Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

California to be sold to China

California is bankrupt, they either have to legalize drugs to tax them for revenue or sell the entire state to China or a rich Arab country.

My bet would be the sale goes to China in exchange for debt reduction.

Wouldnt that be sweet? Reduce the nations debt by trading off its assets like a whole state?

To maintain the 50 state status, also to save money from the SUPER expensive task of re-flagging every school and public place that has a US flag, they should and probably will just make Puerto Rico a state.... finally get some tax money from them too, it would be worth it with Puerto Rico's income having all those big drug companies located there.

Anyway, California would most likely be harvested for raw materials or possibly cheap labor,  really as an R.O.C. property all the labor laws and environmental laws in the US would be null and void.

I see the future: "R.O.C. Property" labels tagging many US places things and maybe people if we don't get our huge budget deficit taken care of.

At the very least the US could outsource most of the government to India. It would save a bundle and probably get the job done just as well..... however you justify "well" that is....I suppose at least it would save alot of cash to pay for all the public services offered in this great nation.

 

«1

Comments

  • Scubie67Scubie67 Member UncommonPosts: 462

    Right now for the most part they allready own all of the US

  • keltic1701keltic1701 Member Posts: 1,162

    Maybe we can throw in Texas to sweeten the deal for them!

  • CleffyCleffy Member RarePosts: 6,414

    The entirety of the US is worth more then $75 trillion.  $10~14 trillion is traded within a year in the US.  So they don't own the US, but they would probably get a cut if the US Government ever went bankrupt.  My guess is China wants Alaska.  They would immediately start harvesting the Oil and Natural Gas without the environmental and cost concerns that plague the US businesses who do the same.  They would also probably kill the Polar Bears that encroach on them and use ANWAR, 2 things that you currently can't do in Alaska simply because its apart of the US.

  • declaredemerdeclaredemer Member Posts: 2,698

    Why buy California, a state, when you own the entire country?  

  • EkibiogamiEkibiogami Member UncommonPosts: 2,154
    Originally posted by keltic1701


    Maybe we can throw in Texas to sweeten the deal for them!



     

    Lmao Why get rid of a state thats Profitable? Lets dump yours. Its not that worth while.

    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
    —Samuel Adams

  • AstropuyoAstropuyo Member RarePosts: 2,178

    That would epic.

     

    Of course the problem of CA being ... "SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU LET THE "PRETTY/RICH" PEOPLE RUN THINGS?!"

    I swear to all that isn't or is holy that we CA folks are truely the dumbest schticks around.

    I also find it funny for a state with so many resources/talents we still went bankrupt. 

    Alot of it is to blame on the sheer fact that CA in general has one of the biggest footholds for a state.

    It's like what 65% of the west coast. That's too much territory for the type of people we vote in.

     

    Fun fact: Alot of people I know/knew/wish had died pre-birth: Voted for Mr.Conan just for fun.

    No fking joke. 

     

    I on the other hand did what the military calls "fallback". I got the fk out of there.

  • keltic1701keltic1701 Member Posts: 1,162
    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by keltic1701


    Maybe we can throw in Texas to sweeten the deal for them!



     

    Lmao Why get rid of a state thats Profitable? Lets dump yours. Its not that worth while.

    If your state is so profitable then go buy a sense of humor. It was meant as a joke.

  • SarcazmoSarcazmo Member Posts: 105
    Originally posted by SmurfMagic


    California is bankrupt, they either have to legalize drugs to tax them for revenue or sell the entire state to China or a rich Arab country.
    My bet would be the sale goes to China in exchange for debt reduction.
    Wouldnt that be sweet? Reduce the nations debt by trading off its assets like a whole state?
    To maintain the 50 state status, also to save money from the SUPER expensive task of re-flagging every school and public place that has a US flag, they should and probably will just make Puerto Rico a state.... finally get some tax money from them too, it would be worth it with Puerto Rico's income having all those big drug companies located there.
    Anyway, California would most likely be harvested for raw materials or possibly cheap labor,  really as an R.O.C. property all the labor laws and environmental laws in the US would be null and void.
    I see the future: "R.O.C. Property" labels tagging many US places things and maybe people if we don't get our huge budget deficit taken care of.
    At the very least the US could outsource most of the government to India. It would save a bundle and probably get the job done just as well..... however you justify "well" that is....I suppose at least it would save alot of cash to pay for all the public services offered in this great nation.
     

     

    You are clearly a highly intelligent, highly educated individual with a firm grasp on politics, economics, and finance. 

  • AstropuyoAstropuyo Member RarePosts: 2,178
    Originally posted by keltic1701

    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by keltic1701


    Maybe we can throw in Texas to sweeten the deal for them!



     

    Lmao Why get rid of a state thats Profitable? Lets dump yours. Its not that worth while.

    If your state is so profitable then go buy a sense of humor. It was meant as a joke.

    I just hope he's recovering from laughing his ass off.

    That's gotta hurt.

  • SarcazmoSarcazmo Member Posts: 105
    Originally posted by keltic1701


    Maybe we can throw in Texas to sweeten the deal for them!

     

    What would we do for gasoline?  

  • EkibiogamiEkibiogami Member UncommonPosts: 2,154
    Originally posted by keltic1701

    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by keltic1701


    Maybe we can throw in Texas to sweeten the deal for them!



     

    Lmao Why get rid of a state thats Profitable? Lets dump yours. Its not that worth while.

    If your state is so profitable then go buy a sense of humor. It was meant as a joke.



     

    So was mine

    Pull your head outa your rear, and accept that a tacky Joke, will be meet with a tacky joke...

    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
    —Samuel Adams

  • AstropuyoAstropuyo Member RarePosts: 2,178
    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by keltic1701

    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by keltic1701


    Maybe we can throw in Texas to sweeten the deal for them!



     

    Lmao Why get rid of a state thats Profitable? Lets dump yours. Its not that worth while.

    If your state is so profitable then go buy a sense of humor. It was meant as a joke.



     

    So was mine

    Pull your head outa your rear, and accept that a tacky Joke, will be meet with a tacky joke...

    OH YEAH?!

     

    Well -- Well my states penis is bigger than your states!

    That makes my penis bigger than yours as well!

  • ArbadacarbaArbadacarba Member Posts: 304

       California has the highest gross state product at $1.812 trillion which is 13% of United States gross domestic product and larger than all but 8 countries in the world.  Texas has the second highest GSP at $1.09 trillion but they don't have a huge, $26.3 billion deficit.

       There is obviously a problem with state spending, however I would also like to content that California will not see it's full potential until it starts regulating and taxing it's most profitable, agricultural industry.  Imagine if Texas's most valuable agricultural product, livestock production, was unregulated and untaxed.  As I've stated before: Marijuana is California's number one cash crop. In California, marijuana is a $14 billion dollar industry, and vegetables are $5.7 billion and grapes are $2.6 billion. It is utterly preposterous that California's largest agricultural industry is completely unregulated and untaxed! Who do you think benefits the most from this situation? Certainly not the folks in charge of California's budget crisis.

      

       You are not going to stop California from cultivating marijuana.  This was proven in 1990 when the government, for the first time, had used military force against its own citizens in a drug operation called Operation Green Sweep. 

       A contingent of 200 military troops conducted a massive marijuana eradication program in California's northern Humboldt County where military helicopters flew overhead surveying residents, homes, and fields, and conducted road blocks, interrogations, and detentions. Violent demonstrations by Humboldt County locals against Green Sweep broke out. The first day of the raid resulted in the seizure of 200 marijuana plants and 700 pounds of farming equipment. In addition, three arrests for trespassing were made by BLM at the base camp (a diversion for others to photograph the camp). Two eradication teams were deployed the very next day and seized a further 523 plants.

       Eradication continued on August 1, resulting in 683 plants and 2.6 tons of growing paraphernalia confiscated from the local farmers. Local citizens began attempts to disrupt military communications in order to slow the progress of the raid, the military responded by introducing code words into Task Force radio nets. The operation continued several more days in August. The public continued to protest (sometimes violently) the actions of the military and federal officials. On August 3, local residents threatened a military laundry unit with a pistol and another group fired shots at a UH-60 helicopter.

       Though the operation was scheduled to continue until August 10th all operations ceased on August 5, most likely due to the escalating demonstrations. The results from the property seized during Operation Green Sweep were: 1400 marijuana plants (worth approximately $2000 each) and 12 tons of growing equipment. The local marijuana industry was ultimately set back three years, with significant effects on the local economy.

  • keltic1701keltic1701 Member Posts: 1,162
    Originally posted by Sarcazmo

    Originally posted by keltic1701


    Maybe we can throw in Texas to sweeten the deal for them!

     

    What would we do for gasoline?  

     

    Innovate cleaner was of producing energy. Then we really wouldn't need Texas. Ok....we can keep Austin but that's it.

  • keltic1701keltic1701 Member Posts: 1,162
    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by keltic1701

    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by keltic1701


    Maybe we can throw in Texas to sweeten the deal for them!



     

    Lmao Why get rid of a state thats Profitable? Lets dump yours. Its not that worth while.

    If your state is so profitable then go buy a sense of humor. It was meant as a joke.



     

    So was mine

    Pull your head outa your rear, and accept that a tacky Joke, will be meet with a tacky joke...

    Sorry, I'm not a flexible as you are. I also think that since the nation's capitol and the Naval Academy are in or near my state and will be her long after Texas produces it's last barrel of oil, I think the likelihood  Maryland getting sold before Texas are slim to none.

  • AstropuyoAstropuyo Member RarePosts: 2,178
    Originally posted by keltic1701

    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by keltic1701

    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by keltic1701


    Maybe we can throw in Texas to sweeten the deal for them!



     

    Lmao Why get rid of a state thats Profitable? Lets dump yours. Its not that worth while.

    If your state is so profitable then go buy a sense of humor. It was meant as a joke.



     

    So was mine

    Pull your head outa your rear, and accept that a tacky Joke, will be meet with a tacky joke...

    Sorry, I'm not a flexible as you are. I also think that since the nation's capitol and the Naval Academy are in or near my state and will be her long after Texas produces it's last barrel of oil, I think the likelihood  Maryland getting sold before Texas are slim to none.

     

    You both know the likelihood of either of your states being sold are slim to none right?

    You surely know that?

  • popinjaypopinjay Member Posts: 6,539

    The saddest thing about California being so far in debt is also ironic that the people from Texas are laughing about. ENRON was a former Houston, Texas based energy company who made their money through scams. Enron's greatest scam was when they pulled the ones on California during 2000.


    Enron used California as their personal piggy bank; whenever Enron wanted to make some money, they just threw some rolling blackouts on California and said there's a "energy shortage". Then when the shares got high enough, their traders sold it to Wall Street and then poof... the energy "crisis" was over. They did this not once, not ten times... but thirty eight times.


    California's deregulation and subsequent energy crisis

    In October 2000, Daniel Scotto, the top ranked utility analyst on Wall Street, suspended his ratings on all energy companies conducting business in California because of the possibility that the companies would not receive full and adequate compensation for the deferred energy accounts used as the cornerstone for the California Deregulation Plan enacted in the late 1990s. Five months later, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) was forced into bankruptcy. Senator Phil Gramm (REPUBLICAN), the second largest recipient of campaign contributions from Enron, succeeded in legislating California's energy commodity trading deregulation. Despite warnings from prominent consumer groups which stated that this law would give energy traders too much influence over energy commodity prices, the legislation was passed in December 2000.

    As Public Citizen reported, "Because of Enron’s new, unregulated power auction, the company’s 'Wholesale Services' revenues quadrupled—from $12 billion in the first quarter of 2000 to $48.4 billion in the first quarter of 2001."[7]

    Before passage of the deregulation law, there had been only one Stage 3 rolling blackout declared. Following passage, California had a total of 38 blackouts defined as Stage 3 rolling blackouts, until federal regulators intervened in June 2001. These blackouts occurred mainly as a result of a poorly designed market system that was manipulated by traders and marketers.


    Enron traders were revealed as intentionally encouraging the removal of power from the market during California's energy crisis by encouraging suppliers to shut down plants to perform unnecessary maintenance, as documented in recordings made at the time.[8][9] These acts contributed to the need for rolling blackouts, which adversely affected many businesses dependent upon a reliable supply of electricity, and inconvenienced a large number of retail consumers. This scattered supply raised the price exponentially, and Enron traders were thus able to sell power at premium prices, sometimes up to a factor of 20x its normal peak value.


    If the federal government had not stepped in, Enron would have made things even worse. It's no coincidence that Enron CEO Ken Lay was VERY good friends with Bush from Texas and that he was even once rumored to be made head of the Department of Energy during Bush's time. They really cooked a good scheme up after this deregulation and then blamed it all on the Democrat Governor Davis, helped get him kicked out and surprise... they backed Arnold.

    Now 21 billion dollars later, the chickens are now sitting on Arnold's head and the people who voted him in, while Texas laughs. (after they got taxes from Enron's rape of California)

    People don't have to worry about China. It's Americans doing other Americans. People seriously need to wake up and stop trusting these same people who want to derail healthcare.

  • CleffyCleffy Member RarePosts: 6,414

    popinjay, California's problems are more then just what Enron did 9 years ago.  Davis was removed for more reasons then just Enron.  During his term nearly every major city removed politicians who were committing ethics violations.  It was only a matter of time before Davis was implicated multiple times.  Davis' mismanagement of state programs was pretty well spread.  Although it isn't all cheary with Schwarzenager, he has definetly done a better job then Davis and we can see the results of what he did.

    I say the problem lies more in the political systems here.  The first is a very basic system that helps prevent corruption.  New programs have to be voted in by the public.  So what happened was all the programs got voted in just without the tax increases to fund them.  The 2nd is the laws here that have ended up being bad economic policy, like the 3 strikes law and marijuana possession.  The last is illegal immigration just like any other border states.  They take the programs California has to offer, but don't pay the taxes.  They also ramp up other costs like road crashes, free clinics, and prosecution/deportation/imprisonment of drug runners.  The bulk of the prison population in California is the Mexican Mafia and mostly drug runners.

  • DracusDracus Member Posts: 1,449

    Now what I can see happening with Californian cities is allowing individuals or corporations to buy the right to have their name replace the name of the city or at least leased for a number of years.  Example: San Francisco made a deal with Cisco Systems so now the city is called San Cisco or just Cisco.

    And that is why...

    Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.

  • EkibiogamiEkibiogami Member UncommonPosts: 2,154
    Originally posted by Astropuyo

    Originally posted by keltic1701

    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by keltic1701

    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by keltic1701


    Maybe we can throw in Texas to sweeten the deal for them!



     

    Lmao Why get rid of a state thats Profitable? Lets dump yours. Its not that worth while.

    If your state is so profitable then go buy a sense of humor. It was meant as a joke.



     

    So was mine

    Pull your head outa your rear, and accept that a tacky Joke, will be meet with a tacky joke...

    Sorry, I'm not a flexible as you are. I also think that since the nation's capitol and the Naval Academy are in or near my state and will be her long after Texas produces it's last barrel of oil, I think the likelihood  Maryland getting sold before Texas are slim to none.

     

    You both know the likelihood of either of your states being sold are slim to none right?

    You surely know that?

    Lol Before his Post Ida Sworn he was jokeing... Now im not so sure...

     

    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
    —Samuel Adams

  • popinjaypopinjay Member Posts: 6,539


    Originally posted by Cleffy
    popinjay, California's problems are more then just what Enron did 9 years ago.  Davis was removed for more reasons then just Enron.  During his term nearly every major city removed politicians who were committing ethics violations.  It was only a matter of time before Davis was implicated multiple times.  Davis' mismanagement of state programs was pretty well spread.  Although it isn't all cheary with Schwarzenager, he has definetly done a better job then Davis and we can see the results of what he did.
    I say the problem lies more in the political systems here.  The first is a very basic system that helps prevent corruption.  New programs have to be voted in by the public.  So what happened was all the programs got voted in just without the tax increases to fund them.  The 2nd is the laws here that have ended up being bad economic policy, like the 3 strikes law and marijuana possession.  The last is illegal immigration just like any other border states.  They take the programs California has to offer, but don't pay the taxes.  They also ramp up other costs like road crashes, free clinics, and prosecution/deportation/imprisonment of drug runners.  The bulk of the prison population in California is the Mexican Mafia and mostly drug runners.

    Not to claim Davis was perfect (a perfect politician?) but a LOT of what got him kicked out was geared up from that energy ripoff. People lost businesses because they simply lost inventory and couldn't tell from day to day when the power would be on. I'm sure you remember that. People's bills went through the roof in a electric dependant state like California. To look at the numbers that Enron made off of California and not acknowledge it had a lot to do with starting many of their financial problems isn't being totally honest. Deregulation killed that state on something as valuable as energy.

    The more troubling aspects to look at is how Schwartzenegger manipulated the system off of his close connections to the Bush family (from his days as Presidential Fitness whatever for Bush Sr.) and the very close connection of Ken Lay of Enron to Bush. Then Phil Gramm a Republican who's campaign was funded by Enron. All these things brewed a perfect storm that resulted in a lot of Davis' problems.

    I do agree on you with the public in California creating some of their own problems. By voting down taxes, there is a lost amount of revenue to do many things. I think people who are on this "no income tax" deal would be well to look at California's troubles when the people can just say "NO" to tax increases.

    No one likes taxes but unless you have adults in the room, costs get out of hand unless someone says the tough things and keeps revenue coming in.

  • CleffyCleffy Member RarePosts: 6,414

    There are 2 ways to handle budgets.  Sure you can increase revenue, but for a state this has the inverse problem of decreased trade.  Adding taxes beyond a point is fruitless because you are decreasing the economy too much for it to generate more income.  The other thing is to reduce costs through cuts and making things more effecient.  Even though state programs are more effecient then federal programs, they still are far less effecient then private companies.  Having people on staff to make various programs spend effeciently and have a good output is essential.  Or using a bidding system.  I am just glad they can finally eliminate programs.  As many politicians say, once a program is started its hard to get others onboard to close it down.

    The energy crisis problem in 2000 was just as much a public problem as a private one.  The idea to open up the market for competition was voted on by the public and passed.  It was viewed that having competition in energy would reduce prices.  However, if people kept up with what the economists were saying about the proposals.  California was not ready to switch to a competition based system for energy because its been contracted to a few companies for such a long period of time.  It would have created a monopoly that could not be regulated to prevent such actions that Enron used.  It should have been a phased plan where they would introduce several more companies to power cities then open it up as a private industry.  Its no longer a problem because of the increased competition with Wind and Solar Farms formed in the desert since then under several different companies that compete for city contracts.

    Another problem California faces is that its a feeder state.  It feeds the federal budget but doesn't get back what it invests.  Its hard to judge how little equality California recieves considering the majority of the federal budget do not go directly to states.  Currently about 1/30th of what Californians pay in income taxes to the fed is given back to California.  (9% of california's budget comes from the fed.  30% of its income is from state income taxes.  On average a person pays 1/10th to the state as they do to the fed).  Also there has been a decrease of military stations in California.

    To the person who said California is too big.  I agree, I wish they make North and South California.  Every city in Southern California has a budget surplus.  Also splitting the state in 2 will save many jobs in Southern California because of legislation centering around Sacramento and San Francisco.  Due to how the states electorate is divided, alot of liberal policy is passed from all the districts in North California and a handful of districts in Los Angeles.

  • arctarusarctarus Member UncommonPosts: 2,581

    Im not very sure about the current status of US, but seeing that China have already bought so many bonds from US, it like they are in huge debt to them.

    Would a NAU ( north american union ) save US?

     

     

    RIP Orc Choppa

  • BrianshoBriansho Member UncommonPosts: 3,586

    What would work better? Legalizing pot and taxing it or legalizing all the illegal immigrants and taxing them?

    Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!

  • CleffyCleffy Member RarePosts: 6,414
    Originally posted by arctarus


    Im not very sure about the current status of US, but seeing that China have already bought so many bonds from US, it like they are in huge debt to them.
    Would a NAU ( north american union ) save US?



     

    No a NAU will not work in this case.  United States is the only country that operates in such a federal system that gives the states so much power.  Other governments have larger central governments.  Considering the entirety of Central America's GDP is the same as the national deficit it will not help.  The Canadian Government also takes in a greater portion of its economy on taxes to spend.  There is no way unifying the entirety of North America can possibly get rid of the current deficit spending levels in the US considering much of the money gathered would instead be spent on infrastructure growth in Central America.

    As far as an asset, California is worth more then the bonds China holds.

Sign In or Register to comment.