Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration  (Read 12943 times)

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« on: December 21, 2002, 01:37:25 pm »

One thing we ought to think about, although it seems impossible to quantify, would be informal immigration.

I'll show an example. I live in Oregon and I know there are a lot of (frustrated) libertarians living here. There's ample evidence of this; for example we recently passed an initiative eliminating regulatory takings (since batted down by the court) and another eliminating asset forfeiture.

Just looking at my state, what do I think the potential is for migrating to Idaho, if it becomes "the state"? Quite large, since it is right next door. Not too far from family and friends, some high-tech industry like Oregon has, so jobs would work out; and Oregonians just like Idaho a lot.

Doesn't Montana have a fair-sized libertarian or freedom-loving population? They'd be attracted to Idaho as well.

Now what is the potential for Oregonian libertarians to migrate to North Dakota, or Delaware? I bet it is much less.

I'm not talking here about our hard-core activists, some of whom would go to the south pole to be free. This is more the "friends of FSP" kind of people, who we also need. Our state will become a beacon of freedom and we need to have a healthy influx of people who are interested in it generally, especially when you consider that our action there might pick the economy up. We don't want to be swamped by job-seeking economic immigrants who don't have a clue about liberty.

The bottom line here is the potential for neighboring-state immigration.

If anyone can quantify this it would be great. My intuition is that Idaho would be a strong draw for the healthy population of libertarians in Oregon and Washington state (those in Spokane could just hop across the border). Vermont would draw NH libertarians, but that might have to wait for NH freedoms to fail over time; while going the other way (VT libertarians migrating to NH if we selected NH) would be more immediate since the socialists in VT are already making a mess of things.

I can't think of any other states that would work as well with this criterion. Looks like Idaho and New Hampshire are the best for it.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2002, 01:39:42 pm by Zxcv »
Logged

varrin

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 999
  • THE air male
    • Varrin's FSP Info Page
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #1 on: December 21, 2002, 05:14:39 pm »

This is most visible in Nevada.  It is *the* fastest growing state mainly because it's significantly more free than its neighbors, particularly California.

I don't think we'd have too much trouble getting Californians to move to Idaho.  I'm not sure about the rest of the states.  North Dakota is definately a no-no for weather-spoiled Californians.  From my perspective, ID and DE are the only real options from a weather standpoint.  Idaho borders a lot of other states (more than any other FSP candidate, IIRC) and, hence, would have the best odds for neighbor-state draw.

V-

Logged
Departed Fresno, PRC (Peoples Republic of California): October 18, 2004
Arrived Keene, FS (Free State!): October 25, 2004!
To contact me, please use email, not PM here.

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5706
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2002, 02:35:48 pm »

Another thing to think about is discouraging non-libertarian immigration.  It seems that statists are drawn to beautiful areas and end up taking them over.  To discourage people from moving to a state just because of the good economy we'll create and the natural beauty, perhaps we should consider choosing a cruddy strip mall state like Delaware or a frozen hell like the Dakotas or Alaska. :P
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

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #3 on: December 29, 2002, 04:47:30 pm »

Wups, now you've done it! A fan of North Dakota is going to give you hell.

We do have a fan of North Dakota, don't we?  ;)

That problem will exist even if we pick unpretty states, because people follow jobs too. Last I checked, freedom causes jobs...

I think the trick will be to put up barriers so that even if statists come, they won't be able to hurt anything. Constitutionally-protected tax and spending limits, elimination of a property or income tax, that sort of thing.
Logged

MLiq

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
  • Delaware!
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #4 on: December 30, 2002, 08:26:33 am »

That's exactly right Jason, no one wants to live in Delaware, they just want to establish their companies there for the tax benefits.  If Delaware had many benefits for individuals, people would be more likely to move there, but only for those reasons, because otherwise Delaware is not especially appealling.  On the other hand, it isn't bad weather wise like all the other unappealling places are.  Ugly architecture can be changed, weather patterns cannot.

The point about Oregon is well taken.  However, we should consider that there are probably more frustrated libertarians in NYC than in all of Oregon, just by sheer numbers.  I don't know, but I think having a location within driving distance of a huge swath of the population will pay huge benefits for membership growth and that cuts out all Western states.  This is a make it or break it thing.  If Wyoming is the state, only outdoorsmen gun-rights people will move there and it will turn into a strange militia type organization the government will want to shut down.  We have to stay near urban areas so that we can have a varied membership that includes many professionals and people who are in the mix of power and media and money that goes on in the northeast and controls the whole nation.
Logged

Robert H.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #5 on: December 30, 2002, 09:03:46 am »

Another thing to think about is discouraging non-libertarian immigration.  It seems that statists are drawn to beautiful areas and end up taking them over.  To discourage people from moving to a state just because of the good economy we'll create and the natural beauty, perhaps we should consider choosing a cruddy strip mall state like Delaware or a frozen hell like the Dakotas or Alaska. :P

Reminds me of a line from the movie Maverick where an Indian chief threatens to move onto a piece of swamp land next just to keep the white man from taking it from them.   ;D

While we do want people to be drawn to us, I would think we wouldn't want to make it too easy; that way those who do join us will probably be more solidly in line with us.  Otherwise, we're liable to get a lot of immigrants interested in making a fast buck or thinking that we'd protect them while they engage in illegal activities, but not necessarily those interested in contributing to the maintenance of a liberty-oriented society.

This is part of our immigration problem now in the U.S. We have a lot of people coming here because we're the richest nation on earth, not necessarily because they value our heritage or culture, and the net effect is beginning to weaken us.

redbeard

  • FSP Participant
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 150
  • Damn, it feels good to be a gangster.
    • henerd
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #6 on: December 30, 2002, 05:40:08 pm »

This is part of our immigration problem now in the U.S. We have a lot of people coming here because we're the richest nation on earth, not necessarily because they value our heritage or culture, and the net effect is beginning to weaken us.

Amen. Like they used to say in MN, the cold keeps out the riff raff. Maybe a tough environ would do the same thing to socialists.
Logged
I understand, and not knowing how to express myself without pagan words, I'd rather remain silent.
Arthur Rimbaud - A Season in Hell

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #7 on: December 31, 2002, 05:42:32 pm »

Quote
This is part of our immigration problem now in the U.S. We have a lot of people coming here because we're the richest nation on earth, not necessarily because they value our heritage or culture, and the net effect is beginning to weaken us.

OK, I have to take a whack at this one.

I've known a lot of immigrants in my time. Yes, some are socialists (just like the rest of the population), but some are the exact opposite. My wife's parents were driven out of China by the communists, and you can bet she's not one! (That was actually a favor in disguise for them, because they missed fun things like the Great Proletarian Revolution.)

I had a conversation with a friend of mine, who talked about his friend, a Mexican who had his own business doing yard work, good old-fashioned manual labor. This guy told my friend, "America is wonderful! There's money all around here, just laying on the ground. All you have to do is bend down and pick it up!" I had another conversation with a recent Russian immigrant, who said something like "I love this place, you can go into a store and buy anything you want!" He too had his own business.

Personally, I think the real problem with socialists are the home-grown ones. The ones who have never had a child go hungry because of a completely broken economic system; the ones who have not had a boot on their neck. It's luxury that makes socialism possible, luxury and ignorance.

Let's not be too hard on our immigrants.
Logged

Robert H.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #8 on: January 01, 2003, 04:56:49 am »

Let's not be too hard on our immigrants.

I'm not trying to be hard on immigrants per se, but I am concerned about growing trends with regard to those immigrants who are coming in today.  Many coming up illegally from Mexico are hard workers, but it sits badly with me that their first act upon our country's soil is a flagrant violation of its laws.  Then we have the problems caused by non-citizen, non-English speaking children in the school systems, etc.

At one point in this country's history, people who came to our shores came here to be Americans.  Now it seems that they're coming and setting up special interest groups that issue demands or otherwise lobby for special favors.  I understand that this doesn't apply to a large number of them who do come here for freedom; coming from an area where there are enormous numbers of resident aliens (legal and illegal alike - the Washington metro area), I've seen both.

I used to work as an automobile insurance claim representative investigating vehicle accidents in Northern Virginia (where there is an exponentially growing hispanic community).  One of the things that used to really upset me was when a hispanic policyholder (living and working in the US for years) would describe the other person who was involved in accident (if they were white) as "an American."  I thought it spoke volumes about what they thought of themselves as well as those around them, and I heard this reference used constantly.

I guess we're straying off the topic here, but I just wanted to clarify that I am not "anti-immigrant."   :)  I just think it's alarming that so many are refusing to integrate into our culture today, and I see this already beginning to weaken us as a country.

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #9 on: January 01, 2003, 01:19:33 pm »

Quote
I guess we're straying off the topic here, but I just wanted to clarify that I am not "anti-immigrant."    I just think it's alarming that so many are refusing to integrate into our culture today, and I see this already beginning to weaken us as a country.

Maybe its because our culture is no longer attractive to them.

People used to love to become American, because that was synonymous with being free. Now it just means being another member of a command-from-the-top statist nation, just like another part of Europe.

If we ever rid ourselves of this statist nonsense, you will see a lot more of what we used to see in immigrants, people coming to be free.

BTW, remember the "official" libertarian position is open borders. I don't actually agree with that completely, I thought I'd just bring the point up...

Anyway, we will have the same problem in our free state: how to encourage immigration of freedom-seekers while discouraging statists.
Logged

Robert H.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #10 on: January 02, 2003, 05:45:39 am »

Anyway, we will have the same problem in our free state: how to encourage immigration of freedom-seekers while discouraging statists.

For the moment, I imagine all we can really do is chose what most people would consider a more inhospitable or remote location.  That way, those who join us are more likely to do so because they really identify with us and our efforts.

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #11 on: January 02, 2003, 12:08:35 pm »

Actually, elimination of government programs will itself discourage some socialists. If there's no slop trough to feed at, they will go somewhere else.

Our state needs to get a certain reputation (one the "caring classes" would consider to be unsavory). People need to know when they come here, they are on their own.
Logged

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #12 on: January 03, 2003, 06:00:17 am »

Our state needs to get a certain reputation (one the "caring classes" would consider to be unsavory). People need to know when they come here, they are on their own.

What you describe is the exact opposite of VT.
Logged

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #13 on: January 04, 2003, 03:46:12 pm »

Quote
Our state needs to get a certain reputation (one the "caring classes" would consider to be unsavory). People need to know when they come here, they are on their own.  
Quote
What you describe is the exact opposite of VT

I don't mean to insult anyone, but I can't help but think of some of these types of posts as a little childish.


I am not insulted.  People actually move to VT (and CA) because the states provide a lot more welfare to people than most states.  I've been to VT and I have seen the street people.  Even the churches in Burlington area (I have not been to churches in other parts of the state) are very liberal and do a great deal to encourage the street people.  For decades my grandmother’s church would let these people sleep inside the church at night but after years of problems the church quit that failed program.  VT also has very socialized med.

Quote
Some of the posters here need to realize that their libertarian paradise already exists.  It's called Somalia, or maybe Afghanistan.  No laws, no healthcare, no public schools, no zoning, no lawyers, and you can blow up whatever you want.  Oh, and here's a bonus, it looks like the Western U.S. (and I bet the land's cheap). ;D

I have read 1/2 a dozen or so stories about how things are getting better in a certain parts of Somalia.  About how services like phone cost less than they used to and work better.  However, even those parts of the place still have increased crime rates while much of the rest of the country is doing very poorly in most regards.  I did not know that any libertarians were trying to influence Afghanistan like many libertarians are working with parts of Somalia.

Quote
I'm all for reduced government, but I'm not for turning America into the third world.  

I cannot agree with you more.  I do not want America to become like much of Africa and Latin America.

Quote
For example, how about tax credits or rebates for health insurance rather than throwing people on the street.

I am not sure what this means.  In America we have socialized med.  This means that anyone with a life threatening problem must be treated by the nearest hospital.

When I worked with the special burn care unit of the hospital at Ft. Sam Houston, TX (inside the San Antonio area) we would treat almost everyone we had space for.  We did this free of charge to the mostly Hispanic clients.  Yes, even if they person had no money, future promise of money, or i.d.

In TN, there is a program where almost 1/4 of the people of TN (even illegal aliens) are on state care.  Everyone that is middle income or less may have state care.  The less money someone makes the less it costs.  Many people get it free.  Also, most of the companies like Wal-mart and Costco provide insurance to there employees, in TN.
Logged

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Potential for informal (non-FSP) libertarian immigration
« Reply #14 on: January 04, 2003, 10:24:02 pm »

Yes, the medical establishment is by now a quasi-governmental agency. That's why it has gotten so expensive.

"Tax credits" and "rebates" are leftist-speak for subsidies. You know, welfare. RacerX, I think you can be pretty sure FSP will not institute new welfare programs - even if we end up in Vermont. They are just not our thing.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up