Now Is a Great Time for California to Secede \ stacker news ~econ

pull down to refresh

Now Is a Great Time for California to Secede mises.org/mises-wire/now-great-time-california-secede

320 sats \ 42 comments \ @Undisciplined 31 Jan econ

By Ryan McMaken

California secession would not change the US into a laissez-faire paradise, but the positive change would be immense.

Some of you know that secession is one of my favorite topics. I promise to get started on my series making the case for secession for different states and regions.

view all related items

34 sats \ 3 replies \ @realBitcoinDog 1 Feb

Lmao that’s what they said last time

10 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 1 Feb

We're just perpetually hoping you all will do the right thing.

70 sats \ 1 reply \ @realBitcoinDog 1 Feb

We’ll secede when @grayruby becomes the 51st state

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 1 Feb

All by himself?

163 sats \ 5 replies \ @Lux 31 Jan

Fun facts:

The STATE OF CALIFORNIA can't secede, it's a franchise.

California the republic doesn't need to secede, it's above the bullshit already.

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

I haven't seen "franchise" used in this context before. What does that mean?

59 sats \ 3 replies \ @Lux 31 Jan

it's a subcorp. of US inc

https://www.educatedinlaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Educated-in-Law-Handout.pdf

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

I think I see your point. The "State" of California would simply cease to be and the Republic of California would basically (re)assert it's independence from the United States.

131 sats \ 1 reply \ @Lux 31 Jan

I think it's enough that the people see the swindle. the words are written on paper, there are two constitutions in cali, one for the people with sovereignty, the other for enfranchised slaves. it just takes some learning and responsability on an individual level

433 sats \ 0 replies \ @Lux 31 Jan

reply on another page

23 sats \ 2 replies \ @Aardvark 31 Jan

Honestly, with how the Federal government is run, I don't think any state would be worse off in the long run.

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

That's the other thing. As big of a mess as California is, right now they have the added mess of everything the feds are doing too.

29 sats \ 0 replies \ @Aardvark 31 Jan

Yea, everyone can just walk away. 50 countries, who cares.

25 sats \ 1 reply \ @ruthless_stacker 31 Jan

Now?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

The best time is whenever they'll actually try to do it.

36 sats \ 5 replies \ @Satosora 31 Jan

They are so in debt, they couldnt function without the federal government. Secession is out of the question.

10 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

If they secede, they can start directly monetizing their debt, which states are not allowed to do.

48 sats \ 3 replies \ @Satosora 31 Jan

l get the part about if they leave, it would create a more unified government. But is that what we really want? If cali separates, why wouldnt each state do the same? Maybe they will become a dictatorship instead?

10 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

The most likely states to leave with CA are Oregon, Washington, and maybe Hawaii. Those are four of the most socialist states in the country. The result will be an America much more open to free markets and much less interested in government "solutions".

California would likely descend into a Canada or European situation, which is still better than most of the world. The point for them is that they can have the kind of society that they want: universal health care, gun prohibition, hate speech laws, etc. It's none of my business what Californians are willing to sacrifice to have those things.

44 sats \ 1 reply \ @Satosora 31 Jan

I think the split would be more than that. Once one state is able to do it, other states will try. Can you imagine the migration of Californians if this happens. I can see many leaving Cali.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

The dynamics would be that without CA (and the other progressive Pacific states) the internal politics of the country would be more palatable to most of the remaining states, so they'd have less incentive to leave.

The main outlier to that logic is New England. All the better if they leave, too. Good luck and good riddance.

reply on another page

26 sats \ 1 reply \ @denlillaapan 31 Jan

Always was

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

The best time to start was yesterday. The second best time is now.

22 sats \ 4 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic 31 Jan

Isn’t this the situation that many other countries are looking for? To Balkanize the US would be the ideal solution to a world dominating, one-world government that has the most totalitarian objectives ever seen by the eyes of mankind.

Science fiction author David Niven wrote books about the total state and its effects upon mankind and his imagination was vividly brutal for individuals ~~unless you were one of the ruling elite~~.

My imagination of what would happen to Californicated and the rest of the world, including the other remaining states, is not agreeable. I think that they would not like the results, either, however you can see what they have chosen for themselves, already.

15 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

I don't think so. The influence of California and the other pro-socialist states is to dilute American independence.

Let's say the worst states (Pacific and Northeast) left. The remaining US would have about a quarter of a billion people who are overwhelmingly opposed to global governance. That seems better than 350 million people who are roughly indifferent to it.

41 sats \ 2 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic 31 Jan

Yes, but they have all the ports of entry for their progressive/lefty/Marxist/socialist/communist/murderering buddies in foreign lands. Do you think that giving them the great west coast ports to enter by would be a good deal for everybody on the east side of the Sierras? I don’t think so. Again, this is another blood of patriots and tyrants watering the tree of liberty scenario.

20 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

That's a good point. Carving out the State of Jefferson from Northern Cali and Southern Oregon could fix that, though.

39 sats \ 0 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic 31 Jan

I think that carving out Jefferson is a great idea! It has been in the works for a long time now because those people despise what is going on in the big cities on the west coast. There is also the Greater Idaho movement that is looking to carve out a huge chunk of Oregon and Washington and becoming part of Idaho. These are good ideas, in my estimation, but hindered by the big cities that don’t want to loose their ~~farming slaves~~ citizens. It sure would make things more simple.

24 sats \ 13 replies \ @justin_shocknet 31 Jan

US is finally getting back into Monroe doctrine and claiming new territory, the state itself on the other hand is bankrupt and is in revolt with its leadership, while the US military just happens to have newly deployed on its border and seized its water infrastructure...

Yea, sounds like really good timing! /s

0 sats \ 12 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

seized its water infrastructure

What's this?

39 sats \ 11 replies \ @justin_shocknet 31 Jan

What the fake news is obfuscating is that the Army Corps of Engineers went in and turned on pumps under emergency order.

0 sats \ 10 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

I hadn't seen this, but those stories are all pushing back on the claim that the military seized the water.

Now, I don't trust any of those outlets, so I won't be surprised if they're lying. Where's the evidence for the military actually seizing the water, though?

52 sats \ 9 replies \ @justin_shocknet 31 Jan

Best summary I can find with the Army Corps reference and Trump tweet: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/28/trump-said-military-turned-on-the-water-in-california-not-quite-00200907

0 sats \ 8 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 31 Jan

Thanks

I know some people who do work related to California's water management system. It's a very complicated mess, and has been for a long time.

It looks like the particular system they're taking credit for "turning on" was already under federal control.

You're right that things like that are sticking points in potential secession talks, but I don't see why they'd be deal breakers. If Trump were willing to let CA go peacefully under any circumstances, I can't imagine giving back control over internal water management would be a huge problem.

You're initial point was the more relevant, I think. Trump is clearly looking to go the other direction and bring more territory into direct US control.

view all 8 replies