 Author
|
Topic: What about being an unwelcome presence? (Read 24116 times)
|
|
vermass
|
Hey Robert it's me Robert (I love doing that), I agree with you 100%. I too find it very hard to believe other states will follow. Several things can happen:
[1] We are totally unsuccessfull (I doubt it)
[2] We are partially successfull. Another words they throw us a bone once in a while. I for one don't want a bone I want the meat!
[3] We are successfull at securing a Free State (I love the sound of that one)!
Once we are successfull It is likely that people will migrate TO US that want to participate in the FSP. If this happens our political power will only strengthen. If however as we start to become successfull in our state we try to branch out we may die as a movement, like spreading out a fire before it gets hot enough. The career polliticians will see us as a threat and stomp us out. As long as we're a NH or a WY or whatever movement we will be able to continue too grow. We must be very powerfull in our chosen state, our "base", BEFORE we even consider extending beyond our borders.
There are a lot of people in Government that benifit from the status quo. There are a lot of people getting MORE out of the present system than they put in. These two groups WILL band together. Those government goons will tell the [other] leaches what we are trying to do and how it will effect their free ride. Placement is crucial, we must have as much local support as possible. Question is where is that? Noone is SURE.
Your comment about urgency is also so true. If NH is chosen I may very well move next spring. If it's WY it'll be 2 or 3 years due to difference in pay. I can transfer to NH with the same pay why not just move sooner! I WILL take a pretty good pay cut in WY. As I wish to buy a house I'll need more time at THIS pay scale to save up for WY. Either way I'll not wait any longer than I must.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Give me liberty or give me death!"
|
|
|
|
phylinidaho
|
Your comment about urgency is also so true. If NH is chosen I may very well move next spring. If it's WY it'll be 2 or 3 years due to difference in pay. I can transfer to NH with the same pay why not just move sooner! I WILL take a pretty good pay cut in WY. As I wish to buy a house I'll need more time at THIS pay scale to save up for WY. Either way I'll not wait any longer than I must. If WY is chosen, I may very well move this winter, since it will cost me less to make the move. If NH is chosen, I may need to wait until the 20,000 is reached, since such a move will be very risky for me. (not only from the standpoint of moving expenses from Idaho, but trying to live at the higher cost of living evident on the East Coast). I cannot be an effective activist if I starve to death.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
George Reich
FSP Participant
Global Moderator
 Offline
Posts: 546
I just *love* it when Hank and Dagny brainstorm!
|
If WY is chosen, I may very well move this winter, since it will cost me less to make the move. If NH is chosen, I may need to wait until the 20,000 is reached, since such a move will be very risky for me. (not only from the standpoint of moving expenses from Idaho, but trying to live at the higher cost of living evident on the East Coast). I cannot be an effective activist if I starve to death. It looks to me like you are much more likely to starve right where you are, Phyllis. Poverty rates ranked by state: 1 AK (best) 2 NH 3 VT 4 DE 5 ME 6 SD 7 WY 8 ND 9 ID 10 MT (worst) Source: http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty99/povstate99.html |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If everyone were rich there would be no need for government assistance. If everyone were rich all children could attend private schools. If everyone were rich, government would become superfluous. Read the free e-book at this site: http://www.scienceofgettingrich.net |
|
|
|
Robert H.
|
It looks to me like you are much more likely to starve right where you are, Phyllis. Poverty rates ranked by state:
I haven't seen any Feed the Children ads for any of these states yet.  Compare the above to how all 50 states rank for a more complete picture: 1 AK - 7th out of 50 2 NH - 10th out of 50 3 VT - 13th out of 50 4 DE - 15th out of 50 5 ME - 17th out of 50 6 SD - 27th out of 50 7 WY - 29th out of 50 8 ND - 38th out of 50 9 ID - 39th out of 50 10 MT - 45th out of 50 The Cenus Bureau also places the a position for the entire United States on this same chart - it comes in at number 30, immediately following Wyoming. Thus, the first seven states on this list (AK - WY) have poverty levels less than the average poverty level of the country as a whole. There are also some other problems created by ranking our candidate states only against one another based on this chart criteria, and considering them as poor or otherwise lacking in opportunity because of how they place. My home state, Virginia, comes in on the list immediately following Vermont. The current state where I live, South Carolina, comes in immediately following Wyoming. And California comes in at number 41 behind Idaho. But consider... Virginia has a larger economy and more opportunity than Vermont by magnitudes. Fairfax County, where I lived, is one of the richest counties in the country and the area is positively booming. There is no lack of opportunity there. South Carolina comes in following Wyoming, but again, there is no way that South Carolina has less in the way of economic opportunity or prosperity than Wyoming. And lastly, consider California, which on this list comes in behind every one of our candidate states with the exception of Montana. But California had (last I heard) the 7th largest economy in the world!Do any of us doubt that we couldn't get jobs or live well if the FSP was headed to California? Yet, on this list, it would appear worse off North Dakota. So I would caution against making any conclusions based on this data without further qualification. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
vermass
|
As a MA resident NH is easier for ME to move to. I also may be able to transfer and maintain my present hourly pay rate. When cost of living is higher and pay is much higher I'll take the pay with the higher cost of living. Used to live in SC earned 50% more pay when I returned to MA than I was making in SC. Cost of living is not 50% higher in MA than SC; housing cost in the biggest difference and that's close to 50%, clothing, food, car insurance, taxes and food prices differ little. I live much better in MA than I did in SC, all this of course is for the SAME occupation. I am only speaking of my own experience and others will have different experiences.
Poverty rates are not the best indicaters of quality of life. Most homesteaders are probably "living in poverty". Small independent farmers also show very low income when all is said and done. I think that many independent people living in WY are going to show low incomes and appear to be "living in poverty" when in fact they have plenty to eat and live the life they CHOSE to live. I think that there's also a lot more income unreported in WY than NH. Maybe I'm looking at all this the wrong way but as I said I'm going by my own experience.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Give me liberty or give me death!"
|
|
|
|
Zxcv
|
Once we are successfull It is likely that people will migrate TO US that want to participate in the FSP. If this happens our political power will only strengthen. If however as we start to become successfull in our state we try to branch out we may die as a movement, like spreading out a fire before it gets hot enough. The career polliticians will see us as a threat and stomp us out. I think it will play out differently. I believe whatever state is chosen by FSP, NH, WY, ID, and to a lesser extent SD, AK and MT will all get an influx of freedom-lovers. People will see what FSP is doing, say "that's a good idea, maybe I ought to move" and then file that away in the back of their brain. Then 5 years later when their socialist state economy throws them out of a job, or they can't take one more tax hike, or whatever, they will remember that ID, WY and NH were good FSP states and maybe find some way to get to one of them. So I see a general, long-term movement, far beyond the immediate project. A good collection of states will become more free while places like NY and CA will sink further into the morass and export more jobs, and all their freedom-lovers. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jgmaynard
|
"I believe whatever state is chosen by FSP, NH, WY, ID, and to a lesser extent SD, AK and MT will all get an influx of freedom-lovers. " I concur. At the very least, an awful lot of liberty loving people are going to learn about those states, and begin to think about moving for liberty, and many will. Now if we could just each visit all the states for a week or so, we'd be all set! lol....  JM |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The Light of Alexandria By James Maynard A history of the first 1,000 years of science, and how it changed the ancient world, and our world today. http://www.lightofalexandria.com
|
|
|
|
Kelton Baker
|
On Apr. 30, I posted a rant from a resident of Idaho who was entirely opposed to the idea of the FSP moving to 'her state'. Here is a response that looks like it could have come from a fellow Porcupine: YOUR VIEW: 'Libertarian Migration'I feel that I need to respond to the recent worry regarding the "Great Libertarian Migration" into your state. First off, I would like to apologize (even though I do not speak for the Free State Project or for any other Libertarians at all), as I see how the project comes across as some sort of "invasion" or aggression against the current population in which every state they end up choosing, and the ultimate purpose of this "invasion" seems to be to radically alter the government of said state. Perhaps a better metaphor than to compare this project to those "wackos" that you successfully ousted recently is to look at the project as a large business looking for a corporate headquarters. This "business" would bring an influx of "employees" from out of state in addition to "hiring" from within the state providing jobs and increasing the overall state GNP. The key difference is to actually take a look at who these people are instead of taking a few inflammatory views of theirs and painting them with such a wide brush (i.e., these folks want to bring about legalized drugs and prostitution into our state). If you were to take a look at the individuals within the Libertarian Party you would find a group of people who are well educated, highly productive (entrepreneurs, business people, etc.), that would greatly enhance any state's population. ... They will be politically active, they will engage in discussions with those that disagree or do not understand Libertarianism, they will try to persuade others to at least take an objective look at what a truly free citizen is and how he/she differs from the current citizens in the U.S. are. The main ideological difference between Libertarianism and our current political philosophies (Democrat or Republican) could be summed up like this: Libertarianism believes that people are basically good and will make better decisions regarding their lives and property than any outside agency (government) ... Michael Stedman, Reno, Nev. 1412 |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 05, 2003, 10:26:32 am by exitus... »
|
Logged
|
Give me some men who are stout-hearted men Who will fight for the right they adore. Start me with ten, who are stout-hearted men And I'll soon give you ten thousand more...--O. Hammerstein
|
|
|
|
Robert H.
|
This editorial appeared in the NH Keene Sentinel today. They seem to be pulling a Montana and recommending that we go elsewhere. But then I hear that Keene is a liberal town. *** Sentinel Editorial: Don't be hasty (6-26-03) Libertarian Robert Kingsbury visited The Sentinel in 1996 to outline his philosophy. But the policies he put forward as a candidate for governor of New Hampshire seemed indistinguishable from those of your average fringe conservative. He said he was against state-government involvement in education, and in favor of unfettered gun rights and property rights. There are just too many unnecessary laws, he said. But when we asked if he was against passing a law against flag-burning, he went ballistic. Flag-burners should rot in jail, he said. Presumably he meant government jail. Kingsbury got 5,974 votes that year, a little more than 1 percent of the total. Last year, he ran for governor as a Republican, getting 877 votes in the primary. John Babiarz was the 2000 and 2002 Libertarian candidate for governor. Like Kingsbury, he talked like a conservative and walked like a conservative. His big issue was a proposal to defy the New Hampshire Supreme Court’s Claremont decisions, which said the state government must pay the cost of an adequate education for all children. Babiarz proposed declaring the cost of an adequate education to be zero dollars. He also wanted to offer tax credits to people who send their kids to private schools. His most evident nonconservative stand was his strong support for hemp cultivation. In 2000, Babiarz got 6,446 votes; in 2002 he got 13,028. That's about 3 percent. Babiarz and Kingsbury may do even better in the coming years if the Free State Project comes to New Hampshire. That's a group of self-proclaimed Libertarians who plan to move 20,000 fellow travelers into a single state where they can have a a strong impact on social and political life. (So far, they have only 4,000 people, but they have high hopes.) The group's members plan to pick a small state where they can repeal laws and limit the scope of government, especially regarding gun control, taxes, property rights and schools. If all goes well, the Free State Project will set up a society where people pack guns, educate their children by themselves, and keep whatever money they scrounge up selling hemp. This week, representatives of the group are casing New Hampshire to see if it's ripe for the plucking. On Sunday, they were met at a Lancaster campground by Granite State Libertarians who touted what they believe to be this state's advantages: no income tax, a beautiful seacoast, the White Mountains, only a small number of unionized workers, and a border with another country (apparently for quick exits should anything go wrong). The Free Staters are looking at 10 states that might fit their needs, but their spokespeople say New Hampshire and Wyoming are in the lead so far. What an honor. We hope these folks have a nice visit and pay a lot of New Hampshire rooms and meals taxes. But they shouldn't be too hasty. Wyoming may not have a foreign border but we hear it's a beautiful place, with lots of mountains, tons of guns, and only about as third as many people as New Hampshire. Like New Hampshire, Wyoming has no income tax. But, unlike New Hampshire, the state imposes no tax on out-of-state retirement income. And, get this: In Cheyenne, there's a company that manufactures Hempdip, which it bills as a healthy alternative to tobacco! On the Web: www.state.wy.us and www.hempdip.com http://www1.keenesentinel.com/localnews/editorial.htm |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: June 26, 2003, 08:15:40 pm by RobertH »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Karl
Guest
|
This editorial appeared in the NH Keene Sentinel today. They seem to be pulling a Montana and recommending that we go elsewhere. But then I hear that Keene is a liberal town.
Its a liberal college town. Nearly a quarter of the population are students, half of which are from other states. Luckily, the out-of-staters can't vote in NH, but they can make a big fuss, and probably have a larger-than-life influence on the local media. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jgmaynard
|
I am actually living in Keene now.... Yes, Keene has 4 colleges in a town of ~ 20k people, so we are about 20% students sept-may. The Sentinel is far and away the most liberal paper in the state..... But the students are amazingly apolitical... Even the Republicans can't keep a student group together for two semesters... We kept a Lib grop together at KSC for 2 years, though  The AP article on us (in another thread) was pretty positive though, and ran in the state's largest paper (the Union Leader). JM |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The Light of Alexandria By James Maynard A history of the first 1,000 years of science, and how it changed the ancient world, and our world today. http://www.lightofalexandria.com
|
|
|
|
Hank
|
We seem to have drifted a long way from Heyduke (a NH resident and native) saying he does not welcome 20,000 of any kind of incomer.
Are NH voters going to let NH grow to as many people as Massachusetts?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Rearden
|
We seem to have drifted a long way from Heyduke (a NH resident and native) saying he does not welcome 20,000 of any kind of incomer.
Are NH voters going to let NH grow to as many people as Massachusetts?
Yet another thread brought back from the dead. NH voters will "let" NH grow to as many people the market allows to move there, and that's plenty more than live there, now. As Governor Benson said, "Come on up! We'd love to have you." Speaking of people "letting" their state grow: Hank, are you aware that the default zoning for Carbon County, WY, which applies to any part of the county that is not otherwise zoned, (over half of Carbon County) allows residential building on those lots with a minimum size of 640 acres -- a full square mile?!?!?! According to the article I read the ranchers in the county support the measure because they don't want it to change. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Government can do only one thing: It can break your legs, hand you a crutch, and say, "See? If not for the government you couldn't walk."
|
|
|
Karl
Guest
|
Speaking of people "letting" their state grow: Hank, are you aware that the default zoning for Carbon County, WY, which applies to any part of the county that is not otherwise zoned, (over half of Carbon County) allows residential building on those lots with a minimum size of 640 acres -- a full square mile?!?!?! According to the article I read the ranchers in the county support the measure because they don't want it to change.
What about this Hank? Do you support zoning as long as it seems to protect your faux rural lifestyle? If I buy land next to your land in the Free State, can I build a city on it? Or will you use the Government to stop me? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Hank
|
Keith, The long term goals of many Porcupines expressed here has been not just 20,000 or 100,000 but to liberate a state and make it a magnet for hundreds of thousands of liberty-minded people. You can be very sure there will be a lot of residents of New Hampshire saying exactly the same thing as Heyduke started this thread with. I hope that this can be discussed constructively.
I am a native of New Hampshire, and I am not the least bit excited about the idea of 20,000 out-of-staters moving in and attempting to hijack the local political system.
How does FSP plan upon addressing this extremely valid concern of mine?
Thanks...
You can be sure that planning and zoning regulations will be passed in New Hampshire mandating a minimum number of acres or a maximum density per square mile. One acre? Five acres? Ten acres? Don't say it won't happen. It already has. A google search turned up so many hits that it looks like nearly every town and county in New Hampshire has such regulations already. Town of New Boston, NH, subdivision regulationsCrow too much Keith, and we'll dig up egregious examples from New Hampshire already in place. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
