• samuelazers@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    As i read this, i am remembered of Newsom meeting Trump, after he refused to help with Californian wildfires.

      • Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Fake news. Some journo hack used photoshop. Here’s the original, with Trup standing true and strong despite them all being on a hillside.

          • Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            Cheers, fella! I’m AI1, me!

            [1. AI: a two-letter abbreviation which commonly refers to Artificial Intelligence but which can also, although far less often, refer to Abject Imbecile.]

      • rational_lib@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        7 hours ago

        People misinterpret this image. Newsom isn’t point at Trump, he’s keeping the stack of people from falling over.

        • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          Smoothbrain criminals. “America has been hit by…struck by a smoothbrain criminal!”

          [Chorus]

          America, are you okay? (I don’t know)

          Will you tell us that you’re okay? (I don’t know)

          There’s a felon at the window (I don’t know)

          Then Trump struck you, a crescendo America? (I don’t know)

          Trump came onto your apartment (I don’t know)

          Left white stains on the carpet (I don’t know why, baby)

          And then she ran into the bedroom (Help me)

          She were struck down

          It was your doom America (Dag gone it)

  • mesa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    It would be ironic if businesses come back to California because of the tariffs.

    • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      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

      • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        21 hours ago

        As a non-American, the more i learn about US states, the more I realise that the country is more like a reluctant confederation than an actual unified country.

        • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          20 hours ago

          It tore itself apart in a civil war 72 years after its constitution was written, and the only reason why it didn’t happen again was because it got fat off of being the only power left standing after the world wars.

        • Liz@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Yeah, it made sense when a horse was the fastest way to travel over land. These days? We’re stuck with a ridiculous government structure designed when no one knew how democracies worked.

          • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            17 hours ago

            Amen to that. It’s very stupid and backwards, but a whole lotta idiots think that the founders were inspired by their god (Jehovah/Yahweh/Allah) and that this kind of thing was handed down on stone tablets.

          • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            It is starting to make sense alright. I remember someone telling me that Americans put too much focus on federal politics, even though what goes on in Washington does not necessarily affect them. And the news of American states “Trump-proofing” themselves is also starting to make more sense. This also explains why voter turnout for presidential elections is quite low compared to other democracies, because eligible voters feel they won’t be affected as much.

      • slickgoat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        21 hours ago

        The whole “no legal precedence”. Has been a thing for a few years now. We have what used to be called chaos nowadays.

  • orclev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    123
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    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).

    • boolean_sledgehammer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

      • orclev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        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.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          But without boots on the ground, enforcement won’t happen. If Trump mobilized military on his own nation, he will well and truly enter the final find out phase of his life. The social contract is wearing thin.

          • orclev@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Wouldn’t take the military, he can call on federal marshals, the FBI, the NSA, the CIA, and probably even some of the local police would be willing to become his dogs. He could also in theory deploy one states national guard into a different state although that’s a little shakier legal ground. That’s assuming of course that the local officials would refuse to appear in court or a congressional summons voluntarily. There’s also other ways of exerting pressure like refusing to issue federal funds (although that’s far less effective against Democrat states since they contribute more federal funds than they receive, particularly California).

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              National Guard is military. Using federal law enforcement might be on the table but they’re woefully underequipped to deal with California as a whole.

      • kreskin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        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.

    • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      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.

    • eric5949@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      They did it during the pandemic, the union is quite literally dissolving before our very eyes.

    • peregrin5@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      103
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Don’t have to care about being unconstitutional if you’re not part of the union.

      • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        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.

            • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              23 hours ago

              That wouldn’t be happening because they don’t live in CA, it would happen because of Trump who exists in this role whether CA leaves the union or not.

              • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                23 hours ago

                Do more democratic Senators and Representatives do anything or not? Because 6 months ago it was vote blue no matter who, now suddenly it doesn’t matter if we jettison 2 Democratic senators and 40+ Democratic reps as long as you get yours.

                • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  22 hours ago

                  The “vote blue no matter who” people were just “blue MAGA” folks trying to justify their support of genocide and those senators and reps along with the DNC leadership are now happily sitting on their asses while Trump’s power goes unchecked, so who cares whether they keep their titles? It’s not as if they’re actually using their positions to fight back. They’re just acting as controlled opposition.

                • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 hours ago

                  I did.

                  I’m brown and fled the south as soon as I could.

                  Best decision I ever made.

                  Fucking worthless inbred filth need a wall to contain their damage, let them deal with each other.

              • SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                22 hours ago

                Yarvin’s technobrocratic dystopia will have a bunch of these little states run by CEOs, and you wouldn’t have any voice in how it’s run, but you would be free to leave. Is that what you want?

      • orclev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        53
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        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.

        • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          That’s the problem … if you are damned if you stay and damned if you leave … everyone starts weighing the options of either situation

          The choices for staying become … stay and beholden to federal government that ties your hands, manipulates your economy and uses you for their benefit while never allowing you to do what your people want for themselves

          or … secede and fight a political, economic and possibly even a military conflict to decide your own future

          either options is terrible in the long run (if things continue as they are) but staying means things stay indefinitely terrible while seceding gives a higher chance of political autonomy.

          • Serinus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            If you’re going that far, why wouldn’t you want the other states? Just take over the whole government instead of trying to secede.

            • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              For one, because the way that the government is set up means that you would need the cooperation of at least 26 states to ensure control of the legislative and executive branches, and even then, the Supreme Court justices are lifetime appointments, so you’d have to wait a long time to get the judicial branch on board. So you’d have to wage a war of conquest to secure the entire country. For another, much of the country is a burden on California’s economy. They’re the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world on their own, and many of the states are dependent on their tax money and produce.

              I think if you’re seriously talking about seceding, the most practical/logical plan would be a coalition of like-minded states seceding to form their own nation or EU style group of nation-states. The most likely to consider it would probably be the west coast and the northern end of the east coast (New England specifically), which would be a logistical nightmare for everyone involved - both for the US having hostile nations on all sides as well as any seceding states trying to trade across a hostile country between them. Though aid from friendly countries would be easily available, as both coasts border Canada (and Mexico on the west) and have plenty of infrastructure for trade internationally.

              • Serinus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 hour ago

                wage a war of conquest to secure the entire country

                There’s not a large difference between that and a war for secession. Either way it’s violence.

                • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  26 minutes ago

                  One is holding ground that you already own vs. taking ground by force. From a military standpoint, there’s a massive difference.

                  Not that I disagree that it’s violence either way, mind you. It’s just a different scale and situation.

        • Jax@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Seems like it would be easier to untangle from the U.S. military if the California populace had access to… something… maybe something that throws metal really fast? Idk

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          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.

          I mean it’s California. At that point just get a few neighboring states on board, take all the military hardware and shit and be like “Wanna go to war over it?”.

        • lemmus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          53
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Water is more of an issue than the military. The US relies heavily on California for food so that would be a bargaining chip.

          • orclev@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            38
            ·
            1 day ago

            Economics in general. California is responsible for a significant chunk of the entire US GDP as well as being one of the primary shipping hubs. My point was more along the lines that these other problems are tractable, you could for instance negotiate trade deals between the rest of the US and California. The military on the other hand is a much tougher problem akin to unscrambling an egg. There’s no obvious way to disentangle California from the greater US military.

            • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 day ago

              Any military option automatically removes any economic benefits that could have been possible in peace time. As soon as any conflict appears, everyone will spend more money on fighting, defending that in saving or creating profit. No matter who may “win”, everyone will lose and it would take decades to recover from it.

              • orclev@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 day ago

                Did you mean to respond to someone else? This seems like a bit of a non-sequitur from my comment.

            • LordGimp@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              20
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Thankfully CA can fund its.own military once we no longer need to send charity to all the red states with dirt for an economy. Actually, our police forces in the state routinely spend more money than entire foreign militaries. I’m sure with a couple trade deals and strategic defense pacts that California can easily become it’s own country.

          • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 day ago

            California’s food industry relies heavily on water from out of state, if those rivers dried up because flow got restricted to a trickle, it would be bad for their industry. None of this would happen without violent conflict though. Remember when the north burned the south to the ground? That is our historical precedent for how to respond to secession.

            • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 day ago

              I could see Oregon and Washington State throwing in with Cali, giving all of them a direct line to nice fresh Canadian Rocky BC Springs because we up here in Canada would be an instant ally of any states that broke off.

              • BigDiction@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 day ago

                You cannot get water from southern Oregon into California by any practical manner. Same as the person you replied to, the Central Valley and coastal regions are inaccessible except from the Sierra Nevada or Colorado River.

              • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                Most of Oregon hates Portland these days, and I grew up in Portland. But I don’t think secession would be up to a vote, it would be decided by violence like it always has been. That doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be successful, but I think Portland would still be burned to the ground.

                • peregrin5@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  23 hours ago

                  That’s always been the case that the rural backwater hillbilly sister-fucking areas hate the cities. The same is true in California. But it doesn’t matter because there are more people in the cities so they have more power so the yokels can’t do shit.

            • BigDiction@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              Much of the agricultural land would be fine. However the population centers in SoCal would have to make drastic cuts without the Colorado River.

            • duckworthy36@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              23 hours ago

              California is at the forefront of water conservation recycling in the US, and supports energy self sufficiency. The water issue is a problem, but not nearly as big as you might think. The state and water districts regularly fund new technologies and invest in storage. It would suck for a while, but in the long run, freedom from federal system might actually speed up changes that need to be made anyway.

          • Serinus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            We could do without almonds and wine. The US has more than enough soybeans and corn and wheat and potatoes go around. Nobody is going to starve without California’s agriculture.

            Why are you growing water intensive almonds in what should be a desert anyway?

      • BigFig@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Leaving the union? Yep you guessed it, unconstitutional. Secession would absolutely cause a war

        • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yeah, if things were so bad that you were considering secession you might as well cut to the chase and just try to overthrow the US government because they would absolutely go after you hard

          P.s. for any government officials who read the above comment, I’m not advocating for overthrow of your stupid little clubhouse, I’m pointing out why secession is a bad idea. Also, quit wasting my tax dollars looking at stupid shit.

        • LordGimp@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Would you rather be complicit with fascism or fight for something better?

          Also, you’re overlooking how much CA funds the rest of the nation. Flyover states do not function without funding from states like CA and TX. Take the west coast from the rest of the US and all that’s left struggles to qualify as third world lmfao

    • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

          • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            If memory serves right the person you are responding to is probably British. Or at the very least I don’t think they are American, so don’t take much of what they have to say particularly seriously.

            • monarch@preferred.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              16 hours ago

              If they are british I hope that they are paying attention and doing what she can to keep the UK from following in our foot steps even farther.

      • orclev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        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.

    • aesthelete@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      They could implement this by just not charging the duties at the ports in California and see who blinks first.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Federal and local government are likely both involved. With the doge cuts, who knows how many boots they actually have on the ground for this these days?

    • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      21 hours ago

      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.

      • orclev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        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.

        • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          On the other hand if…

          … the federal government can prove …

          California is promising…

          Of anyone in government was good at proving backhanded deals without exposing their own, we’d be in a very different place right now.

    • joostjakob@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      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…

  • Formfiller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    Succession! And we’re taking Hawaii Oregon and Washington. We can trade with the EU and Canada. Maybe we can join the EU

      • The_Caretaker@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Or at least let Hawaii be independent again and let the people of Hawaii decide what they want. Too bad they don’t teach the history of what American corporations did to destroy Hawaii and how the US government helped overthrow a friendly foreign nation for American oligarchs to rule.

      • Formfiller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Yeah that seems fair. Can you guys take care of zuck and Ellison? ……I’m thinking sewer slaves would be best after seizing their assets of course

        • yumpsuit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          gonna solve world hunger by empowering billionaires to eat the peanuts outta my shit

  • MyOpinion@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Thank goodness now we are talking. Time for California to move past the Orange Turd.

      • MyOpinion@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        The tighter his grip the more states that will slip through his tiny fingers.

      • KnightontheSun@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 day ago

        Other states should join in. It’s going to be rough no matter how you slice it, but I’d rather the states take the fight to him and the feds. Start controlling the narrative and take it away from the idiots.

        • PNW clouds@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          24 hours ago

          What’s really to keep states with ports from just taking over Customs, especially with doge firing and closing federal agencies? If the states control their ports they control what gets tagged for tariffs, or am I wrong?

  • Lit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    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.

    • theherk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      10 hours ago

      They care because their economies rely on people buying the products. The reasons why tariffs hurt both sides is because the movement of products decays. That’s the whole idea, so that the products’ supply source changes.

      • Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Cool but Americans should cool down their consumerism anyways.They consume the vast majority of stuff which is why everyone wants into the market.

        • theherk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I actually agree, and therefore think tariffs can be, if thoughtful and executed well, good for a country’s self-reliance and defense (cake). What it generally can’t be is good for the economy (eating it too).

    • derfunkatron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      There are a lot of complicated reasons why high tariff are a global problem in a global economy, but simply put:

      1. High tariffs raise prices
      2. High prices reduce sales
      3. 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.

      • Lit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        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.

        • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Eh, what do you sell and on which platform? I’d like to avoid you, firstly, and secondly, knowing that will give me an idea of what to tell you to expect.

          I’m buying less these days. Going on less vacations. Picking up fewer wants, and limiting my purchases to needs. Reducing the amount of money I spend. I am seeing it as more money is going into savings now than when Biden was POTUS. Gonna need to do that because everything’s about to get more expensive. I need to get used to doing more with less, because otherwise, I’m going to take it right in the chin. As will many of my American counterparts.

          You might escape scott free. Or you might not. Your country likely is tariffing everything from the USA, and the USA is likely tariffing you as well. You might find fewer people buy your stuff because not ONLY has the US tariffed money out of your buyers, you’re exploiting them as well, meaning they get double hit. While it’s your right to set your price to what you want, don’t be surprised if your sales take a hit. Also, it’s a very douchebag move to take advantages of your customers…just like what the Shitgibbon would do, so I do hope your customers look elsewhere for their sales. Too bad we as Americans don’t have that luxury to avoid tariffs.

          • Lit@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 hours ago

            Even if I sell less it doesn’t matter, the higher prices makes up for it. I don’t need to sell much at higher price. People buy my stuff usually to save time, they are trying to meet project deadlines. As long as it is cheaper to buy instead of building it themselves which might take days, weeks they are still saving time and money.

            Note that I raise prices on US platform only. My prices on site based in Europe (Lithuania) is much lower (American can buy from there if they bother to search, I do see US customers IPs on my sale stats), If you really want to talk about greed and douchebag-ness it is the US platforms that are super greedy they are taking more than 60% from each of my sales. While the Europe platform only take 30%. So I could care less if I lose sale on the US sites, I prefer if my customer buy from europe site instead.

            It seems countries getting hit by tariffs don’t tariff US goods as high as trump is claiming, https://www.threads.net/@aaliamauro/post/DICFOusPqD1

            US doesn’t even export enough goods to some of those countries to hit tariff triggers. So most item remain tariff free. https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/02/politics/fact-check-trump-tariffs-trade/index.html

            The tariffs broken down by internet level domain makes no sense, It looks very unscientific and lazy.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 hours ago

        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.

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Newsom is directing his state to pursue “strategic” relationships with countries announcing retaliatory tariffs against the U.S., urging them to exclude California-made products from those taxes.

    It sounds like he wants foreign countries to do California a favor without getting anything in exchange (and even that might be unconstitutional). Or is there something that he has the authority to offer in exchange which I’m missing?

    • arotrios@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      CA sales tax averages 10%. While it’s nowhere on the scale of the tariffs, it could offset the impact significantly if reduced or eliminated for goods coming from specific countries.

      Additionally, the government of CA has enormous purchasing power. Directing where that money goes could serve to be a powerful tool in mitigating the trade war.

      Plus, one element that most folks don’t think about is the financial weight of the CalPERS retirement fund. This organization controls a huge amount of investment money subject to state regulations as to where its invested. Opening up that revenue stream to select foreign companies could be a mighty tasty carrot.

      • blitzen@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        24 hours ago

        Not disputing most of you point, but the sales tax in California does not average 10%. I live here, and don’t think I’ve ever paid more that 9. Most of the time, it’s lower than 8.

    • ClanOfTheOcho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

  • limer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 day ago

    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

    • kreskin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Well the south finally will get to leave the union and form florida-man-istan, jesus-wasteland-istan and all-hat-no-cattle-istan. Good luck to them. We should have a going away party before we put up a wall to keep them from trying to get back in.

      • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Why not let them back in? There’s some good people in the red states; it’s a shame we can’t easily relocate all of them.

        • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Nothing says a wall can’t have a door in it. If you want to come here, and aren’t a total douchebag, we can let you in. Maybe even let you stay if you want to. 🤣

        • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I escaped the south, they need to as well.

          The amount of absolute evil down there is unimaginable.

          We need to build a wall.

    • 4grams@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      been thinking and saying for years that we’re on the path to a soviet style balkanization. just wasn’t sure what would be the spark. this certainly smells like one.

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      Sadly it’s a near inevitable outcome of an overly powerful Federal Government attempting to deal with a population this large. The more powerful the Federal Government gets the less able it is to balance the different desires of its citizens and the less popular it becomes.

      The solution was to NOT have such a powerful Federal Government but we tossed that out the window around somewhere between 1900 and 1920. It may not happen now over this but the clock is ticking and it’s going to happen at some point over something.

      It will be terrifying and terrible when it happens.

      • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        22 hours ago

        A lot of this could be fixed by reforming the senate which is a big part of why that will never happen.

        • misteloct@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Agreed the problem was baked in during the Ohio Compromise and at other times, it has nothing to do with population size because we’re talking about a small number of elites, not popular will.

      • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Unfortunately, we keep giving a small amount of people a lot of power. The cons have way too much representation in relation to their numbers. The other huge problem is that we have a system of legalized bribery, which is just insanity.

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 day ago

      Will it be California first? Or maybe Alaska? Hawaii? We know one’s gonna try and split, just not which.

      • monarch@preferred.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Not Hawaii at least in my opinion. The military foothold is too high, California might have a similar problem but the state is so much bigger that I don’t think that it is as much of an issue. I think Alaska is most likely though. Might pull a Texas and succeed and then ask to become a part of Canada.

    • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      We’ve been heading there for a long time and much of the rest of the world has been feeding into the two-sides divide. It’s easier to see when you already loathe both sides for different reasons. But the US has been a powerhouse many would love to see taken down. Generations of work towards that are paying off, and the US working class will suffer the most.

  • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

        • sunflowercowboy@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Yes, but remember the Jews are a very crafty folk. They are building their plot of canonization through trump - however their is one other person that could supercede his religious seat.

          The right name, at the right time, in the right place makes all the difference.

          However normal people are so antichristian without even trying to understand the reasoning behind a christian book. Which I find really frustrating, as they don’t understand it is pivotal to capturing the world’s heart. It has been used as the archetype for the modern worker and their submission. Submission to each other is kindness, and peaceful. However, we are forced to submit to a faceless corporation, for which we must revere, fear, and hold above all else while in position. Essentially making a false god in all but name, however this unbreathing beast controls your lives.

  • SirFasy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    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.

    • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      The US does not need balkanization.

      We have a single region that has been rebellious and trying to corrupt and destroy the rest of the union since the founding, because they cannot see any governmental or religious structure as legitimate unless it is founded on the principles of racism. This is their own words.

      Lincoln was wrong to readmit the south, we should have let Sherman finish then build a wall around them, while letting any slaves who wanted to escape do so.

      Either that or we need to restart reconstruction today with absolute brutality.

      Before they committed treason against the US alone, this time they allied with Russia to bring us down.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        We have a single region that has been rebellious and trying to corrupt and destroy the rest of the union since the founding

        Isn’t a ton of the current Trump administration rot coming from Silicon Valley?

        Isn’t Silicon Valley in California?

        Lincoln was wrong to readmit the south

        The South was under the Reconstruction plan, complete with Marshall Law and Freedman’s Bureaus and all sorts of additional federal oversight, untilThe Compromise of 1877 gave Rutherford B. Hayes the presidency at the cost of his soul.

        Lincoln didn’t simply readmit the South. He readmitted 9 million enslaved Americans as proper first class citizens. And the initial wave of democratization gave birth to a brief but generally optimistic egalitarian glimpse of a potential future.

        Lincoln’s big mistake was not putting Smedly Butler into his VP seat. Letting the country revert to Andrew Johnson was the big blunder. One that Grant had to spend two terms mopping up.

        But that’s all distant history. The modern fascist presidency is born out of Manhattan Island. The modern Texas/Florida/Ohio Axis of Evil is a product of Yale Business School. Stanford Alumni are fucking us up far more today than some Daughters of the Confederacy could have dreamed.

        This isn’t a North/South problem. It’s a turf war between extractive industry and the professional class.

        • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Yeah, because if there’s two things we know silicon valley loves it’s the core issues of the Trump administrafion:

          1. Immigration restrictions

          2. Tariffs

          He was voted in purely about the south, who are not only fascists to the core (if what they consider to be Christo-fascists).

          The thing is: their religion, the southern Baptist church, was founded because they wanted a religion whose core dogma was that slavery was a commandment from God. Hence their basing the Sbc around the curse of Ham justifying slavery. The nazis themselves based the Nuremberg Laws off Jim crow, only without the 1 drop rule.

          This is 100% the south, the restriction of women’s rights, the anti-lgbt, racism, isolation ism.

          They’ve been sold that Russia is their best ally because it is the last True (read: white) Christian Nation fighting against the atheist and Muslim hordes who have infested Europe.

          Silicon valley doesn’t want any of this bullshit, they just want less regulation. This has been a nightmare for them, Europe is starting their own competitors and regulating the cloud providers.

          Silicon valley is smart, this whole thing has the backwards inbred balls-over-brains energy of the south.

          Show me one Manhattan anyone who thinks those tariffs are a good idea.

          Super popular in the south though, finally those rich northerners will have to pay them to do the work, instead of buying stuff from the dirty Mexicans.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            there’s two things we know silicon valley loves it’s the core issues of the Trump administrafion:

            Immigration restrictions
            
            Tariffs
            

            Go pick up a copy of The Network State

      • samuelazers@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        Reminds me of east and west germany, even still today, one side is poorer than the other, which fostered new radicalism.

        And also where i live, Quebec, poorer rural regions control the elections.

        • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Exactly, the difference is in east Germany after the war they mostly dealt with the nazis.

          In the south they gave them a timeout for 10 years then let them take power again.

          • Noobnarski@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            Lol no they didn’t deal with the nazis in East Germany. They were pretty quickly persecuted if they came out, but as long as they stayed quiet and clamied they wanted socialism, nothing happened to them.

            And then after the fall of the east block, all of the nazis in eastern Germany no longer had to be quiet and there were also many nazis from the west who helped spread it even further while there was a power vacuum and nothing was done against it.

      • CMonster@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I dont think the lines are the same anymore. Social media and 24/7 news has given people in plenty of northern regions the same viewpoints. A civil war would not be north vs. south. it would be neighbor vs neighbor

        • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          I always hear this.

          I am brown and grew up in the Midwest.

          Then my family moved to the south.

          This is like comparing Canadians who care about hockey with the Khmer Rouge exterminating much of their population.

          The south is just infinitely worse in literally every way.

          • braxy29@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 hours ago

            there are a lot of nice people in the south. there are a lot of brown people in the south. you think everyone needs to suffer brutality for what the worst do?

              • braxy29@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 hours ago

                we can attack and punish each other as the few would like or work together. that requires us to acknowledge common humanity and rally together for our shared well-being.

                • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  15 minutes ago

                  You’re asking us to nourish monsters who have only ever shown brutal violent hate.

                  Go find a wild tiger and try to win them over with kindness and nurturing, see how well that works.

                  I’m sure a lot of people thought they could win the nazis over with kindness. Sure a lot of slaves hoped letting the rapes happen would somehow make them stop.

                  Some people just have darkness in their hearts, and society must be protected from them for everyone’s sake.

            • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              5 hours ago

              In the Midwest there are bad people too.

              The difference?

              In the Midwest when a racist is being a racist, people say shit, they stand up to them!

              In the south the bystanders just laugh, at worst they laugh nervously.

              Which is why it’s a vile and corrupt society.

              Police yourself, or don’t be surprised to be judged as evil.

              • braxy29@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 hours ago

                there are bad and good people everywhere. i do not endorse painting millions as deserving suffering; there’s plenty of that already.

                ordinary americans can find their way out of this mess together or tear each other apart. which do you imagine suits those in power?

                you are no longer here. stop trying to sow further hatred and division. i don’t want my children, my friends, my colleagues, my clients to suffer because they live on the wrong side of an arbitrary line.

                • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  55 minutes ago

                  BTW… The fact that you make it clear you don’t want to be caught up in this makes one thing ckear:

                  You know they are evil and violent, and you are terrified to face them because of this.

                  This is what neutral Germans must have felt as they watched jews get rounded up in camps.

                  You don’t understand that dealing with the monsters yourself is actually the better choice for everyone.

                • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 hour ago

                  I’m sure there were a lot of poor Germans who didn’t deserve what they got.

                  But it doesn’t matter, that’s how it goes, if you can’t stop your neighbors from doing evil you suffer for that evil.

                  A table with 4 people where one is a nazi is a table with 4 nazis.

                  Your people are still trying to hurt everyone, and you’re not stopping them.

                  I fully expect to put a lot of effort to hurt your people in the near future in self-defense, because their history of monstrous evil and cruelty speaks for itself.

                  I’m no longer there because I had to escape the south, and I thank God every day that I could.

                  Then the filth chased me to the coasts and I had to escape to Europe.

                  I can’t escape earth. This far, no farther.

    • RabbitInTheWoodPile@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I don’t get why Oregon and Washington haven’t jumped on that bandwagon. Imagine the entire west coast working together. All Western seaports.

  • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Good. There is no point in being part of a government that doesn’t believe in governance. Here’s hoping that other Blue States join a compact with California.

    • whaleiam@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Trump has been withholding fema money allocated to California. They are stealing disaster funds. He also wasted billions of gallons of water during the la , for a headline, pretending that he did something. Wasting that water when we have a wet/dry season is detrimental for farming. Destroying food supply/ water supply In reality that’s attrition and is an act of war, he is attacking Californians extra hard, but he also attacking all Americans.

      • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        15 hours ago

        That flag comes from a videogame series, called Fallout. The premise is that America or China began a nuclear war, with horrific results for the world as a whole. At least a couple hundred years later, the player is released from the confines of a fallout shelter. These vaults housed the remnants of humanity as we knew them, and they are now emerging to recolonize the earth.

        Thing is, some critters had children, despite the excessive radiation. New California’s national animal, the bear, tends to have an extra pair of heads.

        If the premise of the series interests you, I recommend New Vegas as your starting point. It has the most narrative strength in the series and is user friendly in comparison to the original games. Fallout 4 is approachable, but lost writing and player choice, unfortunately.

        Fallout trailers, all of them.

        • Yeather@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Actually no Yao Guai in game have two heads. Though it should be noted the only Yao Guai you run into when playing are balck bears, so possibly grizzly bears as depicted on the flag do get two heads.