There's definitely a push in some corporations strategy to turn from ownership to renting,
also to deny the right to repair.

California has .4% of it's population homeless. Texas has .09% of it's population homeless. Wage is not the only thing to do with homelessness. To be honest, if California just became a country, the US would be better off. There's nothing beneficial in California. You could say they grow tons of food, but food can be grown elsewhere and bought elsewhere. You could say they provide the entertainment industry, but that's not exactly a need and it's already shipped worldwide. Corporations are leaving California. On top of that, California has many wildfires, mudslides, and earthquakes. No benefit there. We're now left with the ironic rich liberals who have 8 to 12 figures in their bank account preaching how everyone should do this or that, especially with their money, all while giving only a tiny percentage of their worth to a "good" cause. Occasionally it's questionable if the charity is actually helping people. Then those same people buy million dollar houses, clothes, cars, etc for no real reason other than to proclaim to the world that they are rich. I will not get started with the race/sexuality nonsense. A person is a person, that's the end of it. No need for preaching, just accept a person can be or do as they wish, as long as it's within the law. Now, after saying all of this, I would visit the nature of California, probably the northern part, but that's probably the extent of it. And believe me when I say this, I will most certainly NOT move to California.

To be honest, if California just became a country, the US would be better off.

Yeah, let's get rid of 15% of our economy, 17% of our wealth, and the place that has 5 of our 10 largest publicly-traded companies, 14 of our 18 current decacorns, our 2 best public universities, 2 of our 6 best private universities, 57% of American venture capital, and the top driver of American soft power & cultural influence abroad.

I'm sure that will work out swell for the United States. Let's kick out America's by-far economically, culturally, and geopolitically most valuable state to please...
*checks notes*

Plays from: Missouri

Here's a wild idea: maybe the coastal elites who keep our economy ahead of the pack have at least as much a claim of ownership to this country as any American. Maybe folks in federal funding donor states have at least as much a right to claim America as do folks in federally-dependent net-recipient states whose lives our tax dollars subsidize. Maybe 29% of the economy should stop saying we ought to kick out the 71%.

Sure, we've got our problems in California. You're welcome to not move here and keep raising the roof about ~400 out of every 100,000 Californians not having homes (hope you at least donate to a shelter to compensate the homeless for employing them as a talking point). But we've got as much a right to the Union as people in any other state. California deserves more respect than to be treated as some go-to policy failure boogeyman by flyover states. Don't talk about us like we're not here.

There's a reason that the people with enough money to live wherever they want to, tend to choose California, home to 160 of America's 642 billionaires and 19% of its ultra-high net worth individuals. You move to Texas because it's affordable, not because you actually want to live there. Texas is the Walmart of states: it's worth paying the premium to not have to go there.

Edited 9/7/2021 05:48:16

dreams of Californication, doo doo dreams of Californication, wo oh oh
ding ding dong dang ding dong ding ding Hollywood station
ding dong dong ding dang donggedy ding dong
ding dong dream of ding ding dong ding Californication

California was a great, great state,
going in a bad bad way,
run by dumbasses who's gonna ruin it,
berdan would rule it well though.

https://youtu.be/I821oI3Ezjs

If I was a millionaire or billionaire, I wouldn't live in California for financial, cultural, environmental, and economical reasons. I would be edging on not living in the US at all. Next, I've lived in Missouri for a whole of one year. Congratulations on your note taking. Now to the money. Where the hell is the Californian government getting all the money it's dishing out? I would ask the same about the US government, but that's not the topic. Also, just because California is the 5th largest economy in the world, does not mean it would succeed on its own. I'm not sure how or why Democrats give away so much money, but eventually the barrel will be empty, and you'll be left with an inhuman amount of dept. I'm sure taxes would go crazy, which would encourage those big companies to leave. Yes, Texas is affordable. What exactly makes that bad? Also, I WILL talk about California as if they didn't exist, because they talk about us as if we didn't exist. By us I mean the successful people who aren't rich or poor, but should be required to pay everyone for being "emotionally hurt" and for having "unfair wages" or whatever nonsense they decided to talk about today. Reality warning! We aren't a cash flow.

All those billionaires you're so proud of being in California, how about they each take 50% of their wealth and actually help people. By help, I actually mean make a difference. Don't create more useless programs. Don't wright a big cheque to some charity. Actually use it to give a lasting impact to those who need help. Fix up the primary schools and have them teach more effectively, while also teaching these things called core subjects, not all that emotional/sexual/racial/wellness crap that doesn't get you through life. I would be astounded if that ever happens and would have a better opinion about hyper-rich people, as well as the political party they support. Most of the loud rich in California that I dislike so much are, in fact, Democrat. You're probably going to come back with something about rich Republicans and I'm here to respond to that in advance. They aren't loud mouthed on how other people with less money than them should spend thier money.

I don't necessarily have an issue with rich people, I have an issue with rich people telling people like us about how we should spend it to help this or that, all the while they contribute 1% of all their wealth, equivalent to over 500% of our wealth. Republicans don't tell us how to spend our money, Democrats do. I match everything I just said with California, because that's where the most loud Democrats are. And with those loud liberals comes the politicians to match them. These politicians give away state money all over the place that does nothing. "Throwing money at a wall, hoping it will go away."

Are you team California or team Texas?

Please tell us in the comments :P

if I were a millionaire, I would order a million bananas to jk's address

Liechtenstein

If every millionaire of a country gave up 50% of their wealth to “help” people that nation would go into a bad economic crisis. Don’t be a doofus

what is this? communism?

*sarcasm*

Edited 9/8/2021 14:46:57

GDP doesn't matter....

We should look more into living standards.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fn39vHu0tm8


If a country's GDP is rising, but the profits only go to the top 1%.... it's just a manipulation to trick people into thinking they're getting "better".

#occupy wall street

First, in line with the rules (https://www.warzone.com/wiki/Rules#Politics_.2F_Religion), here is a warning that the contents of this comment [debatably] relate to politics. Stop reading now if you do not consent to reading about or discussing these topics.

---

@berdan: California HDI is above the US average and comparable to that of Finland or Singapore. Texas HDI on the other hand is below average and along the lines of Slovenia's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_Human_Development_Index

You might notice other trends here.

---

@Georg:

TL;DR*:

Where the hell is the Californian government getting all the money it's dishing out?

Mostly from state income tax (~60%).

Also, just because California is the 5th largest economy in the world, does not mean it would succeed on its own.

Indeed. There are a number of factors that suggest an even more positive outlook for California once you move past just state GDP (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-14/california-defies-doom-with-no-1-u-s-economy).

I'm not sure how or why Democrats give away so much money, but eventually the barrel will be empty, and you'll be left with an inhuman amount of dept.

This is not a Democratic vs. Republican government issue: Missouri and California have roughly the same state debt per capita (ca. $3000).

As far as giving away money, California's economy- unlike the economies of rural red America- does not require or request protectionist measures to keep itself alive. We do not have to pay off companies to build facilities here (indeed, we have an unfavorable tax regime, so they choose to pay the premium for operating in California). Our goods and services and labor are actually competitive on the global market, and we don't even need to get tariffs or tell people to "buy American" because they already buy our stuff- because it's actually good!

Meanwhile, you can't even buy a Tesla in Texas because car dealers lobbied their government to prevent car manufacturers from cutting out the middlemen. Texas consumers pay the premium for this anti-competitive measure and give up money to prop up car dealers, the same way consumers all over the US pay premiums to prop up corn farmers, coal miners, and others who can't pull their weight in the global economy and have to resort to political measures instead.

California's spending is not giving money away: between 2010-2019, CA real GDP grew at an annualized rate of 3.49%/yr while the state debt shrank. In contrast, Texas state real GDP growth has been 3.43%/yr but state debt has outpaced this growth (+5.3%/yr).

This year, California runs a budget surplus of tens of billions of dollars, while Texas faces a deficit.

Yes, Texas is affordable. What exactly makes that bad?

Affordability in and of itself isn't bad. Affordability as your main selling point, though, especially at the cost of compromise? Texas is pitching to the people who can't afford to live in better states, the same way Walmart lets you save a few bucks if you're willing to pay the price of shopping at Walmart.

By us I mean the successful people

Aren't you a kid still in education? A little bit early to claim success.

We aren't a cash flow.

Sure, you're not worth less; you just contribute less. It's like the breadwinner(s) of the house: they're not better people, but you probably shouldn't suggest kicking them out of the house when they own it more than you do.

how about they each take 50% of their wealth and actually help people

Net worth != liquid cash.

Vlad Tenev, for example, has a net worth of about $1B. The bulk of this is tied to securities, probably mainly Robinhood stock. In other words, his $1B is the approximate value of his ownership/control in various companies. He cannot spend this money without dispensing with his ownership. Logistically, it's complicated.

Moreover, these assets appreciate. Jeff Bezos could have given away half his net worth to charity in 2010 (about $6.3B of $12.6B), but those $6.3B instead grew to become about $94B today. $94B in 2021 can do a lot more good than $6.3B in 2010. If you- like many American billionaires, who have pledged to give away much/all of their wealth to charity- are interested in using your wealth to help people, then if you want to do so effectively you may choose to reap investment growth (especially when keeping your stake in Amazon also lets you better steer that growth).

Finally, it's worth considering that investments themselves can do a lot of good. A competitive and free market, by design, creates individual financial incentives aligned with societal growth. This is not to say that making more money necessarily helps society (rent-seeking exists), but that there are ways in which investing money- e.g., by funding pharmaceutical research, businesses that improve financial access, startups that make education accessible- generate immense societal value. Market transactions tend to be positive-sum interactions (e.g., if I buy an apple for $1, it means that I value the apple more than $1; consequently, both the seller and I gain value from the transaction), so often these billionaires through the market have already created immense value (of which they reap a portion); of course, again, the rent-seekers exist (e.g., real estate developers and Disney heirs). But engaging in capitalism can itself be beneficial.

Of course, billionaires are not necessarily altruistic or moral so some probably accumulate wealth for its own sake and keep it because they want to.

Fix up the primary schools and have them teach more effectively, while also teaching these things called core subjects, not all that emotional/sexual/racial/wellness crap that doesn't get you through life.

Education in the United States is not a money problem in general. It's mainly a problem of political will to enact policies, which ironically get rejected at home based on arguments similar to what you're making (which presume you have some idea of how education should operate). Meanwhile, countries like Finland have implemented the products of American pedagogical research to great success instead of deciding they know better about what should and shouldn't be taught in school.

A lot of your arguments hinge on your own credibility, especially your suggestion that you know how education should properly work, so I suggest researching and proofreading your next comments so you can actually build some.

Republicans don't tell us how to spend our money, Democrats do.

Could you name examples of Democrats telling you how to spend your money? Are you talking about taxes? I've never had issues spending my money on whatever I want to, except when trying to buy alcohol in Texas on a Sunday.

* for the (unfortunately necessary) edification of one specific person: this is in (rather blatant) jest and not directed as a personal dig at anyone

Edited 9/9/2021 01:43:27

The research of education in the US is credible. The US does not use this information though. If we did use it, perhaps we could have better education. I base my education ideas on the form used in Germany, because that's the one, other than the US, I know the most. Also, the Democrats I'm referring to about telling us how to spend our money are the Hollywood types, not the politicians. They also don't blatantly tell us how to spend money, they use creative ways to say donate to this or that. As for me being a "kid", do not use that term. I'm not a crazy 11 year old know-it-all. I use the word us because I'm referring to everyone in about the same range if wealth. My parents worked their asses off with no support from their parents, and are now getting pushed aside because they aren't wealthy enough to be allowed to have a voice, but aren't poor enough to benefit from anything. I'm not successful, in fact, it's going to be decades before I have a chance because of all the dept the US keeps racking up. It has to come from somewhere. That somewhere is going to be from my generation via tons of taxes.

Straight out of college, I'm going to be hit with an overload of taxes, expensive living places, expensive food, expensive utilities, and it will continue to be a never ending downward spiral as long as Democrats have any control. There are so many issues I have with the Democratic party, that I can't count them. I can at least count the issues I have with the Republican party. China will prosper, and will come out on top. That's not a debate, it will happen. And I do blame that on the politics of the US entirely.

China will prosper

...So?

As for California's perfect economy, it sounds like it will be much better on its own, am I wrong? As for Texas, it would also be fine on its own. Their economies would be 5th and 9th respectively. It would leave the US crippled if either left. However, California relies on imported water and energy, both of which would then cripple California. For the monetary values, California imports about $441 billion and exports about $178 billion. See a problem? Texas imports about $304 billion and exports about $316 billion. Not fabulous, but definitely better than California.

We don't exactly want a Communist government to prosper and come out on top in the world.