Author Topic: Who gets Yosemite? in Three Californias plan  (Read 387 times)

Mackin USA

  • Inner Core
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2184
  • Abstract Artist
    • View Profile
Who gets Yosemite? in Three Californias plan
« on: June 14, 2018, 01:00:05 PM »
For example, Yosemite National Park would suddenly straddle two of the new states since part of it is in Madera (Southern California) while other parts are in Tuolumne and Mariposa (Northern California) counties.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/06/13/three-victors-and-a-lot-of-spoils/
Mr. Mackin

ergophobe

  • Inner Core
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4175
    • View Profile
Re: Who gets Yosemite? in Three Californias plan
« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2018, 04:16:33 PM »
Nobody. UPS already thinks Yosemite is it's own nation

The thing about living in Yosemite Nation is that it's fairly easy to travel the United States if you want to experience Costco


littleman

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3920
    • View Profile
Re: Who gets Yosemite? in Three Californias plan
« Reply #2 on: June 14, 2018, 04:34:09 PM »
Splitting California along the proposed lines would really be a bad idea.  Northern California would be completely dominated by the Bay Area.  What they want to call 'California' would be most of the Southern Coast and dominated by LA.  If the more rural areas think they don't have a say now, imagine how bad it would be after the split?

Other than the coastal area, most of what would be called Southern California is extremely poor and generally a miserable place to live.  San Diego would end up the most prosperous city in Southern California with the rest of the state a poor wasteland with very little income and short water resources. 

Also, it would never get ratified because it would add four U.S. Senate seats, congress is already quietly ignoring Puerto Rico's request for statehood.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2018, 04:40:06 PM by littleman »

Mackin USA

  • Inner Core
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2184
  • Abstract Artist
    • View Profile
Re: Who gets Yosemite? in Three Californias plan
« Reply #3 on: June 15, 2018, 12:19:58 PM »
>Also, it would never get ratified because it would add four U.S. Senate seats

SO TRUE
No way American Citizens would be willing to give CA 4 more Senate seats.  :D
Mr. Mackin

grnidone

  • Inner Core
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1357
  • Laugh often. It's the best medicine.
    • MSN Messenger - grnidone@yahoo.com
    • AOL Instant Messenger - Ggrnidone
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - grnidone
    • View Profile
    • GreenEyeWire
    • Email
Re: Who gets Yosemite? in Three Californias plan
« Reply #4 on: June 27, 2018, 07:50:22 PM »
>most of what would be called Southern California is extremely poor and generally a miserable place to live.

The entire cesspool of California is a miserable place to live IMHO.

littleman

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3920
    • View Profile
Re: Who gets Yosemite? in Three Californias plan
« Reply #5 on: June 27, 2018, 08:34:41 PM »
So much Cal hate.  ::)


FYI, there are at least four active members in the Core that choose to live here.  Let's not get into sh## throwing contest on who's place of residence sucks the most and why.


ergophobe

  • Inner Core
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4175
    • View Profile
Re: Who gets Yosemite? in Three Californias plan
« Reply #6 on: June 28, 2018, 02:41:49 AM »
The entire cesspool of California is a miserable place to live IMHO.

Having lived in Vermont (25 years), Wisconsin (6 years), Switzerland (3 years), and California (18 years), I would disagree with that statement. The only one I would not go back to is Wisconsin. Bad fit for my recreational proclivities.

Geneva and Berkeley are wonderful as cities go aside from the obscene cost of housing in both places. I lived there relatively poor. I'd only go back if I were wealthy. Didn't have a car in Switzerland. Had one in Berkeley but would go for weeks at a time without driving it.

Yosemite has been a great place to live too. Fire danger is the big negative for me here.