'South California' proposed as 51st state

[Camper]

Well, That's one way to have a California that's actually solvent.

'South California' proposed as 51st state by Republican supervisor
July 11, 2011 | 2:40 pm

The 51st state should be named South California, says Jeff Stone, a Republican on the the Riverside County Board of Supervisors. But the proposed 13 southern California counties that would split off from the Golden State would not include Los Angeles.
Stone told the Times' Phil Willon that the ommission is intentional and is part of a plan that would make for a new conservative Californian state.
"Los Angeles is purposely excluded because they have the same liberal policies that Sacramento does. The last thing I want to do is create a state that's a carbon copy of what we have now,'' Stone said.
"Los Angeles just enacted a ban on plastic grocery bags. That put three or four manufacturers out of business,'' Stone, a pharmacist from Temecula, said.
Stone plans on formally proposing secession Tuesday during a meeting of the Board of Supervisors.
South California would encompass Fresno, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Mono, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego and Tulare counties, totaling approximately 13 million people.
The proposed 51st state would be the fifth largest by population, more populous than Illinois, Ohio and Pennsylvania. South California would take nearly a third of the population away from California, making the Golden State the second-largest state after Texas.
Eleven of the 13 proposed counties in South California traditionally vote Republican, a fact noticed by California Gov. Jerry Brown's office.
"If you want to live in a Republican state with very conservative right-wing laws, then there's a place called Arizona," Brown spokesman Gil Duran said.

'South California' proposed as 51st state by Republican supervisor - latimes.com

 

[greg334]

It would be a short lived solvency.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

"If you want to live in a Republican state with very conservative right-wing laws, then there's a place called Arizona," Brown spokesman Gil Duran said.

If you want to live in a commie state, where they're scaring away all the business, Californy is the place ya outta be.

LMAO Like this libtard has anything to say about counties seceding from Kaleefourkneeah. I bet he talks with a lisp too.

 

[Camper]

It would be a short lived solvency.

Well, even a short-lived solvency would be an improvement over the chronic state of insolvency.

Personally, I believe California has the potential to be a true economic powerhouse if the political will was there to make the painful but necessary moves with respect to the tax structure, spending and the vast web of stifling regulations that have driven out an untold number of businesses in just the past five years, alone.

 

[greg334]

T-Hawk, don't we live in the nearest thing to a commie state here in the great state of Denial?

Camper, it doesn't matter. the problem is that the solvency will be short lived with the same issues that they have right now as a whole state. I think much of the businesses that ran and the costs the state has is related to the southern part of the state, not the northern part.

Beside I think there is a territorial agreement issue with splitting the state up and how it entered the union. I think part of it has to do with the treaty with Mexico and recognizing the land owner's rights who were granted their land by the Spanish government before the war.

 

[Camper]

Camper, it doesn't matter. the problem is that the solvency will be short lived with the same issues that they have right now as a whole state. I think much of the businesses that ran and the costs the state has is related to the southern part of the state, not the northern part.

You're right about Southern California. However, the vast majority the problems are with respect to LA..Well, this proposal takes care of that by excluding LA from the proposed new state. Many of the best ran municipalities happen to be in Southern California. One example is Maywood which outsourced all government functions, including Police and Fire. A year or so later, the sky hasn't fallen.

Now, whether or not the proposal stands any realistic chance of coming to fruition is a whole other ball of wax. Nonetheless, it could be instrumental in getting the dialog over spending at the state level going in the right direction..Well, one can only hope, anyway.




Posted with my Droid EO Forum App

 

[moose]

. Many of the best ran municipalities happen to be in Southern California. One example is Maywood which outsourced all government functions, including Police and Fire. A year or so later, the sky hasn't fallen.

no, the sky are being provided by the bankrupted county.

http://www.expeditersonline.com/forum/loading-dock/42304-welcome-maywood-mexico.html

BTW, just go to Argentina and see what happens when Gov. is overoutsourching. (money talk,& money walk!).

 

[Camper]

no, the sky are being provided by the bankrupted county.

http://www.expeditersonline.com/forum/loading-dock/42304-welcome-maywood-mexico.html

BTW, just go to Argentina and see what happens when Gov. is overoutsourching. (money talk,& money walk!).

Interesting article. The only problem is it's over a year old and is therefore a reflection on Maywood prior to the outsourcing of its government services. In fact, one can argue that the city was not any safer when it had a Police force. I'm not arguing that it's any safer now, either. The bottom line is the underlying issue the article touches upon is in no way related to the outsourcing of government services (at least not in this particular instance).

Quite frankly, the only effective way to reduce crime by any measurable standard is by granting law abiding citizens the tools needed to take back their communities.


Posted with my Droid EO Forum App

 

[Tennesseahawk]

T-Hawk, don't we live in the nearest thing to a commie state here in the great state of Denial?

Camper, it doesn't matter. the problem is that the solvency will be short lived with the same issues that they have right now as a whole state. I think much of the businesses that ran and the costs the state has is related to the southern part of the state, not the northern part.

Beside I think there is a territorial agreement issue with splitting the state up and how it entered the union. I think part of it has to do with the treaty with Mexico and recognizing the land owner's rights who were granted their land by the Spanish government before the war.

You obviously don't know the extent of California's laws or taxes. They make Michigan look like North Dakota, fer Christ sake.

So what about some 100 yr old treaty with Mexico. I think they've been paid back 1000 fold, by letting us take their worthless peasants illegally.

 

[greg334]

I would agree it would be a good idea but after thinking about it for a while, removing the coast from the rest of SoCal would allow this to work but with the coastal cities and people, it would be the same.

 

[greg334]

You obviously don't know the extent of California's laws or taxes. They make Michigan look like North Dakota, fer Christ sake.

I know and I still feel we are in a socialist state with a leader who appears to be one thing and really is another - all the same with california and the former governor.

So what about some 100 yr old treaty with Mexico. I think they've been paid back 1000 fold, by letting us take their worthless peasants illegally.

The what is a treaty is still in effect until one of the countries disappears. IT IS a very sore point with a lot of Mexicans and if we screw with the treaty, they may make more of a deal out of it than it really is. ON top of that, like Texas and Michigan, California was admitted to the union by agreement, which I think means the entire state has to be left intact.

 

[Camper]

I would agree it would be a good idea but after thinking about it for a while, removing the coast from the rest of SoCal would allow this to work but with the coastal cities and people, it would be the same.

I can see SoCal doing just fine as its own state if managed properly, especially without an albatross like LA. They would have San Diego which to my mind is one of the better ran big cities, the military bases. Not to mention probable "Right to work" state status which would be a potential industrial draw.

Like I've said before though, I think the whole state in its current form has a lot of upside potential(more than almost any other state) if(a big if, I know) the political climate ever changes.



Posted with my Droid EO Forum App