Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Poll

What freedom is most important to you?

Fiscal Freedom
- 8 (42.1%)
Guns Freedom
- 2 (10.5%)
Alcohol Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Auto/Roads Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Privacy Freedom
- 5 (26.3%)
Victimless Freedom
- 1 (5.3%)
Campaign Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Forfeiture Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Marijuana Freedom
- 2 (10.5%)
Gambling Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Education Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Marriage Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Tobacco Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Occupational Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Eminent Domain Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Tort Reform Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Land Use Freedom
- 1 (5.3%)
Labor Market Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Health Insurance Freedom
- 0 (0%)
Utilities Freedom
- 0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 19


Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: One size freedom does NOT fit all  (Read 71113 times)

KZUV.COM

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
One size freedom does NOT fit all
« on: April 21, 2012, 09:40:45 am »

Hi Everybody,

I have written a program based on the 'Freedom in the 50 States' study at Mercatus Center.
The 'State Freedom Calculator' lets you modify the weights of the study and re-rank the states based on your personal preferences.
It also includes graphs so you can see how your priorities stack up against each other as well as compare multiple states graphically side by side.

My contribution to the 'Which State' argument:
Just because a State is 'freest' for one person does NOT mean it will feel like the 'freest' for you.
In fact, if everybody indeed does move to New Hampshire you will only end up with the same thing you have right now... a bunch of different people all living in the same place.
Let's face it, our nation is divided politically, socially and economically.  Issues like medical marijuana, gay marriage and gun ownership have driven an irreconcilable wedge that makes it uncomfortable, if not impossible for some citizens of this country to live in the same jurisdiction as other citizens.  What is the solution? 

What's the problem?  Why can't all citizens of this nation live together in harmony?  Does it really affect a person in Texas if somebody marries somebody of the same sex in California?  Does it really bother you if I smoke pot in a restaurant 1000 miles away?  I understand my rights end where yours begin but let's be reasonable.  At the same time,  I respect your right to live in a community where certain standards are upheld.  You can make it illegal to chew gum and walk at the same time for all I care.  I also understand that this may pose a problem when I travel from State to State.  I am willing to deal with that border when I cross it.

There's a bigger problem than State laws though... the erosion of State Powers by the Federal Government.  Do you ever wonder how crap like the Patriot Act and the more recent NDAA gets slipped by 'We the People'?  We can certainly all agree that we don't want an Orwellian society where an omnipotent Federal Government peers into every facet of our lives using virtual and physical technology.  How is it that now I can be arrested and my constitutional rights suspended?  I thought those rights were inalienable?

I believe the Federal Government is able to get away with it because they have forced us to live together in a state of constant conflict.  Remember, were never going to agree on certain topics.
Now, were all dependent on the Federal Government for equality and justice.
Would a State not be stronger at the Federal level if they could all agree on a common set of beliefs and rules?
Will it solve our differences?  Absolutely NOT!  But it's ok to be different.  That's exactly why our country was founded in the first place.  Tolerance.

I'm not in favor of splitting up the Union.  I am in favor of reducing the size and influence of the Federal Government.
For as long as we all live on the same land mass, we will have common interest that are worth preserving with a constitutional bond.
But by and large Federal jobs should move to the State level and only for those States that want to pay for them.  You're always free to move.

The State Freedom Calculator will allow you to customize more than 126 variables and choose your place to live based on your preferences.
If everybody would use it, the result would be a natural migration that will at the least consolidate your votes at the Federal level.
The program is free, and feedback is appreciated.  http://www.kzuv.com/freestate

Ken
www.kzuv.com
« Last Edit: April 21, 2012, 11:31:13 am by KZUV.COM »
Logged

ghog

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
Re: One size freedom does NOT fit all
« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2012, 05:29:23 pm »

Based on my vote, I believe I am starting with the right state, NH. I voted fiscal because I agree with what you wrote about Federal Government encroaching on all of our rights. To me it starts with the fiat currency system and NH is one of the least dependent of Federal money. Also, they have a stable economy and employment picture which is all too important! Next step would be for states to start Nullifying unConstitutional Federal laws and having great local leadership can make that happen. My desire is to run for some type of local office and truly represent the People.
Logged

TJames

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
Re: One size freedom does NOT fit all
« Reply #2 on: April 22, 2012, 02:31:50 am »

I have given this thought for years. I believe tax is theft and from my embrace with the non-aggression principle flows all my other libertarian views. New Hampshire has a few non libertarian law like wire tapping but we can work to change that. The FSP is clear about who they want. After all it isn't 20,000 yet.
Logged

KZUV.COM

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
Re: One size freedom does NOT fit all
« Reply #3 on: April 22, 2012, 08:59:17 am »

Thanks for your responses ghog and TravisJ,

You know, I have to believe that on the real Planet Earth your arguments for fiscal responsibility make a lot of sense.
But here on Bizarro Earth the empirical evidence seems to contradict that logic.

Based on the study by Sorens and Ruger New Hampshire ranks #2 for fiscal 'freedom', but it ranks #11 for personal freedom and #18 for regulatory freedom.  Still in the top half (respectible) but clearly not the freest if your top priorities are of a more personal nature... like where I'm free to work or what I'm allowed to do on private property or behind closed doors.  In other words, I agree that if you are more fiscally responsible you SHOULD be more free to do what you want.  Unfortunately, it seems in New Hampshire that they not only want you to pay your own way(less federal money)... but there's not necessarily a commensurate amount of freedom that comes with that responsibility.

What's worse is that if our national economy continues to get worse, and I believe it will due to the 'fiscal irresponsibility' of the nation as a whole States like New Hampshire will surely be punished.  The national debt is shared by all of us to the tune of about $700K per family of 4.  Those who can pay... will and dearly.  In the end you may be left with an economy in shambles in addition to a rank #10 State for personal and regulatory freedoms.  It may be a better strategy to focus on personal and regulatory freedoms.  After all, it's these cultures that will provide the MOST fiscal freedom in hard times (in the form of black markets) v. a culture with tight fiscal and regulatory controls.  Something to think about.

The last thing I want to do is come into your forum and stir up trouble.  Believe me, this question of what State to live in is a top priority for me.  I have total respect for what you're doing here.  On the other hand, if you're going to build a society based on he love of money alone I have to believe your headed for trouble.  All cultures love money... but not all can live together.  For example, a fiscally conservative Christian and a fiscally conservative homosexual couple.  In a perfect world there would be tolerance.  In the real world one group truly believes the other is responsible for all that's wrong and harmful.  

I urge you to check out my desktop application 'The State Freedom Calculator' at http://www.kzuv.com/freestate and compute your own personal list of options.  The program is base on the 'Freedom in the 50 States' study from Mercatus Center and is absolutely free.  I really believe that if the citizens of this country would consolidate into communities of like minded people we would be more likely to send representatives to Washington that will push a State agenda... not a corrupt Federal agenda.  The fact that States will not agree at the Federal level only means that the Federal government will stay out of the States business.  Our National bond will be to preserve our way of life at the State level.
Please forgive me if somebody's already suggested this... but could you not have several 'sub-communities' here at the FreeStateProject?  We all want the same thing on a macro level but I believe there may be more diversity than you realize on a micro level.

Thanks again for the feedback!

Ken
« Last Edit: April 22, 2012, 09:21:31 am by KZUV.COM »
Logged

TJames

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
Re: One size freedom does NOT fit all
« Reply #4 on: April 28, 2012, 09:31:47 pm »

Depending on how I tweak it. NH SD ID. The FSP hopes to start up in NH and work in ME and VT. It sounds workable.

Also letting people keep more of their money often leads to more demands of freedom. I can site many examples.

Don't forget laws change all the time.

Why bring this up when we picked a state? If I picked Vermont for gun freedom I would need to deal with socialism but my allies would be scattered all around the World. I'm multi-issue you know? Are you here to help or not?
Logged

KZUV.COM

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
Re: One size freedom does NOT fit all
« Reply #5 on: April 29, 2012, 07:30:28 pm »

Hi Travis,

Please accept my apologies for sounding contrarian.  It's not my intention to split up your group.
You asked if I was here to help... yes.  I'm here to help myself by learning more about freedom.
After reading more of your site I see that you are recruiting people of like mind.  So I see that you have already considered my questions.

I too am of a Libertarian mindset... unfortunately I wouldn't even consider living on the East Coast.
Has the group considered any West Coast Affiliates such as Oregon?  and why not develop affiliate groups in any state who would want to bolster your political influence?

I'm sure it's hard enough to get the first group solidified without thinking about expanding at this point.  Perhaps in the future?

Ken
Logged

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: One size freedom does NOT fit all
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2012, 07:42:04 pm »

I too am of a Libertarian mindset... unfortunately I wouldn't even consider living on the East Coast.
Has the group considered any West Coast Affiliates such as Oregon?  and why not develop affiliate groups in any state who would want to bolster your political influence?

I'm sure it's hard enough to get the first group solidified without thinking about expanding at this point.  Perhaps in the future?

I'd suggest reading this recent thread on the Shire Society forum: http://forum.shiresociety.com/the-shire-society/the-fsp-in-other-places/

I'll quote what I posted, but the whole thread is worth reading:
Quote
Working to reform/replace/whatever the biggest empire in history is hard.  Moving a few miles more or less is trivial, in comparison.  Someone with so little dedication to liberty that a minor geographic difference is an impediment... isn't cut out for being a real activist.  The reason FSW has failed, is precisely because it's made up of those who put comparatively-petty concerns higher than their dedication to liberty.  Any other project made up of less-than-dedicated folks is doomed to the same fate.

Yes, it's been hard for some folks to move here.  But that's an important first test, as it weeds out those who are more interested in hoping for liberty, than in actually achieving it.  The barrier is a feature, not a bug; those who won't climb it, are not of much value.  Maybe they'll do simple things like show up once or twice a year and vote, but that's a drop in the bucket, compared to the population... we need folks who will work, and work hard.  Moving one place versus another is as easy as taking a nap, compared to what is needed from an activist (particularly at this early stage).
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

TJames

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
Re: One size freedom does NOT fit all
« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2012, 02:15:48 am »

Apologies for my accusation.

Only 10 states were eligible for the FSP. Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Delaware. The Dakotas, Montana, Idaho, Alaska, and Wyoming. Wyoming dose have a FSP but due to being the second choice it is still in the conceptual phase. In New Hampshire the early movers are successfully implementing libertarian public policies. Here in Maine the legislators envy New Hampshire.

Oregon has too many people to be considered. I might already be networked with the Republican Liberty Caucus and other libertarian groups in your area, but If not I suggest you do so.

Even my Mom is distressed about the idea of me moving 100 miles west. I'm just wondering what other problems people might have with this coast.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: One size freedom does NOT fit all
« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2012, 02:59:30 pm »

Why would the legislators in Maine envy NH? And if it were because of public policy, why couldn't the legislators change it?
Logged

TJames

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
Re: One size freedom does NOT fit all
« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2012, 05:15:14 pm »

Why would the legislators in Maine envy NH? And if it were because of public policy, why couldn't the legislators change it?


Just one example. http://www.pressherald.com/news/New-Hampshire-envy-takes-a-seat-in-Augusta_2011-05-23.html
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: One size freedom does NOT fit all
« Reply #10 on: May 01, 2012, 03:36:29 pm »

The article sounds like some people, in some instances... but not a majority, or the policy would change.
Over time situational envy happens in all instances.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

anything