoma. In addition to the entertainment industry, SoCal would get all the farms and oil fields. A better option for California would be to secede from the rest of the United States. California could cut taxes and afford to pay its public service workers their inflated salaries (and then some), if it wasn't bailing out the rest of the country to the tune of $50B each year.

gxs 16y ago
Whenever I see comments to this effect, I always wonder if people are familiar with their history. Note, I'm not accusing you of this, just saying it makes me wonder. Silicon Valley, Stanford, UC Berkeley, Fairchild Semiconductor..HP..all these things were funded with federal defense money way back in the day. Just saying Ca may be "bailing out" the rest of the country, but the rest of the country invested a great deal in Ca as well. Don't get me wrong - I love this place and see where you're coming from.
- natrius 16y ago
  My assumption is that California has been a donor state for much of its history, so much of that defense money "invested" in California was probably Californian tax money to begin with.
tesseract 16y ago
> A better option for California would be to secede from the rest of the United States. California could cut taxes and afford to pay its public service workers their inflated salaries (and then some), if it wasn't bailing out the rest of the country to the tune of $50B each year. Some states that paid more in federal taxes than they saw returned to them in federal spending have tried this before. It didn't exactly work out. (Of course circumstances are different now, in that it's the urbanized states on the losing side of the deal, plus there isn't a massive human-rights issue alongside the economic disparity.)
flomo 16y ago
Northern California has the water.

by rdouble 16y ago

gxs 16y ago

Whenever I see comments to this effect, I always wonder if people are familiar with their history. Note, I'm not accusing you of this, just saying it makes me wonder. Silicon Valley, Stanford, UC Berkeley, Fairchild Semiconductor..HP..all these things were funded with federal defense money way back in the day. Just saying Ca may be "bailing out" the rest of the country, but the rest of the country invested a great deal in Ca as well. Don't get me wrong - I love this place and see where you're coming from.

natrius 16y ago
My assumption is that California has been a donor state for much of its history, so much of that defense money "invested" in California was probably Californian tax money to begin with.

tesseract 16y ago

> A better option for California would be to secede from the rest of the United States. California could cut taxes and afford to pay its public service workers their inflated salaries (and then some), if it wasn't bailing out the rest of the country to the tune of $50B each year. Some states that paid more in federal taxes than they saw returned to them in federal spending have tried this before. It didn't exactly work out. (Of course circumstances are different now, in that it's the urbanized states on the losing side of the deal, plus there isn't a massive human-rights issue alongside the economic disparity.)

flomo 16y ago

Northern California has the water.