PDA

View Full Version : Secession and the State of Jefferson


oldrifle
12-19-2008, 8:15 PM
Here's a crazy idea... what if we got a bunch of CGers to move up near the CA/OR border and along with the locals who are already friendly to the idea, secede from CA and OR to form a new state? That way we can have gun freedom and still enjoy the climate and natural beauty of California.

More info on the state of Jefferson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Jefferson

http://www.jeffersonstate.com/

bulgron
12-19-2008, 8:18 PM
Somehow I doubt the powers that be in Congress would go along with it.

But busting California up into three or more chunks makes a great deal of sense to me.

oldrifle
12-19-2008, 8:25 PM
Somehow I doubt the powers that be in Congress would go along with it.

But busting California up into three or more chunks makes a great deal of sense to me.

Well, my thinking is that if there are enough smart people with guns (CGers) up there Congress won't have any choice but to let us do it.

Breaking up the state makes perfect sense to me with the diversity of values and philosophies we have here.

JDay
12-19-2008, 8:29 PM
Well, my thinking is that if there are enough smart people with guns (CGers) up there Congress won't have any choice but to let us do it.

Breaking up the state makes perfect sense to me with the diversity of values and philosophies we have here.

Do you really want to have all those tweekers in southern Oregon living in the new state?

oldrifle
12-19-2008, 8:31 PM
Do you really want to have all those tweekers in southern Oregon living in the new state?

Good point... though, it would probably be easier to just secede from one state rather than two, and to be fair it should be the bigger state. Perhaps the Northern border can be redrawn. :)

Wildhawk66
12-19-2008, 8:35 PM
JDay has a point. I've never seen so many seriously screwed up meth heads in broad daylight as I did the last time I stopped in Medford. :rolleyes: (though the lack of sales tax more than made up for it :43:)

oldrifle
12-19-2008, 8:40 PM
Another point... because of the budget crisis we're currently in and the growing state deficit which should exceed $11 billion by the end of the year, perhaps the federal government will recognize our grievances as valid. Congress may even sympathize.

Fjold
12-19-2008, 8:44 PM
Well, my thinking is that if there are enough smart people with guns (CGers) up there Congress won't have any choice but to let us do it.



Are you serious? Congress wouldn't have any choice?

:TFH::TFH::TFH:

383green
12-19-2008, 8:45 PM
Do you really want to have all those tweekers in southern Oregon living in the new state?

If we're going to secede with a bunch of tweekers, let's do it in Riverside. The weather's nicer down here, many of the roads are paved, and OC/LA will be glad to see us go. :D

dustoff31
12-19-2008, 8:46 PM
Another point... because of the budget crisis we're currently in and the growing state deficit which should exceed $11 billion by the end of the year, perhaps the federal government will recognize our grievances as valid. Congress may even sympathize.

Considering that the federal government is in pretty much the same situation, Congress is more likely to see it as a normal condition and ask what you are so upset about.

sorensen440
12-19-2008, 8:49 PM
Can we name it texas ? :p

JDay
12-19-2008, 8:49 PM
Considering that the federal government is in pretty much the same situation, Congress is more likely to see it as a normal condition and ask what you are so upset about.

What business of the federal government is it when it comes to state issues?

dustoff31
12-19-2008, 9:02 PM
What business of the federal government is it when it comes to state issues?

I was addressing Oldrifle's suggestion that Congress might feel some sympathy for the succession idea.

As to your question, while we might have other ideas, the feds made their feelings on states rights issues pretty clear quite some time ago.

Legally, the US constitution does not allow any new states to be formed from existing states. "Jefferson" would have to be a part of either Oregon or California and both states and congress would have to consent to it.

bulgron
12-19-2008, 9:36 PM
What business of the federal government is it when it comes to state issues?

The federal government has always had a lot to say about the formation of new states, which territories will become states, and they even put their stamp of approval on state constitutions.

dchang0
12-19-2008, 9:49 PM
It's a great idea, but secessions are difficult to pull off because the larger group will want to keep its access to the resources seeking to secede, including the human resources.

For instance, some of you may remember the Valley Secession effort that was rightfully started because City of LA is taking much of the Valley's tax dollars and using it to prop up the inner city with none of the taxes going back to the neighborhoods who paid them, in exactly the same way that England took the American Colonies' taxes to patch up its own deficits.

That effort died simply because the City of LA, the larger, parasitic group was literally fighting for its survival--without the Valley's tax dollars, the rest of LA would collapse economically, politically, and socially. (That's fine with me--any person or persons who are not self-sustaining have no right to ride on the backs of those who are.)

More recently, the country of Georgia tried to keep South Ossetia from seceding. Though it's not a matter of Georgia's survival to retain Ossetia, they still want access to the natural resources (if not the people--human resources) of S. Ossetia.

That's why guns are so important in the end, because somebody eventually wants something that rightfully belongs to someone else, and they'll take it either overtly criminally, or by legitimizing the theft and calling it "taxation."

EOD3
12-20-2008, 2:57 PM
I would have the truck loaded and down the road before the USGS had a chance to redraw the maps. However, the last time something like that was tried, the "military industrial complex" managed to dupe a madman into tossing the Constitution into the crapper and starting a war that killed more than 600,000 Americans. We'll discuss war crimes at a later date...

Let the blood-bath begin.

bwiese
12-20-2008, 3:03 PM
It won't happen.

North Norcal is relatively unproductive in terms of "gross regional product" and cannot support itself to current living standards. Half the population is on welfare/AFDC, etc. and another big fraction is on meth. (Herds of jumpy folks with extraordinarily bad teeth + acne.)

A few square blocks in Silicon Valley can generate more revenue and tax income than 1000 sq mi of North Norcal.

The first time I ever saw a store that handled "EBT" cards (welfare-via-ATM/debit card) it was in Yuba City.

I was staying in a new (well, renovated) Motel 6 in Oroville and the neighboring room's occupants kept exiting to the balcony to light up - I'd hear Zippos being flipped open every 15 min. from 1:30AM til morning. Fortunately, Sam Colt was my bedmate so I had no fear.

Vacaville
12-20-2008, 3:06 PM
I don't think they want to screw up the rounded number of 50 states. We'd mess up the flag, man.

Also, does it include Humbolt County? Might be some Pot Grower/CG'er clashes up there. If so, I'm prepared to fight in the Hippie Wars of the future.

Mssr. Eleganté
12-20-2008, 3:10 PM
The Feds would have a pretty big say in whatever went on in Jefferson. They would most likely be the largest employer in the State, followed closely by the lumber industry and then antique shops.

Bad Voodoo
12-20-2008, 3:12 PM
Here's a crazy idea... what if we got a bunch of CGers to move up near the CA/OR border and along with the locals who are already friendly to the idea, secede from CA and OR to form a new state? That way we can have gun freedom and still enjoy the climate and natural beauty of California.

What do we all do for money? Harvest mushrooms and pot?

Edit: I see a few of you guys already beat me to it. :)

Gator Monroe
12-20-2008, 3:16 PM
It was almost a done deal in 1941 and a war stopped it , We are in like 6 + wars right now War in Iraq,War in Afganistan, War on Poverty ,War on Terror,War against Christmas, War on Drugs...

JDay
12-20-2008, 3:16 PM
It won't happen.

North Norcal is relatively unproductive in terms of "gross regional product" and cannot support itself to current living standards. Half the population is on welfare/AFDC, etc. and another big fraction is on meth. (Herds of jumpy folks with extraordinarily bad teeth + acne.)

A few square blocks in Silicon Valley can generate more revenue and tax income than 1000 sq mi of North Norcal.

The first time I ever saw a store that handled "EBT" cards (welfare-via-ATM/debit card) it was in Yuba City.

I was staying in a new (well, renovated) Motel 6 in Oroville and the neighboring room's occupants kept exiting to the balcony to light up - I'd hear Zippos being flipped open every 15 min. from 1:30AM til morning. Fortunately, Sam Colt was my bedmate so I had no fear.

I didn't know Zippos were deadly weapons. :rolleyes:

EOD3
12-20-2008, 3:47 PM
It won't happen.

North Norcal is relatively unproductive in terms of "gross regional product" and cannot support itself to current living standards. Half the population is on welfare/AFDC, etc. and another big fraction is on meth. (Herds of jumpy folks with extraordinarily bad teeth + acne.).

A good many of the true bottom dwellers are grouped around the boys club in the NW corner of the state. If welfare as we know it was done away with and the MASSIVE number of illegals were shown the door it would help a lot. As for sources of revenue, the north state has great potential. All forms of agriculture are already in place and state controlled pot is an excellent export crop. The BIG export is "water", put a meter on the canal and sell it by the barrel just like oil.

oldrifle
12-20-2008, 3:58 PM
It won't happen.

North Norcal is relatively unproductive in terms of "gross regional product" and cannot support itself to current living standards. Half the population is on welfare/AFDC, etc. and another big fraction is on meth. (Herds of jumpy folks with extraordinarily bad teeth + acne.)

A few square blocks in Silicon Valley can generate more revenue and tax income than 1000 sq mi of North Norcal.

The first time I ever saw a store that handled "EBT" cards (welfare-via-ATM/debit card) it was in Yuba City.

I was staying in a new (well, renovated) Motel 6 in Oroville and the neighboring room's occupants kept exiting to the balcony to light up - I'd hear Zippos being flipped open every 15 min. from 1:30AM til morning. Fortunately, Sam Colt was my bedmate so I had no fear.

Well that's why we'd need to get a bunch of gun owners and other smart (ie conservative) people up there to populate the area. Who is to say how fiscally productive the new state could be once that happens.

Also, if we don't have all the bureaucratic nonsense and social programs to support up there like we do now in CA, we should only need enough tax money to provide paved roads, clean water, basic services, etc. Everything else would be provided by free enterprise. Businesses would be attracted to the area like flies on s**t because of the miniscule corporate tax rate, fewer regulations, etc.

oldrifle
12-20-2008, 4:01 PM
A good many of the true bottom dwellers are grouped around the boys club in the NW corner of the state. If welfare as we know it was done away with and the MASSIVE number of illegals were shown the door it would help a lot. As for sources of revenue, the north state has great potential. All forms of agriculture are already in place and state controlled pot is an excellent export crop. The BIG export is "water", put a meter on the canal and sell it by the barrel just like oil.

Speaking of oil, I'd be interested to know how much oil and natural gas is under the ground there. It's an area of great geological activity so I'm guess there has to be something. If we could wrestle the land away from the federal government and tap those resources, perhaps there's the answer to our revenue question right there.

383green
12-20-2008, 4:07 PM
However, the last time something like that was tried, the "military industrial complex" managed to dupe a madman into tossing the Constitution into the crapper and starting a war that killed more than 600,000 Americans.

That was the result of states trying to secede from the country. What's being discussed here is formation of a new state, still part of the USA, out of lands that are currently part of one or more US states. That's an entirely different situation (though I still don't see it happening).

M. Sage
12-20-2008, 4:08 PM
Here's a crazy idea... what if we got a bunch of CGers to move up near the CA/OR border and along with the locals who are already friendly to the idea, secede from CA and OR to form a new state? That way we can have gun freedom and still enjoy the climate and natural beauty of California.

More info on the state of Jefferson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Jefferson

http://www.jeffersonstate.com/

Read the Constitution sometime, eh? Forming a new state in this way is unconstitutional.

That was the result of states trying to secede from the country. What's being discussed here is formation of a new state, still part of the USA, out of lands that are currently part of one or more US states. That's an entirely different situation (though I still don't see it happening).

That specifically is the part that's unconstitutional.

ETA: I found it, I'm halfway wrong. Article IV, Section 3 -- "New States may be admitted by teh Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the States concerned as well as of the Congress." I guess it could be done in a way that's Constitutional, but good luck with that!

oldrifle
12-20-2008, 4:10 PM
What do we all do for money? Harvest mushrooms and pot?

Edit: I see a few of you guys already beat me to it. :)

Just because that's what's going on there now doesn't mean that's the future of the region. Hence the idea of getting new people to settle the area. I think people would come en masse in order to live in a free state. Check out what's happening in New Hampshire (http://www.freestateproject.org/). They're having success and it's New Hampshire. I mean who wants to live there?

I wouldn't put down the pot growers either because they could potentially be our greatest ally. Those guys don't want law enforcement sniffing around their plantations. If we promised them amnesty from state and local law enforcement, they'd probably fight right along with us... when they're not busy watching cartoons and eating Doritos. :)

oldrifle
12-20-2008, 4:12 PM
Read the Constitution sometime, eh? Forming a new state in this way is unconstitutional.

Yes, I'm quite familiar with the Constitution, thank you. Forming a new state is NOT unconstitutional as long as the state giving up the land for the new state agrees to it.

The State of Jefferson was almost a new state before WW2 broke out. Maybe actually read the information provided before getting an attitude.

M. Sage
12-20-2008, 4:16 PM
Yes, I'm quite familiar with the Constitution, thank you. Forming a new state is NOT unconstitutional as long as the state giving up the land for the new state agrees to it.

The State of Jefferson was almost a new state before WW2 broke out. Maybe actually read the information provided before getting an attitude.

As long as both states agree to it, and Congress agrees, too. Ain't gonna happen.

What, you think a Dem-controlled Congress is going to let a bunch of gun nuts have their own state!? That's three electoral votes, minimum; two senators and at least one congressional seat. Ain't gonna happen.

oldrifle
12-20-2008, 4:20 PM
As long as both states agree to it, and Congress agrees, too. Ain't gonna happen.

What, you think a Dem-controlled Congress is going to let a bunch of gun nuts have their own state!? That's three electoral votes, minimum; two senators and at least one congressional seat. Ain't gonna happen.

Again, this is short sighted thinking. Yes the Congress is Democrat controlled NOW, but give them a couple years and the people will be ready to put Republicans back in charge. The balance of power fluctuates. Hey, I'm not saying it's going to happen either. It's just an idea. It's an idea that actually had a pretty good chance of succeeding once... and back in '41 they had a whole lot less to gripe about than we do now.

bwiese
12-20-2008, 4:35 PM
Well that's why we'd need to get a bunch of gun owners and other smart (ie conservative) people up there to populate the area. Who is to say how fiscally productive the new state could be once that happens.


You simply ain't gonna get biz growth up there with that population + education base.

You think Microsoft or Genentech etc (or similar-but-smaller feeder companies) are gonna move up there? Why would these cos move up there when they can't get any employees up there, because those employees wouldn't wanna live up there?

You might get some small growth around Chico because Chico St. has some pretty good programs and a few folks who can read/write/think come out of there, but they're gonna move to where good employment is - so you'll just end up retaining those who need to be near, say, aging parents.

dustoff31
12-20-2008, 4:48 PM
Again, this is short sighted thinking. Yes the Congress is Democrat controlled NOW, but give them a couple years and the people will be ready to put Republicans back in charge. The balance of power fluctuates. Hey, I'm not saying it's going to happen either. It's just an idea. It's an idea that actually had a pretty good chance of succeeding once... and back in '41 they had a whole lot less to gripe about than we do now.

To be quite frank, I think getting permission from various officials would be far less a problem than getting enough useful people to populate the area.

Remember the Free State Project? They couldn't even get 1500 people to commit to moving, much less actually doing it.

Sunwolf
12-20-2008, 5:47 PM
As long as both states agree to it, and Congress agrees, too. Ain't gonna happen.

What, you think a Dem-controlled Congress is going to let a bunch of gun nuts have their own state!? That's three electoral votes, minimum; two senators and at least one congressional seat. Ain't gonna happen.
Yes we can!

oldrifle
12-20-2008, 6:15 PM
To be quite frank, I think getting permission from various officials would be far less a problem than getting enough useful people to populate the area.

Remember the Free State Project? They couldn't even get 1500 people to commit to moving, much less actually doing it.

Yeah I mentioned the FSP earlier. Getting people to move to Northern California would probably be easier than New Hampshire... just a guess.

oldrifle
12-20-2008, 6:31 PM
You simply ain't gonna get biz growth up there with that population + education base.

You think Microsoft or Genentech etc (or similar-but-smaller feeder companies) are gonna move up there? Why would these cos move up there when they can't get any employees up there, because those employees wouldn't wanna live up there?

You might get some small growth around Chico because Chico St. has some pretty good programs and a few folks who can read/write/think come out of there, but they're gonna move to where good employment is - so you'll just end up retaining those who need to be near, say, aging parents.

OK, OK. I said it was a crazy idea. Sheesh :)

Hanniballs
12-20-2008, 6:42 PM
The Free State Project would be easier than forming a new state.

http://www.freestateproject.org/

M. Sage
12-20-2008, 7:37 PM
Again, this is short sighted thinking. Yes the Congress is Democrat controlled NOW, but give them a couple years and the people will be ready to put Republicans back in charge. The balance of power fluctuates. Hey, I'm not saying it's going to happen either. It's just an idea. It's an idea that actually had a pretty good chance of succeeding once... and back in '41 they had a whole lot less to gripe about than we do now.

The Republicans aren't going to stand for it either. C'mon, most gun nuts are more libertarian-oriented than anything, especially the ones who would be willing to get up and move to create a new state. That and the Republican party is just as power-hungry about taking our freedoms as the Dems are.

DDT
12-20-2008, 7:54 PM
LOL... I had never heard of freestateproject.org before but I liked this youtube video. I guess some of the NH police are free staters...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Qgl7K2CJkA&feature=channel_page


After visiting the freestateproject.org website I think NH is a fine place to live. If only we could re-locate it to between Orange and Ventura counties.

Gator Monroe
12-20-2008, 10:32 PM
Chico ? BFD! the Redding/Shasta county area is the Hub of Far Northern California ...

JDay
12-21-2008, 5:45 PM
The Republicans aren't going to stand for it either. C'mon, most gun nuts are more libertarian-oriented than anything, especially the ones who would be willing to get up and move to create a new state. That and the Republican party is just as power-hungry about taking our freedoms as the Dems are.

Well the Republican Party was started by the only President to suspend habeas corpus.

383green
12-21-2008, 5:51 PM
This idea could only happen if the governments of both states, as well as the federal government, agreed to allow it to happen. I do not believe for a moment that any of the involved governments would even consider letting this happen no matter which party was in power, and any one of them can veto the whole idea. Even if the area in question was entirely populated by non-tax-paying tweekers and pot farmers, they would still be providing job security for law enforcement agencies and prisons, and neither state would want to let go of that.

DDT
12-21-2008, 6:56 PM
Even if the area in question was entirely populated by non-tax-paying tweekers and pot farmers,

Sounds like every college campus in California.

oldrifle
12-21-2008, 8:17 PM
This idea could only happen if the governments of both states, as well as the federal government, agreed to allow it to happen. I do not believe for a moment that any of the involved governments would even consider letting this happen no matter which party was in power, and any one of them can veto the whole idea. Even if the area in question was entirely populated by non-tax-paying tweekers and pot farmers, they would still be providing job security for law enforcement agencies and prisons, and neither state would want to let go of that.

Well I still think the state should be split up into at least 2 parts, maybe 3.

Gator Monroe
12-21-2008, 9:31 PM
Shasta County (89% white) (72% Republican)

Meplat
12-21-2008, 11:37 PM
Lovely idea but aint gonns happen.:TFH:


Here's a crazy idea... what if we got a bunch of CGers to move up near the CA/OR border and along with the locals who are already friendly to the idea, secede from CA and OR to form a new state? That way we can have gun freedom and still enjoy the climate and natural beauty of California.

More info on the state of Jefferson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Jefferson

http://www.jeffersonstate.com/

Meplat
12-21-2008, 11:44 PM
California came into the union as an independent republic, not a territory, and as such reserved the right to split if it ever wanted to. The problem would not be with the US congress. It would be with the state legislature that is dominated by the bay Area and the LA Basin who suck resources out of northern CA to survive.:mad:


Another point... because of the budget crisis we're currently in and the growing state deficit which should exceed $11 billion by the end of the year, perhaps the federal government will recognize our grievances as valid. Congress may even sympathize.

Meplat
12-21-2008, 11:47 PM
I was addressing Oldrifle's suggestion that Congress might feel some sympathy for the succession idea.

As to your question, while we might have other ideas, the feds made their feelings on states rights issues pretty clear quite some time ago.

Legally, the US constitution does not allow any new states to be formed from existing states. "Jefferson" would have to be a part of either Oregon or California and both states and congress would have to consent to it.


WRONG!:TFH:

Meplat
12-21-2008, 11:53 PM
It won't happen.

North Norcal is relatively unproductive in terms of "gross regional product" and cannot support itself to current living standards. Half the population is on welfare/AFDC, etc. and another big fraction is on meth. (Herds of jumpy folks with extraordinarily bad teeth + acne.)

A few square blocks in Silicon Valley can generate more revenue and tax income than 1000 sq mi of North Norcal.

The first time I ever saw a store that handled "EBT" cards (welfare-via-ATM/debit card) it was in Yuba City.

I was staying in a new (well, renovated) Motel 6 in Oroville and the neighboring room's occupants kept exiting to the balcony to light up - I'd hear Zippos being flipped open every 15 min. from 1:30AM til morning. Fortunately, Sam Colt was my bedmate so I had no fear.

You go ahead and believe that. Silicon Valley would starve without N. CA and the central valley.

Meplat
12-21-2008, 11:58 PM
Read the Constitution sometime, eh? Forming a new state in this way is unconstitutional.

Bull****!



!

:TFH:

Meplat
12-22-2008, 12:02 AM
My god what a bigot!!:TFH:

You simply ain't gonna get biz growth up there with that population + education base.

You think Microsoft or Genentech etc (or similar-but-smaller feeder companies) are gonna move up there? Why would these cos move up there when they can't get any employees up there, because those employees wouldn't wanna live up there?

You might get some small growth around Chico because Chico St. has some pretty good programs and a few folks who can read/write/think come out of there, but they're gonna move to where good employment is - so you'll just end up retaining those who need to be near, say, aging parents.

:p

Meplat
12-22-2008, 12:10 AM
The feds can't veto it and if it's all within CA only one state has to approve. But that one state never will. I wish the rest of CA was of the same opinion as Sage. Then it might actually have a chance of happening.:43:



This idea could only happen if the governments of both states, as well as the federal government, agreed to allow it to happen. I do not believe for a moment that any of the involved governments would even consider letting this happen no matter which party was in power, and any one of them can veto the whole idea. Even if the area in question was entirely populated by non-tax-paying tweekers and pot farmers, they would still be providing job security for law enforcement agencies and prisons, and neither state would want to let go of that.

nobs11
12-22-2008, 12:15 AM
You simply ain't gonna get biz growth up there with that population + education base.

You think Microsoft or Genentech etc (or similar-but-smaller feeder companies) are gonna move up there? Why would these cos move up there when they can't get any employees up there, because those employees wouldn't wanna live up there?

You might get some small growth around Chico because Chico St. has some pretty good programs and a few folks who can read/write/think come out of there, but they're gonna move to where good employment is - so you'll just end up retaining those who need to be near, say, aging parents.

Edumacashun? We don't need no edumacashun.

If you guys want to turn a part of the state into a rural backwards *** state, go for it. I'm not joining you. Good luck getting investors there. I like living near civilization, technology and money.

Putting on my flame suit :)

383green
12-22-2008, 12:17 AM
My god what a bigot!!

I don't think his comment was bigoted. Tech companies like he mentioned do tend to cluster around major universities with good programs in their fields. The universities and tech companies have a very synergistic relationship. These days, a BS or MS degree isn't good for much without related experience in the field that is provided by part-time jobs or internships. The universities (particularly the UC system) heavily rely on nearby companies to provide meaningful hands-on practical experience that is no longer offered in their academic programs, and the nearby companies similarly group near the universities so they can recruit their new graduates.

While a small and stable company might set up shop anywhere they feel like it, and a larger company will occasionally set up a remote office in some out of the way area if they have one or more key employees who want to live there, large companies like the ones that Bill mentioned absolutely require a steady influx of new college graduates both for growth and to deal with attrition. They need to be near major universities to recruit effectively, and they'll use internship programs both to help train their future employees and as extended on-the-job interviews to weed out the very common students who look good on paper but are useless in a real job.

Also, frequent job-hopping is very common in CA's high-tech industries. There's nothing unusual about changing jobs every 5 years or so. This is another reason why it's easier hire people when your company is close to other similar companies. Folks will be much less likely to want to relocate to work at your company if there aren't any other similar companies nearby to hop over to... possibly even after mere weeks or months if the new job doesn't feel right.

GrayWolf09
12-22-2008, 8:19 AM
As far as I am concerned you can have Alturas for free!!!!

oldrifle
12-22-2008, 8:44 AM
Edumacashun? We don't need no edumacashun.

If you guys want to turn a part of the state into a rural backwards *** state, go for it. I'm not joining you. Good luck getting investors there. I like living near civilization, technology and money.

Putting on my flame suit :)

Damn, I can't believe how short sighted some of you are being in this State of Jefferson conversation. :eek: I'm the OP on this thread and I happen to be a software developer and mechanical/electrical engineer. I like living near civilization, technology, money, etc. too. I wasn't talking about forming some kind of backwoods "Deliverance"-style, moonshine swilling hillbilly community... the idea is to get NEW people into the region, start new businesses and bring existing businesses into the area, provide basic services (electricity, water, sewage, trash, etc.) and form a real actual state with real people in it, however do it without useless gun regulations, high tax rates, etc. Doesn't that sound great? I think so.

battlehatch
12-22-2008, 9:18 AM
I'd go if I could be the Sheriff or at least a Deputy!

Vacaville
12-22-2008, 9:20 AM
Shasta County (89% white) (72% Republican)

The rest are fruit loops who worship pyramid power and the mountain.

Gator Monroe
12-22-2008, 11:37 AM
The rest are fruit loops who worship pyramid power and the mountain.

Thats the next county north (Where Mount Shasta is ):mad:

Knight
12-22-2008, 12:45 PM
You guys are seriously underestimating the marijuana factor. Growing is the #1 business up here, even though you'll never see it mentioned in an official economic report.

Let me give you an example. Target was considering building a store in Eureka, but after an economic census of the area they determined that the area was too poor to support one of their stores. However, someone over there got the bright idea to factor in "illegal" businesses, such as growing pot. They ended up building the store.

The Emerald Triangle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald_Triangle) is the largest supplier of marijuana in the United States. We're talking about an industry where you can rent out a house, start an indoor grow, and if successful make a six-figure salary your first year doing it. Some of the bigger operations make millions of dollars every month. In the town I live in, the city council actually issues licenses to marijuana dispensaries. In other words, pot's about as legal as you can get in the U.S.

My point is, any Potential State of Jefferson would most likely have more than enough money through the cultivation of marijuana, because the area already has more than enough money, just not taxed. Whether or not the rest of the U.S. would just let us legalize and tax marijuana, is another issue entirely, but it is one of the reasons why I think any potential State of Jefferson would meet a lot of resistance from the U.S. government.

Anyone wondering what many people up here think about when they think of the State of Jefferson, I'd recommend picking up a copy of Ecotopia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecotopia) by Ernest Callenbach.

Knight
12-22-2008, 1:02 PM
Removed

The Mexican Mafia is more like an outside organization that has come up here to take advantage of the favorable political - and literal - climate. They certainly don't make up even a majority of the growers. In fact, the feds hit them pretty hard this year, though they were not even close to being wiped out.

Gator Monroe
12-22-2008, 1:09 PM
Bigotry = Welcome to my Ignore List.

You would not think Bigotry if you had to worry about them (Armed Mexican Nationals) as we do Here in Ultra Rural Eastern Shasta County so stay a Dupe and cry Bigotry ...

AaronHorrocks
12-22-2008, 1:22 PM
I don't think they want to screw up the rounded number of 50 states. We'd mess up the flag, man.

I thought there were 57 states! :rolleyes:

Kestryll
12-22-2008, 1:31 PM
...so stay a Dupe and cry Bigotry ...

So how about I tell you it's bigoted, comes off as racist and is gone?

Stay above board or don't cry when you're gone.

Gator Monroe
12-22-2008, 1:41 PM
So how about I tell you it's bigoted, comes off as racist and is gone?

Stay above board or don't cry when you're gone.

So how bout I tell you about my last and only hike up Little Cow creek (less tha 5 mile hike from my house and the 3 armed (Shotgun & levergun ) Mexican looking guys (but they could have been from costa rica guys) watching me as I played through (Pressed on with my hike) pretending I did not see them ... (But watching the Helos carry away their goods after someone dropped a dime on them made me feel a little better but I was skeeerd at the time of the hike because I ONLY HAD A .25 MOUSE GUN ON ME :eek:

Gator Monroe
12-22-2008, 1:49 PM
And how summer before last WE (Boaters at Whiskeytown lake) were warned to stay close to any shoreline when we beached our boats because of the Armed Mexican Nationals Growing IN the Park AROUND THE LAKE ... It's bad here in my beautiful Shasta County and I'm voicing my desire to not let it get any worse ... and Latino folks move here and live and work real jobs as they do anywhere else but the Illegals and their Pot operations are affecting the safety and enjoyment of our outdoors here in Shasta County !

Kestryll
12-22-2008, 3:32 PM
How about you just quit making foolish blanket statements equating an ehtire race of people to drug dealing?

Wasn't that simple?

Meplat
12-22-2008, 5:15 PM
Alturas used to be my dream town. But then they got a stoplight.:(


As far as I am concerned you can have Alturas for free!!!!

adamsreeftank
12-22-2008, 6:46 PM
I'm trying to think of what happened the last time someone wanted to secede... Hmm. All I can come up with is the Civil War.


Do you really think Arnold would let the North go peacefully?


This thread reminds me of one along time ago about having everone move to a small northern town and vote a friendly sherrif into office.


We would have better luck buying a small island and declaring it a new country.

trashman
12-22-2008, 7:03 PM
A few square blocks in Silicon Valley can generate more revenue and tax income than 1000 sq mi of North Norcal.


It's not my drug of choice (single malts and big red wines are) but it does make me think a case can be made that decriminalizing marijuana (and subsequently taxing/regulating its production a la alcohol) would provide a whooooole lotta tax revenue in a very short time.

I posit that it also might create such a substantial stream of revenue for legal producers that they wouldn't jeopardize their status by continuing to manufacture or deal in other drugs (namely, meth).

Leave it to employers to decide whether or not it impacts on the job performance.

--Neill

trashman
12-22-2008, 7:10 PM
We would have better luck buying a small island and declaring it a new country.

I think that's about the scale of things, yes. Dramatic strokes may be desired but the reality is that progress comes through a lot of slogging (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=1312826&postcount=1)and out-working (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=63100&highlight=underground+regulation) our competition.

--Neill

383green
12-22-2008, 7:15 PM
I'm trying to think of what happened the last time someone wanted to secede... Hmm. All I can come up with is the Civil War.

That was a group of states trying to leave the union. What is being discussed here is the formation of a new state under laws which allow for this to be done. It's an entirely different situation. It's still not likely to happen, but it has nothing in common with the secession that led to the Civil War.

Telperion
12-22-2008, 7:29 PM
I'm trying to think of what happened the last time someone wanted to secede... Hmm. All I can come up with is the Civil War.


Do you really think Arnold would let the North go peacefully?

I'm wondering whether the Soviet Union and greater Eastern Block of the late '80s are a more appropriate analogy than the United States of the 1860s. Faced with unresolvable fiscal issues and divergent geographical interests, the only solution to maintain sovereignty was for Moscow to let the republics go their own way.

The annual game of chicken over the budget and the continuous catfights of regional special interests are really pushing this state in the same ungovernable direction.