The irony is that in 2028, a state with the same population as Canada might hold a referendum about leaving America. This trade dispute just might push California over the edge, and I am not talking about earthquakes.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/01/24/country-of-california-secession-newsom-trump/77907859007/

and more recently

https://theharvardpoliticalreview.com/calexit-california-independence/

If America is so out of control and beyond the reach of the Rule of Law and the Constitution that it can elect Trump (recall that he is considered to be potentially a traitor to the Constitution by the Supreme Court), then it is definitely within the realm of possibility that California could separate.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world 6 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (2 children)

This is dumb, making any part of Canada a state would bring a laundry list of unfunded liabilities such as universal healthcare, retirement benefits etc. etc. The same goes for California, I doubt Canada wants to pick up the liabilities for Social Security benefits.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

In Canada when a budget doesn't pass, the government doesn't shut down. Instead all of the politicians are fired and they face an election where they have to explain to the voters why they couldn't do their fucking jobs and pass a goddamn budget.

The US would have to make significant changes to their political system so it doesn't suck. Also change to the Canadian flag, the US flag is tacky as fuck.

[–] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I’m referring to outstanding unfunded liabilities. I never referred to the budgeting process.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

People aren't liabilities. Thinking this way is why US doesn't really have healthcare. Healthcare is a service, not a liability.

Do you consider infrastructure and the legal system to be liabilities because the budget of these things scale with the population size? Or are they just things the government is supposed to do?

So anyway, I don't want to live in a country that thinks my health is a liability.

[–] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Morally you are right but fiscal reality is, both governments are going to take on a lot of unfunded liabilities that don’t mix well with their current financial structure. Making the talk of absorbing parts of Canada into the US or Canada taking on California or other states a moot point. No population is going to give up their current benefits.

[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 1 points 49 minutes ago

You sound like an accountant.

[–] gramie@lemmy.ca 5 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

And it would burden Canada with a share of your $40 trillion debt. No thank you.

[–] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Maybe, but it’s hypothetical. The point is neither side really wants to inherit the liabilities that would go along with integration. You aren’t going to just convince that population to go with out free healthcare or their social security either.