California to negotiate trade with other countries to bypass Trump tariffs
California to negotiate trade with other countries to bypass Trump tariffs
www.newsweek.com
California to negotiate trade with other countries to bypass Trump tariffs
187 comments
-
-
Last civil war was about state rights to own slaves. Now its state right to avoid trade distribution?
My god the writers need to be fired.
-
Turmoil has engulfed the United States of America. The taxation of trade routes is in dispute.
-
-
Literally what I was thinking thx
-
-
If Trump thinks he's above the Constitution why can't a state?
-
No, there is legal precedence for this
Under NAFTA states could impose their own tariffs because NAFTA was a Federal agreement and countries would have to negotiate free trade with individual states
This is just the reverse of that
-
-
All hail The New California Republic. But in all seriousness, it wouldn't surprise me if the United States has a balkanization event happen in the near future.
-
I don't get why Oregon and Washington haven't jumped on that bandwagon. Imagine the entire west coast working together. All Western seaports.
-
There is a Cascadia Independence movement but it's not widely talked about.
-
-
The two heads representing the east and west coasts, obviously (please let us join you, California, when you go).
-
-
-
Texas couldn't secede, probably because it's a red state..how amazing would it be if California became it's own country with actual progressive laws. I for one would allow it. Let them become Canada, Mexico or even it's own. Do it Cali!
-
The best I could tell from the article was that all he was doing was essentially lobbying foriegn countries to tailor their responses so that they hurt california less than other states. I can't see any law blocking that. From what I could tell he wasn't even offering anything real in exchange.
-
Let's do it.
-
It would be ironic if businesses come back to California because of the tariffs.
-
Thank goodness now we are talking. Time for California to move past the Orange Turd.
-
Turd gonna clamp down on California. He's got to. Otherwise he loses grip.
-
-
Hope this falls through. Any trade deals that allow the US to circumvent Trumps policies and thus keep his regime going is bad. The big crash needs to happen before people are motivated to fight back. The slow frog boil is what led us here to begin with.
-
This IS what fighting back looks like. It takes many forms.
-
if all the states did this his regime would be the size of the white house.
-
-
-
As i read this, i am remembered of Newsom meeting Trump, after he refused to help with Californian wildfires.
-
Why they all leaning forward except Newsom? lol
-
People misinterpret this image. Newsom isn't point at Trump, he's keeping the stack of people from falling over.
-
Fake news. Some journo hack used photoshop. Here's the original, with Trup standing true and strong despite them all being on a hillside.
-
Newsom’s gravity powers are pulling them in. They can’t help it
-
Smooth criminals?
-
-
Why does that look like a photo of a bunch of Nazis?
-
-
-
Newsweek is pretty close to a tabloid these days. They are a tad better than the NY Post, but not by much.
-
-
Anyone speaking of secession - please, read history. We do not want to do that again, I don’t care what you believe in, it is a terrible idea. Please think it through beyond how admittedly awesome it would be in theory alone.
-
Wouldn't MAGA supposedly be thrilled for California to leave?
I'm trying to imagine trumper militia marching into California saying, "we need to keep this liberal shithole and it's 54 blue electoral votes".
Yeah, it would be devastating for the US economy, but if MAGA has told us anything it's that they prefer to tank the economy than embrace any kind of diversity.
-
It's even worse today. The amount of interconnected systems we have in play would be absolutely chaos to try and separate.
We didn't have to worry about power grids, networking, food was FAR more local, it would take years to try to isolate yourself from it all on a statewide scale.
-
Now city-states on the other hand...
-
-
Secede and then we can trade :)
-
Maybe Cali could make an agreement to join Canada or EU.
-
You'll need easy access to Canada. What better way than to have a close Canadian Province? - Wa state
-
-
Kudos to California. The neo-Nazi filled MAGA is all about state rights and I hope they tell California to secede.
-
I hope California succeeds at seceding
-
-
Would be fun to watch companies from other states bypass the tariffs by buying California products.
Then of course, Trump will propose tariffs on a State.
-
It would be hilarious if only red states had tariffs with the rest of the world.
-
-
How would a state secede from the US? Like, what’s the actual process?
-
The state government would put forwards a local movement to secede from the US, and if it actually passed the federal government would butt in and go "you can't secede, that's completely illegal and unconstitutional" (it is), at which point the state would either go "oh well" and stand down or say "go suck eggs" and continue trying to secede, which the federal government would treat as rebellion or insurrection.
-
There is no process. States cannot just up and say "see ya" on their own, we fought a war over that.
If the people felt that it would be OK for a state to leave, the proper thing to do would be to pass an amendment stating a process, and then the state would do it. There would be a lot of details to hammer out: does the State get to keep Federal property (like military bases)? Does it inherit a share of the deficit? What happens to deferred US taxes on things like 401k accounts?
IMHO it would take so long to hammer that stuff out that it's basically impossible.
-
"But it's not legal!"
Have you learned nothing the past three months? Laws are what we make of them.
A state seceding is a simple process:
- The state passes an act to allow it.
- The sitting president endorses the idea and agrees to let them go peacefully.
That's it. The United States Constitution itself was illegally written, an exercise in simple willful power. State secession works the same way.
-
-
In short: War. I'm not being hyperbolic either.
-
That's what the Civil War was about, there is no legal way to exit were one nation period end of story millions of dead soldiers proved it.
If a state tried to leave they would have to prove they could no matter the laws. It would be war. No ifs ands or buts. That means having a military that could take out the US military. Currently the top Airforce in the world is the US Airforce, the second largest Airforce is the US Navy, then it's Russia, then it's the US Army. Unless you can somehow convince the military to side with you when you leave, it's not going to happen. I would imagine if you tried to claim it legally the best you could hope for is Federal agents walking in the second said state gov claims independence, and idk arresting the heads of state for treason, and telling said state to elect a new gov.
-
But what is the US military going to do? go to a state that wants to secede and just kill everyone in it??
-
-
You need to amend the constitution which requires 38 states to agree to it that considering how many right wing states hate California doesn’t sound impossible
-
There is a historical example, but given the outcome, I don't think it would be a good idea to follow that blueprint.
-
-
cExit?
-
It's really not legally possible, meaning your either having a revolution, a civil war, or the USA has no ability to stop you as it's effectively over.
Unless CA has military bases that would fully side with them, as in all the ones in CA and they would need other states, THEN a war could be possible, but that is very unlikely, currently there's no military that could beat the US military, so it's not even worth going over unless the US dissolves.
-
The civil war only happens if the U.S. attacks after a secession, but the state that single most funds the U.S. military is California, if you include Washington and Oregon in the secession you now end up with 19ish% of the countries budget and a sizable percentage of the military bases. With the American civil war there was somewhat defined lines of north vs south but this would be fights inside their own states.
-
-
CalOut
-
-
Trump has got another great idea. A tax of 1.5 million dollars for each ship made in China that will dock at any American port, or 1 million if the ship is not made in china but the shipper fleet has a majority of Chinese ships.
So, off before they did like California, Panama, Louisiana, new York, those stops will increase the price of shipping by 4.5 million dollars.
Trump thinks that in this way, in a couple weeks, shipyards will reopen in the states and everyone will buy American ships. Because it takes a couple days to build an oil tanker
Result:
They'll just unload the goods in Canada or Mexico then use trains/trucks. For oil and coal and wheat and other stuff that can't be easily transported by land without ax existing infrastructure, that's an additional 20% cost on top of tariffs. Inflation go go go
-
Yeah Trump wants the US to be a great shipbuilder again... but for that you need materials (steel), workers who want to do that sort of job( he's deporting a lot of people) and skill to manufacture ships...
He thinks by taxing countries or companies, they will go to the US, but they won't, and if they do it takes time and a lot of investment..
-
-
EU is already trying to specifically target products from red states with tariffs.
-
That's not going to work in practice. The US economy is even more tangled under the hood than it is internationally.
Might as well say you're taking a called shot on someone's left ventrical, because you don't want to hurt any other part of their body.
-
I'd prefer that they at least try to target them
-
-
Source? (No doubt, just looking forward tobreading more)
-
Not sure what media you prefer, find a nice article here: https://www.ecosia.org/search?q=eu+targetting+red+states
-
-
-
Holy shit, my prediction model forecast this. 🍿 This is actually a major step toward derailing this coup.
-
Or starting a civil war.
-
If it ends with us cutting Trumpistan/the Neo-Confederacy off, I'm good. Just hope we have enough time to get decent people out of the Neo-Confederacy.
-
-
-
California ! Uber Alles !
Unironically ? I’m so confused
-
Fun fact Deutschland Uber Alles was originally a call for German unification during the early 1800s and was originally a German republican rallying cry.
-
-
lol i'm considering a move to Tijuana so i can commute to San Diego.. if California can nix the chicken tax then i'm moving.
-
wanna join EU? ( ͡~ ͜ʖ ͡°)
-
Already looking into it...
-
-
just secede already.
-
Fuck companies who do that. United they shall fall.
-
-
Funnily enough, there's actually hostoric precedent for trying. Emphasis on trying.
-
Well, they could make a deal to buy at a price adjusted for tariffs so it's a lower price then compensate for that with lower prices on CA exports you don't actually need to stop tariffs legally, they can be worked around the trick is trading something back that makes up the difference and costs less than the tariff to give.
-
-
Oh shit can they do that?
-
Why not? If the last couple of months have proven anything, it's that our entire system is a paper tiger.
-
I don't think so.
Politics can sort of be like playing a cross between chess and chicken. Strategic moves to see who blinks first. It's a constitutional challenge that will need to be addressed by the federal government, taking their time and resources from their own unconstitutional efforts.
Or not. I'm just an Internet person who as far as anyone knows has zero expertise in these sorts of things.
-
-
Im not an American but can they actually do this legally?
-
I mean, I guess we'll find out together
-
Legally? No. But you can’t secede legally either so there is a fuzzy line there somewhere should they start down that road.
-
-
Depends on how legally you need it. They also have marijuana by way of nonenforcement.
-
-
Succession! And we’re taking Hawaii Oregon and Washington. We can trade with the EU and Canada. Maybe we can join the EU
-
It's too bad Utah and Nevada are between Colorado and California...
-
"United" States stands divided. It just gets worse...and at an incredible speed. It's always quicker and easier to demolish as opposed to building. Every one wants the easy money and the quick buck without a balanced expenditure of energy.
-
No politician in California is going to criticize the lack proper vote counting techniques in the USA states that caused this harm. This is because Californian leadership is in thrall to the oligarchs.
Also the man saying this is not the type of person to get out of the safe zone.
I’m not quite sure why people are thinking anything significant can or will happen. The United States cannot change at all
-
Good point, better to try nothing and give up.
-
My point was that the current leaders can only do nothing. I’m in Texas, so there.
-
-
-
And this is constitutional how exactly?
-
There is a precedent for lawlessness. Literally anything is constitutional now, you just do it and ignore the court ruling. Where have you been the last decade?
-
-
But the tariffs are paid by American. It is tax on Americans. Why would foreign country care too much other than the price of their goods are a little higher for americans.
People will have to still buy essential products anyway or suffer clogged drains or sit on the floor without chairs or eat with hands without utensils.
In fact, I raised prices on my digital goods a while back due to trump threats of tariffs on Canada Mexico. i raised prices only on US platforms for my digital products. People are still buying.
-
There are a lot of complicated reasons why high tariff are a global problem in a global economy, but simply put:
- High tariffs raise prices
- High prices reduce sales
- Fewer sales reduces profit
Reduced profit for a single company or industry isn’t usually detrimental to a national or global economy. But when an entire country’s economy is hit with reduced profits across every industry, then it creates a problem.
So in summary, Americans are going to get fucked directly, “foreign countries” are going to get fucked indirectly.
-
So in summary, Americans are going to get fucked directly, “foreign countries” are going to get fucked indirectly.
And the only people who win are the billionaires that get to swoop in and buy everything up at bargain basement prices.
-
I am not affected by tariffs, but I am going to further raise the prices of my digital goods on US platforms anyway. Because i noticed people buy anyway when i raised prices earlier this year.
my impact is extremely tiny, but if everyone does it, especially for essential products sold to US. This might help a nation as a whole compensate for loss of revenue in other industries affected by tariffs.
Most people in US will think the higher prices for everything are due to tariffs.
Edit : Note that my prices on platform based outside of US are kept much lower, Americans do buy from there. It is only on US site that I raise prices.
-
187 comments
Unfortunately this runs into constitutional problems. While the spineless subhuman creatures in congress and the supreme court seem to have no problem with Trump and his administration ignoring the constitution I fully expect them to come down hard on any state that does so (at least in cases that go against Trump and his policies).
Don't have to care about being unconstitutional if you're not part of the union.
That's great in theory but just as unrealistic in practice for California as it always has been for Texas. The single biggest stumbling block for any state to leave the union for any reason is the military. Most of the other problems can be resolved within the borders of the state, but the disposition of existing and theoretical new military hardware, personnel, and bases will always be a sticking point even assuming the federal government and the other states are willing to let them leave.
Any attempt to leave the US that has any hope of succeeding would be a very long and protracted process that would make Brexit look breakneck in comparison. We're talking at least a couple decades at a minimum.
It's either that or another civil war and that has so many variables I'm not sure anyone has any hope of predicting how that would turn out.
Leaving the union? Yep you guessed it, unconstitutional. Secession would absolutely cause a war
Republicans would absolutely love it if the most populous state that consistently sends huge numbers of Democratic representatives to DC was out of the picture. You think Democrats can’t do shit now, see what happens when you lose 40+ democrats from the House.
Constitution? What constitution ?
What’s good for the goose…
If the union doesn't provide any benefits and only costs money and prevents your state from functioning as well as it could and the union only makes solutions harder to solve ...... why stay in the union?
States stay together because of mutual benefit, not because of a document or promises.
And you could force a state to stay in a union by force but the cost of doing that far outweighs the benefits of a peaceful union.
Don't forget they're Democrats.
When the courts rule against them they'll just meekly comply.
See my other response to peregrin5 but in addition you're assuming rational actors all around. Actual reality is far more messy with many of those involved making decisions based more on feelings than any in depth reasoning. States stay together because there's no obvious alternative. There's no mechanism for a state to leave the union and doing so requires solving many problems that have no obvious answers.
They could implement this by just not charging the duties at the ports in California and see who blinks first.
Do they have control over that? I assumed that was handled by feds
The Trump administration has demonstrated that the constitution doesn't really matter. Why keep pretending like this is some sort of sacred immutable text? The spell has been lifted.
Just because Trump and his goons are ignoring it doesn't mean his cronies in congress and the supreme court won't still use it to attack anyone they want to.
yes, without any shared understanding around whether we enforce all laws or just some, law books are just reems of scratchy toilet paper. So are everyones holy books, and any international agreements we have.
Trump doesnt care about laws and law enforcement has openly hated the public for a long time. Their oaths to serve the law are a vanity that they jettison whenever its convenient.
And Biden/Harris violating god knows how many genocide and arms laws for zionist $ and then losing the election and support across every voting demographic didnt help matters. I wish I could go back in time to the day Obama picked Biden as his running mate and shake Obama until he picks someone else.
Let the feds try to enforce it then. Texas immigration officers basically kicked the feds out when they started doing federally illegal shit, the federal government is barely held together these days. Force them to do something about it. If the flow of money between California and the US stops, California is the big winner so they have all the leverage in the world.
The article states California is negotiating with other countries to exclude California from those countries' retaliatory tarrifs on US goods.
There's nothing the federal government can do about that.
That's not actually true, there are things the federal government can do. First it's a grey area legally. The constitution says trade deals (and trade outside the borders of any one state) is the domain of the federal government.
The argument in this case would be "Is this a trade deal?". It certainly sounds like a deal, and it involves trade, but the key technicality would be if California is giving anything in return. Are they promising anything in exchange for no or reduced tariffs or are they just asking with the promise of nothing in return? If they're not promising anything there's a pretty good chance they could win the argument that this isn't a trade deal and therefore the federal government has no legal basis to intervene (although it's worth pointing out that the current administration hasn't particularly let legality influence their actions).
On the other hand if California is promising something in return there's a decent chance the federal government could successfully argue that that meets the definition of a trade deal and is therefore prohibited. This also raises the question of why another country would agree to remove tariffs from California if they aren't promising anything in return. The only answer I can come up with is to figuratively (and maybe literally at the same time) give the middle finger to Trump.
It looks like they're just going to lobby trading partners to please direct (actual) retaliatory sanctions towards products from red states, not their state. In general, I like that idea. But maybe now any excemptions for blue state products should come with a promise to actually fight the incipient fascist government...
Something something taxation.... something something representation... help me out here americans