Here's a thought: Break California up into 6 smaller states...

[Wyrt]

Exactly! Why are there two Dakotas?

So conservatives get more electoral votes.

[kail]

Man, took a second to check out that vid's comments. So much toxic jealousy.

[draynay]

Man, took a second to check out that vid's comments. So much toxic jealousy.

same as always

[Kasierith]

I'd rather see Guam and Puerto Rico made states first, so that the American citizens there get actual representation in Federal governance. Also, if your interest is in all the Republicans in SoCal not getting a say for president and on the Senate, keep in mind that the exact situation is happening in reverse in plenty of Red states. There are millions of Democrats in Texas, esp Dallas, who don't get any real rep in Senate or presidential races.

[Machismo]

I think some of the mid-western states could use a merge. With ridiculously low population, distance would be the only hardship in terms of management...which isn't much of a problem anymore thanks to today's telecommunication technology.

Obviously, we should just join all the square states into one giant square state. We'll let Texas annex Oklahoma, because nobody cares about Oklahoma.

On that note, I want to rename Minnesota to "Iowa's Hat."

[ImpTaimer]

It would not work because splitting up the states would not change the current affairs with that region. It wouldn't even affect the economy in any meaningful way because the region is still a major port, trade, and vacation area.

What WOULD improve is representatives / electorals. No more piggybacking the entire state to inflate themselves. No more shutting out the non-city communities.

What would potentially collapse is the real estate and welfare system. Even if you threw out all the illegals and vagrants, prices would still inflate due to demand of being a state citizen of the larger cities. Working class people may opt to live in neighboring states instead to avoid the inflated taxes. People will be displaced.

More importantly the state that controls more water controls the California region. We're talking figurative Tank Girl dystopian economy. California farmers are some of the most scummy underhanded farmers in America.

America will survive just fine without almonds. I promise.

[JDL49]

This will never happen and not for any of the reasons put forth so far. Its water. Most of the state is arid as hell and without all the water from the north and the mountainous areas would not be habitable by the numbers who live there now. If those non-arid areas became states the aqueducts bringing water south wouldn't last long. Once the water is in a different state SoCal's ability to enforce the existing contracts is very limited.

For those unfamiliar with it the TL-DR is that two LA natives named Mulholland and Eaton hijacked a lot of the water in the North through means both foul and shady. There is zero chance these interests would survive the water being in a separate state.

[Polyxo]

We'll split up California once we render the south and rural west non-state territories.

[Zmaniac17]

Interesting idea presented on Adam Carolla's show... break California up into 6 states and let them compete.

They said competition like a million times.

I found it interesting that they acknowledged how great competition was if you were the best at something and how it really sucked when you weren't, but then they didn't seem to acknowledge that most people suck at competition. Their premise seems to be that given freedom to do what they want, everyone will be able to win. In reality you'll have more losers than winners. Areas of concentrated prosperity will increase and housing/cost of living will skyrocket in those areas.

What really needs to be figured out is how do you transfer some of the wealth of cities into the surrounding area without pissing it all away. Its easy to justify building infrastructure in the city because millions of people will use it and create value from it. In the country you can build infrastructure and maybe only thousands will use it and not create much value from it. But if you don't build anything in the country the people who live there feel like they're just getting shit out of this deal and they vote against you. Splitting everything up just amplifies gentrification and poverty.

Splitting things up seems to be a good idea on it's face but when you really look at the secondary effects it has it's own problems. This had me wondering how the people in this video would feel about breaking up the United States. I think they shouldn't have touted it as much as a fix all for their problems. But I guess they're pushing legislation or something maybe?

Most people will be forced to move into cities in the next 50 to 100 years. A few lucky people will be able to make a living outside of the city. Cities are the optimal configuration for capitalism.

[Zelk]

Balkanise the whole west imo

[Doctor Amadeus]

Adam Corolla is an idiot and No. Him and Trumpsters can move to North Korea. Lol

[Kellhound]

No, just no. This idea gets raised every 10 years or so, and just gets swept under the carpet. The state is stronger together, which is better for the country. Sixth largest economy in the world and whatnot.

No, a strong California is bad for the country, though it should really be breaking most of the state up and giving it to its neighbors. We will let California be just LA and the Bay area, and we might even let them have enough land to connect them together......

- - - Updated - - -

Well, the conservative Jefferson and Central California would be complete shitholes without the rest of the state propping them up. They'd make Mississippi look good.

As opposed to the shithole that is Oakland?

[Doctor Amadeus]

No, a strong California is bad for the country, though it should really be breaking most of the state up and giving it to its neighbors. We will let California be just LA and the Bay area, and we might even let them have enough land to connect them together......

You won’t be doing any of that lol.

[Kellhound]

You won’t be doing any of that lol.

Of course not, I have no power (sadly). I will just have to wait for the revolution.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Of course not, I have no power (sadly). I will just have to wait for the revolution.

Or you’ll get real and move to Texas. California is staying just like it is.

[Deleted]

Why not wait for an earthqauke and split up what's left...

[Milchshake]

No. This is dumb.

Now you're sounding like Jimmy Kimmel and Dr.Drew.

[Kellhound]

Or you’ll get real and move to Texas. California is staying just like it is.

Not if there is a violent rural-urban split it isnt.

- - - Updated - - -

Why not wait for an earthqauke and split up what's left...

If we wait long enough, the worst parts of the state will break free and form a nice island off the coast.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Not if there is a violent rural-urban split it isnt.

Yes by idiots getting killed and made an example of while the rest went to prison. California staying as is.

[Kellhound]

Yes by idiots getting killed and made an example of while the rest went to prison. California staying as is.

You have far far far too much misguided belief in the internal strength of the US.