Options

Oregon Militia: All aboard the crazy train.

16466686970

Posts

  • Options
    dispatch.odispatch.o Registered User regular
    edited February 2016
    Krieghund wrote: »
    SteevL wrote: »
    "Rebellion" is a strong word for it. They didn't want to leave the US, they just wanted to subdivide parts of Northern California and Southern Oregon into a new state.

    That's still sort of a thing among a certain segment of the population, isn't it?

    Not really, although Wikipedia tells me that a number of Northern Californian counties have recently revived the idea.

    Eh, one of the hard core wing nuts on one of the car forums I go to was really, really into Jefferson as a state.

    Eh. Most people living in the area realize it's crazy, but honestly with the population dense voting blocks in California literally not giving a shit about anyone north or east of Sacramento I can understand the frustration. I recall when I was a little kid, they would pump our local water to Los Angeles then charge us a water-transfer fee on our bill as though they were doing us a favor. It's pretty balls awful living as a native of the state and being essentially shit on constantly by population dense sprawling areas of green lawns and people with enough money to relocate to a trendy state with wealth that could give two fucks about anything in the state except the water.

    Edit: I mean, North and South Dakota, Wyoming... Plenty of states have smaller populations than some of the proposed borders of Jefferson. So while ridiculous as a notion, it's understandable a million or so people feel a little left out when it comes to representation.

    Edit2: Hell, Chico + Redding + Medford alone is almost 300,000... that's a lot of people who basically get a big "shrug" from their states that may be listened to in a less populous state. (Wyoming has a population of 550,000)

    dispatch.o on
  • Options
    jothkijothki Registered User regular
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Krieghund wrote: »
    SteevL wrote: »
    "Rebellion" is a strong word for it. They didn't want to leave the US, they just wanted to subdivide parts of Northern California and Southern Oregon into a new state.

    That's still sort of a thing among a certain segment of the population, isn't it?

    Not really, although Wikipedia tells me that a number of Northern Californian counties have recently revived the idea.

    Eh, one of the hard core wing nuts on one of the car forums I go to was really, really into Jefferson as a state.

    Eh. Most people living in the area realize it's crazy, but honestly with the population dense voting blocks in California literally not giving a shit about anyone north or east of Sacramento I can understand the frustration. I recall when I was a little kid, they would pump our local water to Los Angeles then charge us a water-transfer fee on our bill as though they were doing us a favor. It's pretty balls awful living as a native of the state and being essentially shit on constantly by population dense sprawling areas of green lawns and people with enough money to relocate to a trendy state with wealth that could give two fucks about anything in the state except the water.

    Edit: I mean, North and South Dakota, Wyoming... Plenty of states have smaller populations than some of the proposed borders of Jefferson. So while ridiculous as a notion, it's understandable a million or so people feel a little left out when it comes to representation.

    Edit2: Hell, Chico + Redding + Medford alone is almost 300,000... that's a lot of people who basically get a big "shrug" from their states that may be listened to in a less populous state.

    Difficulty of actually doing it aside, are there any solid theoretical reasons why it would be a bad idea? There obviously needs to be some limit on dividing up states, but California seems huge enough to be above that limit.

  • Options
    dispatch.odispatch.o Registered User regular
    edited February 2016
    jothki wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Krieghund wrote: »
    SteevL wrote: »
    "Rebellion" is a strong word for it. They didn't want to leave the US, they just wanted to subdivide parts of Northern California and Southern Oregon into a new state.

    That's still sort of a thing among a certain segment of the population, isn't it?

    Not really, although Wikipedia tells me that a number of Northern Californian counties have recently revived the idea.

    Eh, one of the hard core wing nuts on one of the car forums I go to was really, really into Jefferson as a state.

    Eh. Most people living in the area realize it's crazy, but honestly with the population dense voting blocks in California literally not giving a shit about anyone north or east of Sacramento I can understand the frustration. I recall when I was a little kid, they would pump our local water to Los Angeles then charge us a water-transfer fee on our bill as though they were doing us a favor. It's pretty balls awful living as a native of the state and being essentially shit on constantly by population dense sprawling areas of green lawns and people with enough money to relocate to a trendy state with wealth that could give two fucks about anything in the state except the water.

    Edit: I mean, North and South Dakota, Wyoming... Plenty of states have smaller populations than some of the proposed borders of Jefferson. So while ridiculous as a notion, it's understandable a million or so people feel a little left out when it comes to representation.

    Edit2: Hell, Chico + Redding + Medford alone is almost 300,000... that's a lot of people who basically get a big "shrug" from their states that may be listened to in a less populous state.

    Difficulty of actually doing it aside, are there any solid theoretical reasons why it would be a bad idea? There obviously needs to be some limit on dividing up states, but California seems huge enough to be above that limit.

    It's hard to get a reasonable opinion really. The rural areas think it wont happen because "They need to steal our water and resources" which isn't entirely wrong. The populous areas think it's just some hick bullshit that poor people complain about.

    I am from Chico originally, I think it should be stated so you can take my opinion as it is... but the attitudes of many people who live in the larger cities in California is total garbage with regard to how many people actually exist in the rest of the state. If you drive up/down i5 or 99 you will literally always be an exit or two from a city of 50,000+ people that you may or may not have ever heard of. Many of those cities are more developed and diverse than the most populous and diverse cities in other states. California is just a twisted beast held together with blood rituals and an ancient spells scrawled on flayed skin they use as the constitution and proposition system.


    Edit: With the way taxes and such are collected and distributed in California. I don't know that it would be a net-loss for "Jeffers". Many cities run on their own budgets, albeit poorly with little or no help from the state. In fact with the way the property taxes are fixed in some areas, they would be able to adjust their income by quite a bit if not tied to the proposition funding system for things like education.


    It can not be overstated how absolutely fucked and shitty the proposition system is and how it makes entire regions of the state powerless to self-govern based on population centers.

    dispatch.o on
  • Options
    Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Krieghund wrote: »
    SteevL wrote: »
    "Rebellion" is a strong word for it. They didn't want to leave the US, they just wanted to subdivide parts of Northern California and Southern Oregon into a new state.

    That's still sort of a thing among a certain segment of the population, isn't it?

    Not really, although Wikipedia tells me that a number of Northern Californian counties have recently revived the idea.

    Eh, one of the hard core wing nuts on one of the car forums I go to was really, really into Jefferson as a state.

    Eh. Most people living in the area realize it's crazy, but honestly with the population dense voting blocks in California literally not giving a shit about anyone north or east of Sacramento I can understand the frustration. I recall when I was a little kid, they would pump our local water to Los Angeles then charge us a water-transfer fee on our bill as though they were doing us a favor. It's pretty balls awful living as a native of the state and being essentially shit on constantly by population dense sprawling areas of green lawns and people with enough money to relocate to a trendy state with wealth that could give two fucks about anything in the state except the water.

    Edit: I mean, North and South Dakota, Wyoming... Plenty of states have smaller populations than some of the proposed borders of Jefferson. So while ridiculous as a notion, it's understandable a million or so people feel a little left out when it comes to representation.

    Edit2: Hell, Chico + Redding + Medford alone is almost 300,000... that's a lot of people who basically get a big "shrug" from their states that may be listened to in a less populous state.

    Difficulty of actually doing it aside, are there any solid theoretical reasons why it would be a bad idea? There obviously needs to be some limit on dividing up states, but California seems huge enough to be above that limit.

    It's unconstitutional.

    Also might run into tax base problems- a lot of rural counties get a net inflow of state tax money, which they'd lose by splitting off.

  • Options
    Centipede DamascusCentipede Damascus Registered User regular
    I don't think splitting up states is necessarily unconstitutional. I mean, West Virginia did it.

  • Options
    chrisnlchrisnl Registered User regular
    West Virginia and Maine both did it. I've heard questions about the legality / constitutionality of the West Virginia split and subsequent admission into the union, but I seriously doubt even if was not done legally that it would somehow be undone at this point.

    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    dispatch.odispatch.o Registered User regular
    chrisnl wrote: »
    West Virginia and Maine both did it. I've heard questions about the legality / constitutionality of the West Virginia split and subsequent admission into the union, but I seriously doubt even if was not done legally that it would somehow be undone at this point.

    I'd actually be interested in seeing how it would play out. I've always sort of been apprehensive about the rural population in other states complaining about those crazy city liberals. In the case of California the rural communities rival large cities in other states. Some of them are very rich agriculturally. Especially if you count Humboldt county. I'd be a lot happier in Jefferstonia than the Rural Waste Holdings of California.

    Jefferson people aren't really much like Bundy militia people. Most of those I know are very liberal. I don't think you'd see them handing Muir Woods or Yosemite over to hard working 'murican ranchers.

  • Options
    Knuckle DraggerKnuckle Dragger Explosive Ovine Disposal Registered User regular
    At the north end of the Yreka Valley on I-5, there is a huge barn with"JEFFERSON" painted on the roof in giant letters. Been there for years.

    Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.

    - John Stuart Mill
  • Options
    King RiptorKing Riptor Registered User regular
    I don't think splitting up states is necessarily unconstitutional. I mean, West Virginia did it.

    At the time they were taking a pro union stance though I feel like that's a unique circumstance

    I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
  • Options
    tsmvengytsmvengy Registered User regular
    chrisnl wrote: »
    The craziest thing I've learned about Oregon is that it was illegal for black people to move to Oregon well into the 20th century.

    http://gizmodo.com/oregon-was-founded-as-a-racist-utopia-1539567040
    When Oregon was granted statehood in 1859, it was the only state in the Union admitted with a constitution that forbade black people from living, working, or owning property there. It was illegal for black people even to move to the state until 1926.

    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    I don't think splitting up states is necessarily unconstitutional. I mean, West Virginia did it.

    There's actually a clause for it. Congress and all involved states must approve it.

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
  • Options
    DedwrekkaDedwrekka Metal Hell adjacentRegistered User regular
    I think there are about 4 US territories I'd like to get full statehood before we start splitting the states to make more.

  • Options
    schussschuss Registered User regular
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    I think there are about 4 US territories I'd like to get full statehood before we start splitting the states to make more.

    To some extent yes, but CA is so huge and diverse both population and terrain-wise it's a bit of an impossible proposition to govern properly, so I understand the frustration. It's similar to places like PA and NY where the rest of the state has little to do with their major metro area, and you could likely split the two and both sides would leave happy.

  • Options
    AthenorAthenor Battle Hardened Optimist The Skies of HiigaraRegistered User regular
    They think they would... But in reality it is harder than that. Living in Central Illinois, Chicago has always been the powerhouse of the state. But the reality is that the tax base of both halves would die without the other, as we help provide them with food and they help maintain our infrastructure and attract talent.

    He/Him | "A boat is always safest in the harbor, but that’s not why we build boats." | "If you run, you gain one. If you move forward, you gain two." - Suletta Mercury, G-Witch
  • Options
    Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    We had a thread about the whole State of Jefferson nonsense already.

  • Options
    a5ehrena5ehren AtlantaRegistered User regular
    edited February 2016
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    I think there are about 4 US territories I'd like to get full statehood before we start splitting the states to make more.

    Eh. Puerto Rico is the only "territory" that has enough people to be viable state.

    Like, yeah, American Samoa gets a shitty deal but they only have 55k people...even if you combine it with the other Pacific territories and make a giant franken-state, you end up with less than 300k people.

    a5ehren on
  • Options
    Knuckle DraggerKnuckle Dragger Explosive Ovine Disposal Registered User regular
    schuss wrote: »
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    I think there are about 4 US territories I'd like to get full statehood before we start splitting the states to make more.

    To some extent yes, but CA is so huge and diverse both population and terrain-wise it's a bit of an impossible proposition to govern properly, so I understand the frustration. It's similar to places like PA and NY where the rest of the state has little to do with their major metro area, and you could likely split the two and both sides would leave happy.

    In theory, I would t have an issue, so long as there was a minimum population requirement (enough for a given number of representatives, maybe). In practice, it would be a complete clusterfuck. I don't know what would happen to the rest of NY if the port revenue was suddenly all funneled into a new state consisting of the city and island. In California, any split is going to impact the Colorado River water agreements. Then you get into situations like public utilities, prison populations and whatnot. It would be absolute hell.

    Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.

    - John Stuart Mill
  • Options
    DedwrekkaDedwrekka Metal Hell adjacentRegistered User regular
    a5ehren wrote: »
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    I think there are about 4 US territories I'd like to get full statehood before we start splitting the states to make more.

    Eh. Puerto Rico is the only "territory" that has enough people to be viable state.

    Like, yeah, American Samoa gets a shitty deal but they only have 55k people...even if you combine it with the other Pacific territories and make a giant franken-state, you end up with less than 300k people.
    There's no population requirement for statehood. There's a lot more to statehood than gaining representatives in the House.

  • Options
    EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    a5ehren wrote: »
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    I think there are about 4 US territories I'd like to get full statehood before we start splitting the states to make more.

    Eh. Puerto Rico is the only "territory" that has enough people to be viable state.

    Like, yeah, American Samoa gets a shitty deal but they only have 55k people...even if you combine it with the other Pacific territories and make a giant franken-state, you end up with less than 300k people.
    There's no population requirement for statehood. There's a lot more to statehood than gaining representatives in the House.

    Also, those 300k people are not being represented at all, and should be. Even if that means lumping the Pacific territories as officially part of Hawaii in jurisdiction, at least that would mean they have a voice.

    Also, DC should gain statehood and representation. It's population (~600k) is almost that of North Dakota or Alaska ( both are at ~700k).

  • Options
    ShadowhopeShadowhope Baa. Registered User regular
    Here in Canada, our least populous province (PEI) literally has 1% of the population of our most populous province (Ontario), 140,000 vs. 14 million. It mostly works out.

    I also think that lack of representation is a worse problem than overrepresentation.

    Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
  • Options
    BlindPsychicBlindPsychic Registered User regular
    edited February 2016
    US Territories vote in the primaries, I just learned this yesterday

    BlindPsychic on
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    US Territories vote in the primaries, I just learned this yesterday

    But they have no electoral votes so in the real election they have no voice, yet get fucked by US policy all the same. And we overthrew a government under the auspice of taxation without representation...

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    chrisnlchrisnl Registered User regular
    Unfortunately any addition of states to the union is going to be a tough sell to the people in power right now. Do you honestly think that the Republicans would be on board with adding D.C. and a nearly guaranteed 2 Democratic Senators and 1 Democratic Representative? I don't think Puerto Rico would be very likely to vote Republican either, though I haven't looked into it closely.

    I'm not even sure the people of Puerto Rico want to be a state. It's hard to tell, though, because every time they have a referendum they always give three options (statehood, status quo or independence) and none of those options gain a majority.

    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    Mr KhanMr Khan Not Everyone WAHHHRegistered User regular
    Basically something else to add to the list of things to wait until the Dems have strong control of Congress.

    The DC thing though is just pure hypocrisy, though, the party of small government that allegedly hates Washington all too willing to have congress directly override local initiatives of all kinds and stick their nose in the city's business.

  • Options
    joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    Has anybody been charged with anything over the fucking car bomb trap situation?

    Because I'm still not over that. That's just so much holy shit.

  • Options
    ShortyShorty touching the meat Intergalactic Cool CourtRegistered User regular
    chrisnl wrote: »
    I'm not even sure the people of Puerto Rico want to be a state. It's hard to tell, though, because every time they have a referendum they always give three options (statehood, status quo or independence) and none of those options gain a majority.

    negative

    60% in favor of statehood as of 2012

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statehood_movement_in_Puerto_Rico#2012_statehood_vote

  • Options
    chrisnlchrisnl Registered User regular
    Eh that vote was weirdly confusing, though. 61.15% of those who marked a preference said statehood, but 24% of people didn't mark anything at all. If I am doing the math correctly, that means 46.47% of voters desired statehood and presumably the 24% of people that didn't mark anything did not like any of the choices given (none of which was the status quo apparently). It was also a two part question, and it wasn't clear that people who voted for the status quo in the first question (46% of voters) should even select an answer to the second.

    Whoever chose the wording for the choices did not do a good job of making it clear what each vote really meant (well the first one was pretty clear, it was the second part that I think causes problems). It does at least demonstrate that the voters in Puerto Rico are increasingly dissatisfied with the status quo, but I don't think majority support for statehood has yet been demonstrated (really close though, and it's possible that majority support does exist).

    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    kaidkaid Registered User regular
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    Basically something else to add to the list of things to wait until the Dems have strong control of Congress.

    The DC thing though is just pure hypocrisy, though, the party of small government that allegedly hates Washington all too willing to have congress directly override local initiatives of all kinds and stick their nose in the city's business.

    The federal part of DC should just be the government facilities/monuments and the capitol itself. The actual city should be spun off into its own state. Its population if far more than sufficient to justify its statehood. In a few decades there is a strong chance it will have a larger population than some of the western states.

  • Options
    Knuckle DraggerKnuckle Dragger Explosive Ovine Disposal Registered User regular
    chrisnl wrote: »
    Unfortunately any addition of states to the union is going to be a tough sell to the people in power right now. Do you honestly think that the Republicans would be on board with adding D.C. and a nearly guaranteed 2 Democratic Senators and 1 Democratic Representative? I don't think Puerto Rico would be very likely to vote Republican either, though I haven't looked into it closely.

    Adding new states is always going to be a tough sell, because neither party is willing to give the other more senators and reps. The easiest solution for DC would probably be to allow residents to claim residency in the neighboring state of their choice, if they so desired.

    Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.

    - John Stuart Mill
  • Options
    chrisnlchrisnl Registered User regular
    D.C. already has more people than Vermont and Wyoming, and is not that far behind Alaska and North Dakota.

    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    MayabirdMayabird Pecking at the keyboardRegistered User regular
    320px-Us_reg_dc_2872.JPG

  • Options
    GvzbgulGvzbgul Registered User regular
    edited February 2016
    Has anybody been charged with anything over the fucking car bomb trap situation?

    Because I'm still not over that. That's just so much holy shit.
    One (or more?) of the already arrested guys had an additional charge brought against him once they investigated the area. It had a minimum jail time of (I'm gonna guess) 20 years which made people think it was something to do with explosives. this is just off the top of my head though.

    Gvzbgul on
  • Options
    BursarBursar Hee Noooo! PDX areaRegistered User regular
    Mayabird wrote: »
    320px-Us_reg_dc_2872.JPG

    I... Is that real? I mean, something doesn't get put on an official license plate unless it's something you're meant to be proud of, right? Or do the people who run the DMV in DC have no oversight at all and hate the government?

    GNU Terry Pratchett
    PSN: Wstfgl | GamerTag: An Evil Plan | Battle.net: FallenIdle#1970
    Hit me up on BoardGameArena! User: Loaded D1
    Spoilered until images are unborked. egc6gp2emz1v.png
  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    It's totally real.

  • Options
    jmcdonaldjmcdonald I voted, did you? DC(ish)Registered User regular
    Bursar wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    320px-Us_reg_dc_2872.JPG

    I... Is that real? I mean, something doesn't get put on an official license plate unless it's something you're meant to be proud of, right? Or do the people who run the DMV in DC have no oversight at all and hate the government?

    that is what DC tags say, yes.

  • Options
    DarkewolfeDarkewolfe Registered User regular
    It's the standard DC tag.

    What is this I don't even.
  • Options
    XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    I had always assumed it was on there because they were pissed about it and want everyone else to know.

  • Options
    Desktop HippieDesktop Hippie Registered User regular
    edited February 2016
    Has anybody been charged with anything over the fucking car bomb trap situation?

    Because I'm still not over that. That's just so much holy shit.

    Apparently there are a fresh round of arrests and indictments pending. It'll likely be a few weeks before we see those charges, but we will see those charges.

    Now for some good news! The FBI have finished processing the scene, and the Malheur refuge has once again been turned over to the control of the U.S Fish and wildlife service. Hopefully the cleanup won't take terribly long.



    Meanwhile, a crack legal team is assembling to defend the arrestees...





    How can they possibly fail?

    Desktop Hippie on
  • Options
    Desktop HippieDesktop Hippie Registered User regular
    In other news, the cult of the blue tarp continues.

    No, really.

  • Options
    JazzJazz Registered User regular
    Further and further they lurch into self-parody.

This discussion has been closed.