California is a wonderful state. It enjoys the world’s best tech companies, bountiful and increasingly eco-friendly energy resources, a entertainment industry unparalleled in global clout, a vast array of productive and innovative businesses, and almost perfect weather.

But in recent years, and particularly since Trump became president, Californians feel increasingly dissatisfied with Washington. On every major policy area, from climate change to healthcare and immigration, the federal government makes decisions which are hopelessly unpopular with Californians. In 2016, there was a swing towards the Republicans nationwide, but a swing towards the Democrats in California. Trump primarily appeals to working-class whites without a college degree, who feel hurt by globalisation and deindustrialisation, and are sceptical of the benefits of America’s shifting demographics. California has far fewer nostalgic nationalists. With its highly globalised economy and socially liberal values, the Golden State couldn’t be more at odds with the Republican Party as it currently stands.

Given that for the foreseeable future, Republicans are likely to control the federal government roughly half of the time, the notion of California leaving the US seems increasingly enticing. Were it to be independent, California would be the fifth-largest economy in the world- larger than the UK despite having 20 million fewer people. Independence would allow it to lower tariffs and taxes, not held back by having to subsidise much of the rest of the US. The opportunity for a clean slate on the tax code and regulatory structure could make the state far more competitive. Equally, California could take decisive action on issues where the federal government has dithered for far too long. Without the bizarre climate change denial of the GOP, California could be even more of a world-leader in environmental policy than it already is. A Sacramento-based EPA would take proper action to reduce the state’s poor air quality. On healthcare, California could deliver a proper system of universal healthcare, not the messy compromise that is the Affordable Care Act. Perhaps most significantly, the state would no longer feel embroiled in a culture war with the conservative parts of the US. California could pass comprehensive gun control laws and immigration reform, knowing those policies enjoy the support of a healthy majority.

Appealing as all of that may seem, I would not vote for independence were I a Californian. Partly because such a move would be economically damaging. There would be no guarantee of Californian NATO membership; trade restrictions with the rest of North America would be immensely harmful. Even if after a long series of negotiations with a potentially hostile Washington, California were allowed tariff-free trade with NATO, the economy would still suffer. As Britain is finding out, tariffs are only a small part of trade. Regulatory standards and customs arrangements are even more significant. If California leaves the American single market, its companies would face vastly increased costs when doing business with the US. Were California to remain aligned to the US, it would have to obey regulations it had no say over. For California to have an independent trade and immigration policy, there would be a border between the state and the rest of the US, which would disrupt the movement of goods and people, particularly given the degree of border militarisation needed to stop drugs and guns being smuggled from Mexico.

More importantly, an independent California would have a stiflingly liberal political consensus. Democrats would win virtually every election, even if the California Republican Party moderated considerably. Even more so than today, liberal Californians would feel superior to the rest of the US, knowing their ideals can be implemented without a serious challenge. Californian Democrats conveniently ignore the shortcomings of their state, something which independence would make more common. Housing costs are extremely high, something which independence wouldn’t solve. Poverty is unusually high, especially after housing costs are taken into account. For all its progressivism, California is amongst the most unequal of the US states. Wealthy tech workers and media figures live alongside deprived immigrants from Latin America. The education system leaves much to be desired, even if it is challenged by a high number of non-English speakers. Gas prices are higher than in the rest of the US, yet the infrastructure isn’t any better. California’s Democrats need to be robustly challenged, and it isn’t clear independence would achieve that.

The point is that California has a lot going for it. But it isn’t so exceptional that it deserves independence. Liberals may resent the conservatism of the rest of the US. But America’s federal system already gives states a lot of autonomy, and conservative ideas have a lot of value, even if Trump’s crude nationalism isn’t fit to hold Californian progressivism to account. Rather, California should lead by example. If its policies result in better outcomes, then other states will follow. Equally, if other states, particularly those governed by Republicans are better off, then California should learn from them. Instead of leaving the US and wishing its often toxic politicians away, California should embrace America and engage with it. By leading from within, California can make everyone happier.

Climate change – An apology

What will they say of us when we are gone,
When it dawns on them all that their grandparents knew
(As they wrestle with flooding, starvation and storms)
Of the turmoil their world would be struggling through?
What will they think of us selfishly set
Upon motors and holidays, easily bought,
And the choking pollution discharged in the air
We contribute to blithely with scarcely a thought?

Will they wonder at pineapples flown from Hawaii
While the frost and the snow are still thick on the ground?
Fresh flowers from Colombia, well out of season,
At a cost to the planet, unseen but profound?
Will they say, “Our grandparents, whom we still remember,
Knew that the pole-ice was melting away.
They heard the debates about currents and oceans,
But greeted each fact with a passive dismay.

They knew in their hearts that some real sacrifice
Was required, some remedial money and labour.
They said the right things, but still hoped against hope
That appropriate restraint would commence with their neighbour.
They worried a lot about hurricanes, storms,
And the lot of the seals and the few polar bears.
But they sighed with relief when the skeptics said “Whoa,
It won’t happen, (at least, not for fifty-odd years).”

“Don’t worry,” they said, “keep the growth rolling on.
Keep spending and wasting, don’t take the full brunt.
The grand-kids will have to shape up or ship out;
For if it’s an issue it’s tough to confront.
We agree there’s a problem. Solutions are hard.
The science is sound and now fully attested.
But big money talks, we’re needing the income,
And the interests? Well, you can guess, they are vested.”

Our grandchildren will say, “So the power plants belched on,
And at some point the balance just toppled and tipped,
Mother Nature triumphant is taking Her toll,
And our wings and our science are thwarted and clipped.
Now the sea levels rise and the lowlands are swamped.
There are millions of homeless of every race.
And nations once stable are riven with warfare
And death stalks the Earth at a gathering pace.”

“Fresh water’s a problem, high prices of food,
And flooding at unusual times of the year.
With business disrupted and jobs on the line,
People are nervous, distracted with fear.
Southern Europe’s becoming a desert with sand;
Its desperate people are trekking up north
Joined by North Africans, starving and sick,
Who’ll be turned back or halted at gunpoint henceforth”.

Yes, we curse the short-sighted, the venal, the blind,
Who carelessly caused us this terrible plight,
Who lived comfortable lives in a state of denial
And whose gifts to the world were, in retrospect, slight.
Some were bought and created those bogus statistics;
They twisted the science, unconscionably lied.
Some bullied the serious people who warned them
And none had the courage and faith to decide.

Man will react, if at all, in a crisis,
When the ambitious and greedy have backs to the wall.
Now speeches and meetings are all we can offer.
I apologize, kids, for us all to you all!

Robert Hanrott, January 2008

The United States’ fertility levels have been below replacement level — the level at which a given generation can exactly replace itself, usually 2,100 births per 1,000 women — since 1971. Immigration has has kept population statistics on the level.

Recently the National Center for Health Statistics reported that U.S. fertility had fallen to a record low — for the second straight year. The fertility rate declined to 60.2 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age, down 3 percent from 2016. The number of births in the United States fell 2 percent to 3.85 million, the lowest in 30 years. In fact, the only group for whom birthrates have risen this year is women over 40. This slump began during the 2008 recession. Now the recession has ended but the baby numbers haven’t picked back up. Millennials are not just not buying houses and not setting up their 401(k)s, but many of them are postponing other parts of their lives, too, including childbirth.

Some people put this trend down to too much Netflix and preoccupation with cellphones and social media. Others to nervousness about financial stability, the modern lack of job security, parental benefits and profamily policies in most U.S. workplaces. Still others suspect that young people are actually enjoying themselves with expensive dinners out, pricey gym subscriptions, fancy holidays and nice clothes (and why not?) The main reason, however, may lie in the growing empowerment of women, who now have more choices than ever before and have been putting off childbirth to pursue careers.

Does this matter? One can argue that the Earth is already over-populated and that we are wrecking the environment of the one planet we have. Turmoil, mass migration and warfare are all on the cards with climate change and world population heading ever upwards. But those who disagree, and fear dropping population, point to Japan, which has the world’s lowest birthrate and has lost 1 million people over the past five years. It faces social decline, a lack of meaning, and an increase in loneliness.

If I had to choose I would prefer the Japanese-style population decline, in a peaceful and law-abiding mode, to the winner-take-all, capitalist preoccupation with a never-ending growth that requires a constantly increasing population and leads to boom-and-bust economics and obscene wealth and poverty.
(based on an article by Christine Emba, Washington Post)