Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Idaho job question  (Read 11354 times)

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #15 on: April 05, 2013, 07:19:27 am »

What?
Logged

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #16 on: April 05, 2013, 07:53:16 am »

Why do you people scare away/douche-bag away potential activists? You must secretly not want them if you continue to treat them the way you did. A couple of months ago you had someone who was, apparently, a great activist. A hard worker and things like that overall. Now, if I believe him/her/them/it, IF I do, you shooed them away and/or banned them for what? It certainly couldn't be for spouting the same things you say now. That's what I don't get about libertarians. You harp and sign on the fact that you need activists, and when you get them, either potentially or outright, you scare them away and muck the project's allure from their perspective. WHY?!

Not being a moderator, here, I can't ban anyone.  A few folks have been banned within the last few months, that I've noticed, for blatant violations of the very minimal rules of this forum.  Libertarians respect property rights, so they must not be very libertarian, in that case, eh?

I found out about Idaho's involvement with the FSP -- that is, being a top candidate for the main location -- last week. They have that "Citadel" project, and that website linked to what the FSP said about it. I'll admit, it does make the FSP look fishy. Why was Idaho since Nod's Eden of libertarianism, then overtaken by New Hampshire?

Idaho has never been an "eden" of libertarianism.  The gun laws, alone, are horrific enough to make it unacceptable to anyone who cares about liberty.  (fingerprints before you can carry a gun, like some common criminal?  really?  that's insane)

The original list of states was based upon certain population standards, not a committment to liberty.  That's what all the discussion and voting was designed to figure out.  While Idaho isn't in the bottom half of states, or anything like that, it's certainly not comparable to NH.

In addition, if North Dakota is ranked number one in overall freedom and liberty, why wasn't it chosen over New Hampshire, which currently ranks number four?

Because this isn't the "let's move someplace cool project."  It's not about where things currently stand, but rather where things can go.  What political change do you imagine seeing in Idaho or North Dakota?

What proof do you have of this "change" nonsense you keep spouting?

That change is possible here?  As crossonscout noted, it's already happening.  But the reason behind it?  Well, for example, NH has one of the largest legislatures in the entire Western world.  Made up of private citizens who've chosen to serve, not professional politicians - North Dakota pays their legislators, per day, 150% of what NH pays legislaturs per year.  Idaho does similar, but only about 120%.

You can spend a few hundred dollars on a campaign for a seat in the House, and win, here.  Try that, anywhere else.  If you register to vote in a town, you are automatically a member of the town's legislative body - the elected officials of the town are solely the executive branch, and must come to the people of the town each and every year to ask them for a budget at the town meeting.  Find another state where you can have that level of control over the government.

Since almost all taxation in NH is done at the local level, there's direct control.  Cut spending, and your taxes go down.  There are no general income or sales taxes (Idaho and North Dakota each have both).  NH is the lowest-tax state in the continental US.  That's because we - those who live here - choose to keep it that way, because we have such direct control over spending.

Idaho and North Dakota are solidly Republican, which means change is nearly impossible.  A party that has a solid grip on power, has no reason to listen to the people.  In NH, because things swing back and forth, a few liberty-minded individuals can be the "swing votes" that change the entire course of a bill in the legislature.  Party-line voters may as well not exist, because they will always vote for the party.  Swing voters are the ones who actually control what will happen, if the numbers of party-line voters are fairly balanced, as they are in NH.

In fact, I read an article that there are refugees in New England who don't even speaking English, yet are getting "help". Yes, THAT KIND of help. What's the word? Statism? Marxism? Something like that.

Yeah... that's Federal.  Good luck trying to eliminate the Welfare system.  And why should I care if someone speaks English?  This isn't England.

I may be picking on you, but it's not to start problems, it's because you're snootily talking to a potential member/activist as if he's not worthy simply because he has questions and concerns about the neighboring states. What irritates me more is that you all pine after activists, yet keep shunning/banning them. I already know of three people that you guys either banned or leper'd for whatever reason. Probably for pointing out fallacies and asking questions with the intent to improve the FSP's foundation.

Um, yes, we're looking for activists, not just bodies.  If someone's going to be turned away by trivialities, we're not going to fight to convince them.  Someone like that will not, in my experience, be an effective activist.  Someone like that will, even if convinced to show up, end up doing nothing, or actually turn around and leave after a year or two.  This isn't about getting bodies.  Showing up and voting isn't even a win.  In order to be effective, each activist who moves needs to, on average, convince five locals to switch to the side of liberty.  That requires individuals who are dedicated to the cause, not folks who are scared away by Mass or by the weather or by moving away from their favorite restaurant (all actual complaints that I've heard), or stuff like that.
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..

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #17 on: April 05, 2013, 07:55:36 am »

What?

Someone deleted his own post, between mine and crossonscout's.  He must have done so during the time that I was posting a reply to him, so take a look at the quotes in my post, if you want to see the what crossonscout was responding-to.
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..

crossonscout

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 815
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #18 on: April 05, 2013, 11:05:57 am »

What?

Someone deleted his own post, between mine and crossonscout's.  He must have done so during the time that I was posting a reply to him, so take a look at the quotes in my post, if you want to see the what crossonscout was responding-to.

This. The post I was replying to was removed and I hadn't quoted it because I knew I was going to type up a term paper.
Logged
"When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act." - Why The Gun is Civilization

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5720
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #19 on: April 05, 2013, 11:38:13 am »

Remember that this is the Friendly Forum. Stricter rules for posting apply here. No personal attacks. For that reason, OG's post was deleted.
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism

crossonscout

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 815
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #20 on: April 05, 2013, 11:44:22 am »

Remember that this is the Friendly Forum. Stricter rules for posting apply here. No personal attacks. For that reason, OG's post was deleted.

Ah, makes sense... it did seem to have an ad hominem or two if I recall correctly.

I think it's just a problem with the general irrational logic of attacking collective groups / ideas instead of boiling things down to a logical, individual level.
Logged
"When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act." - Why The Gun is Civilization

Connectisuck

  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • The Resident Misanthrope
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #21 on: April 05, 2013, 03:18:01 pm »

You have my respect from your old posts, so I did read the entire thing.

As someone who believes in solutions rather than complaints, I agree 100% that the FSP should focus on activists and not fair-weather supporters. I know I keep saying this, but I'm in it for the long haul. In it to win it. I will be here when it's raining, and I will be here to enjoy the sun afterwards. So, if people are moving to New Hampshire just to enjoy the fruits of our labour, they shouldn't come, or at least wait until ALL of the work is finished, liberty is realised, and everyone is happy. Right now, you guys (libertarians) need people who don't give a flying fuck about the bordering states. The only reason I even bring this aspect of the FSP up, is because I read a post made by a progressive (liberal), who wanted to move to New Hampshire. The replies were welcoming. This sends a confusing message. A progressive is not a libertarian, right? Why would you guys ENCOURAGE one to move to NH? I thought you didn't want state support programmes. I thought you wanted liberty. Then, on top of that, you have members like Maine Shark snootily talking down to those who have concerns -- as if you can't turn a sceptic into a believer.

I don't know about EVERYONE who was turned away from this community, but the few I DO know of, were wrongfully so. That's another thing. You guys claim to be open to intellectual debates and serious discussion -- especially when it relates to the FSP -- yet you shut down when the questions get too heavy, or when someone doesn't post their resume for the world to see. I have some important, controversial questions that need to be answered before I spend any amount of time helping the libertarian platform. If they cannot be answered, you guys aren't of the upstanding character you let yourselves on to be.

I did not know that NH was #1 at any time. I still think it's the best pick because it has a stronger liberty-loving community overall. Look at its motto: "Live Free or Die!" You can't beat that, mate. You simply can't. It seems like NH has a lot of regulation, but a good amount of personal and economic freedom. I value these things as a blue-collar tradesman. I'm not some fancy white-collar who has a trust fund and an estate waiting for me. As a lad, I had to save up to be poor. It just seemed strange that New Hampshire would be #4, BUT - I said but now - if everyone puts in effort and perseveres, it'll be back to number one in no time.

I won't keep jammering on. I agree with Maine Shark in that the FSP should be about the libertarian platform/philosophy only, and not try to bend or break for anyone -- especially if that individual is a fair-weatherer. I knew two people who said that this, and all other attempts like it would fail because "The government has more guns". Their words, not mine. Clearly not individuals who grasp the message of "Live Free or Die". That's me to a 'T'. I want to buy a car just for the New Hampshire Live Free or Die license plate, man! I think that says volumes. Anyway, thanks for typing all of that. It took a while I bet, and I DID read all of it.

TL;DR: If you're not here for the hard work, they (libertarians) don't need you. At the same time, because you all need more activists, you should try to convert sceptics. Not SELL them, but convert them.
Logged

Connectisuck

  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • The Resident Misanthrope
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #22 on: April 05, 2013, 03:37:49 pm »

Not being a moderator, here, I can't ban anyone.  A few folks have been banned within the last few months, that I've noticed, for blatant violations of the very minimal rules of this forum.  Libertarians respect property rights, so they must not be very libertarian, in that case, eh?
You, I don't respect at all. On top of that, you seem to be fixated on acting like you're some pylon of knowledge. I'll reply to this post, but don't bother replying because I won't read it. You'll just embarrass yourself. Those few folks didn't violate any rules. They came with questions, and you reacted in a way that makes libertarians look loopy. I can't blame the reds or the blues for keeping you guys out of national politics. Look at the way you act!

Idaho has never been an "eden" of libertarianism.  The gun laws, alone, are horrific enough to make it unacceptable to anyone who cares about liberty.  (fingerprints before you can carry a gun, like some common criminal?  really?  that's insane)
Did I know that, Enstein? No. In an old article, you guys were praising Idaho. So yes, it was, at one time, the Nod's Eden of libertarianism. Jeez. Look things up before you type about them.

The original list of states was based upon certain population standards, not a commitment to liberty.  That's what all the discussion and voting was designed to figure out.  While Idaho isn't in the bottom half of states, or anything like that, it's certainly not comparable to NH.
Says whom? Some kid from Maine? Right.

Because this isn't the "let's move someplace cool project."  It's not about where things currently stand, but rather where things can go.  What political change do you imagine seeing in Idaho or North Dakota?
You tell me. You're the expert after all.

That change is possible here? As crossonscout noted, it's already happening.  But the reason behind it?  Well, for example, NH has one of the largest legislatures in the entire Western world.  Made up of private citizens who've chosen to serve, not professional politicians - North Dakota pays their legislators, per day, 150% of what NH pays legislaturs per year.  Idaho does similar, but only about 120%.

You can spend a few hundred dollars on a campaign for a seat in the House, and win, here.  Try that, anywhere else.  If you register to vote in a town, you are automatically a member of the town's legislative body - the elected officials of the town are solely the executive branch, and must come to the people of the town each and every year to ask them for a budget at the town meeting.  Find another state where you can have that level of control over the government.

Since almost all taxation in NH is done at the local level, there's direct control.  Cut spending, and your taxes go down.  There are no general income or sales taxes (Idaho and North Dakota each have both).  NH is the lowest-tax state in the continental US.  That's because we - those who live here - choose to keep it that way, because we have such direct control over spending.
See what happens when you hit people with facts -- answers to their questions? Do you see? They accept the answer, and then move on. They don't make off-handed comments about activism and being an expert on politics.

Idaho and North Dakota are solidly Republican, which means change is nearly impossible.  A party that has a solid grip on power, has no reason to listen to the people.  In NH, because things swing back and forth, a few liberty-minded individuals can be the "swing votes" that change the entire course of a bill in the legislature.  Party-line voters may as well not exist, because they will always vote for the party.  Swing voters are the ones who actually control what will happen, if the numbers of party-line voters are fairly balanced, as they are in NH.
Finally. You say something intelligent.

Yeah... that's Federal.  Good luck trying to eliminate the Welfare system.  And why should I care if someone speaks English?  This isn't England.
And we're back. Sigh.

Um, yes, we're looking for activists, not just bodies.  If someone's going to be turned away by trivialities, we're not going to fight to convince them.  Someone like that will not, in my experience, be an effective activist.  Someone like that will, even if convinced to show up, end up doing nothing, or actually turn around and leave after a year or two.  This isn't about getting bodies.  Showing up and voting isn't even a win.  In order to be effective, each activist who moves needs to, on average, convince five locals to switch to the side of liberty.  That requires individuals who are dedicated to the cause, not folks who are scared away by Mass or by the weather or by moving away from their favorite restaurant (all actual complaints that I've heard), or stuff like that.
Yeah? Well, check this: I'm an activist. Not just a "body". What "experience" do you have with toxic supporters/fair-weathers? I agree that they will make HORRIBLE activists, like the guys I mentioned in my last post. "The government has more guns". That's not what this is about. Running away when things get hard. To me, you fight even if you know you'll lose. You fight because you believe in something. Surprisingly, uppity folks like you haven't tainted the FSP for me, and I do believe in liberty. I have more than enough activists on my social networks who could flip things around (in a good way). We don't give a damn about restaurants, Massachusetts (spelled it right on my first try!), the weather (is it every sunny in New Hampshire? I wanna know!), or anything trivial like that.

You think I'm a horrible activist/supporter, and that's fine. If you really think that any of the above will keep me away from something so globally significant, you need to get an MRI scan of your brain. Some say the FSP isn't a solution to the national problems, because the USA is going under, and see it as a solution to a global problem. And maybe they're right. But I don't care. "You don't care about losing?" I don't. I want to live SOMEWHERE that represents what this country was (allegedly) built on. When I die, I want to be able to say I've experienced many things, one of them being a place where the maximum role of the government is/was protection of life and liberty at the national level. People like you are going to turn others away, and to an extent, that's fine. But you won't get me to break my promise (Letter of Intent) to the FSP and New Hampshire.

I've chosen a side, kid. I think you should choose yours.
Logged

crossonscout

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 815
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #23 on: April 05, 2013, 04:06:32 pm »

You have my respect from your old posts, so I did read the entire thing.

I didn't/don't ever mean offense, was just pointing out what I see/saw as truth.

It's the internet, too much can be mis-construed through text without subtleties of body language and intonation, etc.

Anyways, glad to see you've 'come around' ... ;) I truly think you should visit NH and see everything for yourself.

See if you can make it out to PorcFest this year, that's the best time to meet everyone in a friendly laid back atmosphere. http://porcfest.com
Logged
"When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act." - Why The Gun is Civilization

Connectisuck

  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • The Resident Misanthrope
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #24 on: April 05, 2013, 10:05:11 pm »

I know you were just explaining your side. No problem, mate. On another note, I really need to make it to PorcFest.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #25 on: April 05, 2013, 10:26:06 pm »

What?

Someone deleted his own post, between mine and crossonscout's.  He must have done so during the time that I was posting a reply to him, so take a look at the quotes in my post, if you want to see the what crossonscout was responding-to.
My 'what' was to Cross. We can easily see what bills were passed in the 2009/2010 Legislature and which ones the 2011/2012 Legislature tried to overturn... really not many. And the budget process, as compared to actual spending, seems to be a mystery to many. NH's budgets are actually stand alone structures, not easily comparable.
Logged

crossonscout

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 815
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #26 on: April 05, 2013, 11:18:36 pm »

What?

Someone deleted his own post, between mine and crossonscout's.  He must have done so during the time that I was posting a reply to him, so take a look at the quotes in my post, if you want to see the what crossonscout was responding-to.
My 'what' was to Cross. We can easily see what bills were passed in the 2009/2010 Legislature and which ones the 2011/2012 Legislature tried to overturn... really not many. And the budget process, as compared to actual spending, seems to be a mystery to many. NH's budgets are actually stand alone structures, not easily comparable.

I was trying to make the point that most people don't see that "success" because they don't follow things in NH as intensely as you and I and MaineShark / others do... they see the national politics and reports such as the Mercatus center and then make assumptions based on lack of information or outright misinformation.

That's all I was trying to say.
Logged
"When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act." - Why The Gun is Civilization

crossonscout

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 815
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #27 on: April 05, 2013, 11:19:53 pm »

I know you were just explaining your side. No problem, mate. On another note, I really need to make it to PorcFest.

Great! Glad to hear it! I think you'll REALLY enjoy it. :-) I'm helping organize it this year and it's going to be exciting. :-)

Reach out to me on Facebook or at PorcFest, I love chatting / debating ideology on logic based grounds... it's a lot of fun and helps everyone grow at the end of the day. :-)
Logged
"When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act." - Why The Gun is Civilization

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #28 on: April 06, 2013, 12:55:41 am »

The success wouldn't be the budget.

The success would be things like the scholarship progam.

As I stated, budgets tend to not be easily comparable. Especially the revenue side with federal variation, sunset clauses, and things going on and off the operating budget. Many times more of partisan play than any real attempt at reform.

As for the ranking...
Its best to ask Jason, or someone intimate with the process, what the major factors are in the ranking shift.

We had so many things go on in 2009/2010. New taxes that later got repealed (by the same Legislature), not to mention ongoing social issues.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2013, 01:00:56 am by John Edward Mercier »
Logged

unsung

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
Re: Idaho job question
« Reply #29 on: April 06, 2013, 06:26:04 am »

I did not mean to start a war when I created this thread.

I didn't really want to comment on the politics but it looks like I was drug into it when I was mildly accused of not being in it for the long haul.  I live in Illinois, so please don't tell me about states that won't change.  When I looked to moving I knew I was going to not make the money that I do here, and I would be giving up a career.  Apparently that isn't enough to show my intentions were indeed serious and that I wasn't just a body.  Like I stated I am new here and pushing my resume seemed a bit egoistic, to me anyway.  But since politics were brought up I thought about NH, and I will agree you guys have a pretty good state level and below government system set up.  Unfortunately your federal level government is horrible.  Ayotte?  Terrible.  The others vote with Obama.  Obama won your state.  Maybe I'm missing something, I more than likely am, but I prefer a state where the Federal level politicians will defend the right of the State.  Is that philosophy the wrong way?  Maybe.  I guess I've already been schooled in politics in this thread alone.  I better be careful before I ask any more questions.

I am not trying to start an Idaho vs NH war. 

In the meantime if Libertarians/Constitutionalists are going to get anywhere they need to get along.  It seems if you aren't 100% hardcore Libertarian (I don't agree with illegal immigration and open borders) then you can't be part of the club.  Now I see former hardcore RP supporters splintering off to become Anarchists and ignoring Libertarians and calling Libertarians Statists because of the desire for a Constitutionally limited general government.  There is simply way too much infighting on the Liberty front.

Just how I see it, flame away, I have thick skin.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
 

anything