Free State Project Forum
271565 Posts in 22289 Topics by 36755 Members / Latest Member: LibertyFenix
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 19, 2014, 02:55:15 am

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search

Join the FSP

POSTING GUIDELINES and ADVICE FOR NEW MEMBERS

NOTICE: The forum will be down for maintenance beginning at 7PM (NH time) this evening. It should be up again by 9PM. Please forgive the inconvenience and feel free to e-mail arick@freestateproject.org if you have any questions or support requests.

+  Free State Project Forum
|-+  Archive
| |-+  Which State?
| | |-+  Pick a midwestern state
« previous next »
Pages: [1]  Go Down Print
Author Topic: Pick a midwestern state  (Read 5844 times)
ZionCurtain
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 404


I'm a llama!




Ignore
Pick a midwestern state
« on: November 07, 2002, 04:29:14 pm »

All things being close to equal, I think we should pick a state in the middle of the country. Trying to get everyone out west to move to the Northeast is a tough task, one that I would probably not do. Hell almost every state that is up for selection is east of me except Alaska. It would also put a constraint on my family because all of our relative live out west. If we pick a state in the middle then it would be fair to bothe Easterners and Westerners. I am not asking for a specific state to be picked just an area of the country that geographically would be fair to all. Asking me to move to the Northeast is like me asking someone back East to move to Alaska. Not likely going to happen. We need to find some middle ground, hence the Midwest. I am pleaing to all FSPers for this common ground.
Logged
ZionCurtain
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 404


I'm a llama!




Ignore
Re:Pick a midwestern state
« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2002, 10:20:33 pm »

Since all the states are in the North I think North Dakota and South Dakota would qualify regionally.
Logged
1DayAtATime
First 1000
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6458


Live Free or Die!


WWW
Re:Pick a midwestern state
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2002, 02:32:05 am »


The closest candidate to the "center" is

SOUTH DAKOTA

The next best center state would be WY.  WY is the southern most of the western states.  Wyoming is the closest state for those in:
L.A., San Diego, and Orange County, CA
Phoenix, Mesa, and Tucson, AZ
Albquerque, and Santa Fe, NM
El Paso, San Antonio, Austin, Midland, Lubblock, and Amarillo TX
Oklahoma City, OK
Las Vegas, NV
and everywhere in the 6 states that boarder WY.  WY (after SD) is the most centrally located of all the 10 states.  

All of the other states fall way behind SD and WY when it comes to location with 3 of the states (AK, ME, and NH) having extreme costal locations.  I feel that being on a coast is bad because of travel time when flying and inablility to take bus or car in most inter-state travel situations.  I think being on the Canadian boarder causes the same problems.  The far north states (all of them except WY and SD) are too far north for most people to drive to and take extra air travel for many people.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2003, 11:06:52 pm by FreedomRoad » Logged

Please do not take anything I say as 100% accurate or as an official opinion of the FSP.

Haven't joined the Free State Project yet? Join now! http://freestateproject.org/fsn10
Looking for resources on where to live and how to find a job in NH? http://freestateproject.org/resources
Robert H.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1361

Jeffersonian


WWW

Ignore
Re:Pick a midwestern state
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2002, 02:56:33 am »

All of the other states fall way behind SD and WY when it comes to location with 3 of the states (AK, ME, and NH) having extreme costal locations.  I feel that being on a coast is bad because of travel time when flying and inablility to take bus or car in most inter-state travel situations.  I think being on the Canadian boarder causes the same problems.  The far north states (all of them except WY and SD) are too far north for most people to drive to and take extra air travel for many people.

I'm leary of coastal and border areas right now because of the increased measures with regard to homeland security in particular.  Scrutiny is the word of the day when it comes to areas of access into this country, and this ideology conflicts heavily with our goal of setting up an environment where the people are free to come and go as they please without being treated like a bug under a glass.  I think we would run into disproportionately heavy opposition in such places for that reason.  State and local governments, trying to hold onto their power in the face of serious challenge by FSPer's, could use such things to paint us as extremists, thus possibly frightening people into not supporting us.  The feds could also clamp down on us by appealing to security concerns that would give them an excuse to intervene on behalf of the entire country.

Not locating near borders or port access could potentially take potent weapons out of the hands of local, state, and federal officials.  They'll still find reasons to oppose us of course, but at least we will have narrowed down the list, and what basis for opposition does remain to them will not impact the rest of the country as much either.  People in New York would not be as concerned about our more open society because they won't have to worry about terrorists being able to able to blow up NY buildings after entering the country through lax security in North Dakota or Maine, for example.  

Consider other examples even aside from homeland security as well, such as the drug war.  If we don't have border control, the feds won't be able to cry havoc against us because of Canadian marajiuana making its way through our territory.  The same drug problem could also haunt us in port cities as well, leading to greater regulation of commerce, which could turn businesses against us.

So avoiding borders and ports would, I believe, potentially help us build the case that whatever it is that we do in, say Wyoming, is not anyone else's business because it doesn't affect them.  This would give us the ability to defend a smaller front against a smaller foe with less in the way of ammunition and reinforcements to throw against us.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2002, 03:00:36 am by Robert Hawes » Logged

1DayAtATime
First 1000
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6458


Live Free or Die!


WWW
Re:Pick a midwestern state
« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2003, 12:11:05 am »

Wyoming and South Dakota- Some of the FSP members have suggested that South Dakota is the best compromise state for the FSP project.  While this is an interesting point, I believe that Wyoming, actually, is the best compromise state.  South Dakota is very dependent on farming and the federal subsidies that come with South Dakota’s farm economy.  Wyoming is near two major metropolitan centers but South Dakota is not near any metropolitan centers.  Wyoming has better religious diversity than any of the candidate states, but in South Dakota, the combined numbers of Lutherans, Catholics, and Methodists make up 65% of the population.  Wyoming has a very low native-born population while South Dakota has the second highest native-born population.  Wyoming has warm areas spread all across the state, but the only remotely warm part of South Dakota is in one section of the Black Hills.  Wyoming has both windy and non-windy areas while all of South Dakota is quite windy.  Wyoming has mountains, hills, and valleys, but almost all of South Dakota is very flat.    
Logged

Please do not take anything I say as 100% accurate or as an official opinion of the FSP.

Haven't joined the Free State Project yet? Join now! http://freestateproject.org/fsn10
Looking for resources on where to live and how to find a job in NH? http://freestateproject.org/resources
1DayAtATime
First 1000
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6458


Live Free or Die!


WWW
Re:Pick a midwestern state
« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2003, 08:33:38 pm »

Minneapolis is only three hours away.
And are you implying that Sioux Falls is not a metropolitan center? Smile when you say that. Grin

I should have said major metropolitan centers.  Minneapolis is at least 3 hours away from one small part of the state.  Most of SD is a much greater distance from a major city.  I guess 3 hours is close or far depending on how you look at it.  

Quote
You have not been to southern South Dakota, have you? Say about July. Cool

I understand what you are saying.  I'll try to put it another way.  While Wyoming has the 3rd warmest winters, SD has the 3rd coldest winters.

Quote
You can hide out in the Black Hills. Those forests cut the wind.

This is one small section of SD.  BTW, this section is very, very far from a major or even mid-sized MSA.

Quote
Hiking in the Black Hills is anything but flat. Four thousand feet from Rapid City to Harney Peak. I'd put them up against the Laramie Mountains.

Wyoming has many moutains and the Black Hills are in both WY and SD.  I did say that most of SD is flat, not that all of it is.  Most of SD is farmland, very flat farmland that is very windy and very cold for much of the year.

I am not against SD.  I think it is the 2nd best state for the FSP.  However, I feel that WY is a better state and even makes a better compromise state.  We can compare the two states all day but the  vast majority of FSP members would rather go to WY than SD.  

Actually, I would rather live in the Black Hills of SD than in any area of any state.  I am still able to pick Wyoming because I care more about the project meeting its goals than I care about living in the perfect place.  The way I figure it, all of the state except ND offer a better place to live than Memphis.
Logged

Please do not take anything I say as 100% accurate or as an official opinion of the FSP.

Haven't joined the Free State Project yet? Join now! http://freestateproject.org/fsn10
Looking for resources on where to live and how to find a job in NH? http://freestateproject.org/resources
Zxcv
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1229





Ignore
Re:Pick a midwestern state
« Reply #6 on: July 30, 2003, 09:41:32 pm »

Both Dakotas do very well when I run my big spreadsheet. 2nd and 3rd place, I think. They'd be pretty good choices, esp S Dakota. I'd be happy to live there, although I'll bet I will have trouble getting my wife to go there...
Logged
Kelton
FSP Participant
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604


el resplandor de las llamas de la libertad




Ignore
Re:Pick a midwestern state
« Reply #7 on: July 30, 2003, 11:46:48 pm »

Both Dakotas do very well when I run my big spreadsheet. 2nd and 3rd place, I think. They'd be pretty good choices, esp S Dakota. I'd be happy to live there, although I'll bet I will have trouble getting my wife to go there...
This I've got to see, the last copy of your spreadsheet started getting errors in it after I played with some formulas, so I haven't used it in a while.
Jason's spreadsheet consistently brings North Dakota up to no more than 7th place, one time when I ran it, it surprised me by coming out ahead of Alaska, but never 2nd or 3rd, though SD does that once in a while, never ND.
I expressed my dislike for ND here this morning: http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=690;start=msg38763#msg38763
Though after thinking about it, I thought how I could really get ahead in North Dakota with home prices as low as they are.  Cargill recently moved their offices from California to there, I'm sure I could get an agriculture job relatively easily.  The crime rate is about the lowest in the nation.  The population factor and the 'pure desperation for solutions factor' might outweigh their recent statist tendencies.
Who knows, I might even place ND 9th instead of 10th after a little more consideration.

« Last Edit: July 31, 2003, 09:50:28 am by exitus » Logged

. . .the foundations of our national policy should be laid in private morality. If individuals be not influenced by moral principles, it is in vain to look for public virtue --The U.S. Senate's reply to George Washington's first inaugural address
Robert H.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1361

Jeffersonian


WWW

Ignore
Re:Pick a midwestern state
« Reply #8 on: July 31, 2003, 06:36:27 am »

Who knows, I might even place ND 9th instead of 10th after a little more consideration.

One of the things that really hurts North Dakota for me is that I believe it is unlikely that it would attract or retain that many activists.  The winters there are brutal even by northern tier standards, and North Dakota lacks the compensatory elements that a state like Alaska offers in exchange for bundling up (such as wonderful scenery and outdoor opportunities).  North Dakota also lacks the various climate zones that even Alaska offers, so there's really nowhere you can go to escape that arctic blast coming out of Canada.
Logged

Pages: [1]  Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!