Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 ... 12   Go Down

Author Topic: The case for New Hampshire  (Read 53947 times)

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #90 on: March 12, 2003, 12:09:27 am »

You have to wonder why ID's economy is so robust, though. It does not have much better access.

Maybe the answer about Wyoming was that, until not so long ago, there was always a better place to locate a business, because the state governments had not fallen so far into socialism and fascism. That may be no longer the case; most state governments are fiscal disasters now. Business is migrating overseas to an amazing degree.

The other obvious thing is the shortage of people. Can't have a strong economy without a lot of them. Probably what Wyoming really needed was a good solid gold strike in the 19th century!   ;)
Logged

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #91 on: March 12, 2003, 12:50:00 am »

Note that when we say that New Hampshire does not have an income tax, we mean only that it does not have a tax on personal income.  It does have taxes on business income.  Wyoming would be an example of a state that does not have income taxation of any kind.  Still, NH's overall tax burden is lower than that of any other state in the country (with the arguable exceptions of Alaska and South Dakota, depending on how you count).  But since most of the tax burden is carried through rather high property taxes, you could certainly argue that their tax structure is flawed, since capitation and consumption taxes are in theory superior to property & income taxes.  Wyoming, for example, has medium property taxes, a low sales tax, and severance taxes on mining.

NH does not have a personal wage tax but it does have personal income taxes.  NH taxes both interest (even from CDs) and dividends.  NH has two types of corporate taxes.  It has both a BUSINESS PROFITS TAX (corporate income tax) and a BUSINESS ENTERPRISE TAX which is considered by some to be a indirect personal income tax.  NH has 4 types of income tax compared to WY's zero types of income taxes.  See http://www.johnsoncpa.com/articles/no_income.html for more information.  Infact, WY and DE are known (and used) as tax havens by international corporations.

Wyoming, has low property taxes, in fact, its rates are some of the lowest in the country, whereas NH's are the highest in the country.  WY has a low sales taxes and is right next to MT, which has no general sales tax.

Also, the overall tax burden, you are refering to, I think, does not include corporate taxes.  These numbers can be fishy.  There have been reports that place TN was having one of the bottom 3 tax burdens in the country, before, but that is nonsense.  Taxes are much lower in WY, AK, SD, NH, and TX than they are in TN.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2003, 11:29:56 am by FreedomRoad »
Logged

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #92 on: March 12, 2003, 01:04:52 am »

SD's job outlook is actually quite robust.  It is forecast to create as many jobs as Delaware, which is a somewhat larger state.

I think the reason for WY's poor job growth has to do with two things: natural resource dependence (what economists call the "Dutch disease") and isolation from major markets.  If WY had a major river or port access, its economy would have done much better in the past - and its population might be beyond our range by now. ;)

For the amount of people in WY, its economy is not doing poorly.  Wyoming as a state, is able to product more than enough jobs for its expected population growth.  This should continue if we increase the expected population growth i.e. the job growth will increase.  WY has low cost of living, average mean household income, and low unenpolyment.  The thing is, that Wyoming does not have many people or large cities, and like Jason said, uses natural reasouces to a great degree.  Because WY has so many natural resources, and has so few people it has not needed to develope large factories or tech companies.  Also, as Zxcv said, other states are just beginning to become peices of crap.  Wyoming, since the early 1980s has seen many international companies claim Wyoming as there home because it started the LLC movement and is still one of the best 3 states in the country for LLCs.  Slowing, the companies of Denver are starting to show up in WY.

NH, on the other hand does have high unenployment in some parts, like its major city.  NH's cost of living varies a great deal depending on if you are in the northern most part of the state or the southern most.  

The question of should NH raise property taxes or income taxes is a serious question.  One of the taxes will get rasied.  I was part of the large, statewide movement in 2002 in TN to prevent any tax increases.  We wanted to tax and we did fight well.  Well held at least 20 rallies at the capital.  We shut down the capital's phone and email systems with our messages, we faxed then, honked as loud and as long as we could every time they tried to raise taxes and fought them with all we had.  However, they did raise taxes.  They did not raise income taxes but they rose taxes, more than ever before.  Everything we could do and they still raised taxes by the largest amount, even.  The same thing has happened in states all over the country.  

NH already has 4 income tax, 2 property, and many sales taxes.  It will continue to raise all of them unless we move there.  However, our population is so small that it might not even stop the tied in a large population state like NH.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2003, 11:27:32 am by FreedomRoad »
Logged

Dave Mincin

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2099
  • I'm a llama!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #93 on: March 12, 2003, 09:30:38 am »

Lots of assumptins, few facts? Curious?  Are you sure you are not talking about NY?  All these taxes!  Curious that NH still has the lowest overal (state-local) tax bite.  Not my assumption, what the statistics say!!  Perhaps someone should change the name of this thread to OH MY WY!!! :)
Logged
Please join us!
http://www.nhliberty.org/ New Hampshire Liberty Alliance.

" A leader knows that if he is generous with his time, his people will be generous with their effort."

Plug>>>>Realtor Lovejoy Real Estate!

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #94 on: March 12, 2003, 11:41:16 am »

Lots of assumptins, few facts? Curious?  Are you sure you are not talking about NY?  All these taxes!  Curious that NH still has the lowest overal (state-local) tax bite.  Not my assumption, what the statistics say!!  Perhaps someone should change the name of this thread to OH MY WY!!! :)

No, I was not talking about NY.  NH has 4 types of income taxes, I do not know how many NY has.  SD has the lowest income tax rates in the country, After WY and TX, I think, but you might want to look that up for a few hours.

If you want to change the name of the thread go right ahead.  Maybe, after looking at this thread you think WY is better for the FSP than NH.  Most of the people that have put a great deal of time studying the issues, agree with this thought by a large margin.  Truthfully, I have never even been to either state.  I have been to upstate NY and VT, and Boulder and Denver, CO, though.  Anyway, it is good that most people on this thread are using statistics.  I will continue to use statistics, also.  Although, subjective issues are important to some people.  

NH is a great state and I would love to work there.  I hear they have tons of opening in my choose job field, teaching.  In fact, I hear they have lots of growth in new schools and this is causing a debate between the people that want to raise income taxes and the people that want to raise property taxes.  A somewhat libertarian state would look to sales tax increases before it looked to property or income tax increases because as all libertarians know, consumption taxes are more fair.  But, NH choose to go the other rout and has very high property taxes and 4 types of income tax.  NH will have to lay in the bed it made.  It is too late for us to get ride of NH's income and high property taxes and replace then with a low sales tax (like WY has.)  This is just some of the baggage we will have to carry around with us in NH.
Logged

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5724
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #95 on: March 12, 2003, 05:57:53 pm »


Also, the overall tax burden, you are refering to, I think, does not include corporate taxes.  These numbers can be fishy.  There have been reports that place TN was having one of the bottom 3 tax burdens in the country, before, but that is nonsense.  Taxes are much lower in WY, AK, SD, NH, and TX than they are in TN.

The overall tax burden does include taxes of all kinds, as a % of state income (that's the measure on the State Data page and in the spreadsheets).  Another measure, which I think is less appropriate, is tax revenue per capita.  By that measure, SD comes out looking best (apart from the special case of AK).
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

Dave Mincin

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2099
  • I'm a llama!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #96 on: March 12, 2003, 10:53:17 pm »

I have been to WY.  Jackson Hole is nice if you have money.  Spent some time on a ranch in New Castle, WY.  a small ranch, 12,000 arces (that was the ranchers words not mine).  When I questioned her on this she said  "You have to have a lot of land in Wy if you want to make a living, because so much of the land is worthless."

I do appreciate the work you folks have put into compiling all the stats, truly, but to be honest with you one of the reasons I favor NH is because I have been to WY.
Logged
Please join us!
http://www.nhliberty.org/ New Hampshire Liberty Alliance.

" A leader knows that if he is generous with his time, his people will be generous with their effort."

Plug>>>>Realtor Lovejoy Real Estate!

Robert H.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #97 on: March 13, 2003, 12:02:13 am »

I don't think there will be a whole lot of us buying 12,000 acre ranches.   :)

And while Wyoming may not be New England post card material, that's not what makes it valuable.

George Reich

  • FSP Participant
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 546
  • I just *love* it when Hank and Dagny brainstorm!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #98 on: March 13, 2003, 08:30:55 am »

What makes New Hampshire valuable for me is the lack of a general sales or income tax combined with the fact that I've got a well paying job here. Almost all of New Hampshire's taxes can be legally avoided through intelligent planning - this makes NH a great place to accumulate a fortune. There are so many ways to avoid paying the interest and dividends tax that anyone paying it is quite frankly a fool.

In Wyoming, I'd be stuck paying a sales tax every time I head to the store, a low paying job (assuming I could even find one), and boring scenery. I could live with all of that, however, if the Free State Project could ever work there. It cannot. Wyoming's Republican establishment controls the vote counting machinery making it hopeless for us to ever get the right people elected there.
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

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #99 on: March 13, 2003, 09:08:26 am »

Come on, George, it's not fair making that assertion without your report, or some other information, to back you up.  ::)  Let's get that report out so we can see what you are talking about. If a couple of Wyoming counties need their voting machines replaced, the FSP can take up a collection for them to do it!   :)

Anyway, the right people are to a fair extent already being elected there, which is why Wyoming rates so high on being freedom-friendly. And the statists there don't have the tools that statists in NH have (no "right-to-work in NH, and the NEA has both monopoly bargaining power and forced union dues). That's what driving all the pressure for higher taxes in NH right now. In Wyoming those tools don't exist; it's a right-to-work state and the NEA has no monopoly bargaining or forced dues.

And you know as well as I do that of all the taxes out there, libertarians consider sales taxes among the least undesireable. If there is a tax, it should be flat, and everyone should pay it. None of that "don't tax you, don't tax me, tax that fellow behind the tree" stuff (as Senator Everett Dirksen used to say).

I will admit the NH collects an impressively low amount of revenue per capita, almost as low as SD.

It's quite a stretch to say the project could never work in Wyoming when it consistently scores at or near the top when you run the spreadsheet.
Logged

George Reich

  • FSP Participant
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 546
  • I just *love* it when Hank and Dagny brainstorm!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #100 on: March 13, 2003, 01:26:22 pm »

Come on, George, it's not fair making that assertion without your report, or some other information, to back you up.  ::)  Let's get that report out so we can see what you are talking about. If a couple of Wyoming counties need their voting machines replaced, the FSP can take up a collection for them to do it!   :)

Anyway, the right people are to a fair extent already being elected there, which is why Wyoming rates so high on being freedom-friendly. And the statists there don't have the tools that statists in NH have (no "right-to-work in NH, and the NEA has both monopoly bargaining power and forced union dues). That's what driving all the pressure for higher taxes in NH right now. In Wyoming those tools don't exist; it's a right-to-work state and the NEA has no monopoly bargaining or forced dues.

And you know as well as I do that of all the taxes out there, libertarians consider sales taxes among the least undesireable. If there is a tax, it should be flat, and everyone should pay it. None of that "don't tax you, don't tax me, tax that fellow behind the tree" stuff (as Senator Everett Dirksen used to say).

I will admit the NH collects an impressively low amount of revenue per capita, almost as low as SD.

It's quite a stretch to say the project could never work in Wyoming when it consistently scores at or near the top when you run the spreadsheet.

I have completed my part of the report and am waiting for my co-author to complete her part. Replacing voting machines in a few counties will not help.

If libertarians really consider sales taxes to be among the least undesireable type then I will have to disagree with them - sales taxes turn all kinds of retail businesses into agents of the state.

The worst part of New Hampshire's tax burden occurs at the local level where people have more of a stake and ability to control it.

Yes, Wyoming looks great on a speadsheet until the immigrants starve to death while their votes are stolen by the political machine there. Other than that Wyoming is great.
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.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #101 on: March 13, 2003, 05:39:54 pm »

Yes, Wyoming looks great on a speadsheet until the immigrants starve to death while their votes are stolen by the political machine there. Other than that Wyoming is great.

You know, I'm really surprised those cowboys out in Wyoming haven't rounded up a possey and strung up those nefarious vote thieves in Cheyenne.

Maybe they're out looking for something to eat instead.   ;D

As Zxcv has stated, sales taxes are flat taxes that are fair for everyone while income taxes are the primary tool of the redistributionist, "we'll punish you for succeeding" crowd.  They are the diesel fuel of the statist engine in this country.  Wyoming has no personal or corporate income tax at all, while it has been established that New Hampshire (while lacking an individual income tax) has several backdoor methods of taxing income.

The "right-to-work" issue is a huge matter by itself for me.  I absolutely refuse to live in a state where I can be forced to pay some fat-cat union bosses dues for the privilege of working, and then watch them turn those dues into political activism, most likely for causes I would spend my own activist time and money working against!  I don't see any need to fund my own opposition like this.  I'd rather pay an income tax.  At least an income tax doesn't funnel my money directly into the special interest bank accounts; they have to go and lobby for it first.

On the subject of unions, the teacher's union, as has already been pointed out, has some rather powerful tools as its disposal in New Hampshire.  Education freedom and reform is going to be a tough sell there with so many advocates for "the children" working so well-equipped.  And I'm certain that their friends in nearby MA, VT, ME, NY (the whole statist region) would be happy to lend them a hand in focusing all sorts of attention on us.  They'll be very close by, so it shouldn't be any problem to bus them in.

New Hampshire is also fighting budget problems and is seeing a demand for new education and transportation funding due to its high growth rate.  The issue of a state income tax is going to keep coming up as a liberal solution to the issue, and even if New Hampshire residents manage to defeat it, their local taxes are most assuredly going to go up.  More local control is a good thing, but how are we supposed to sell untested libertarian solutions to these problems in a crisis environment when people want simple, predictable answers NOW?

New Hampshire also has nearly one million voting-age inhabitants with little in way of working around the system.  

There are no term limits to shake up the political infrastructure (even Maine has these).  I know that you disagree with term limits, but there are quite a lot of arguments to illustrate how they help defend liberty.  CATO has a good article here:  http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-328es.html

New Hampshire lacks the initiative or referendum, which equip the people to work around a stubborn legislature with entrenched interests.  Again, even more statist Maine has the initiative.

The lack of initiative and referendum, term limits, and right-to-work laws in such a higher population state create an atmosphere where it will be very difficult for even 20,000 activists to crack the system.  Politicians will be entrenched and powerful, and opposition lobby groups will enjoy the fact that their own rivals are directly contributing to them.

But, hey, at least we won't have to wear seatbelts!  We might want to keep those helmets on though...for protection while butting our heads up against the system.

By contrast, Wyoming:

- has no personal or business income tax
- has the initiative and referendum
- has right-to-work laws
- has term limits
- has a state surplus (no demand for more taxes, in fact, they're considering lowering their 4% state sales tax)
- deprives the teacher's unions of more power than any other candidate state
- has the lowest voting-age population to deal with
- has a lower cost of living which more could afford
- has a population that consistently votes for small government candidates, not just when the income tax debate comes up
- has a very friendly gun and homeschool culture
- has less expensive elections
- has liberty-friendly neighboring states - it's not boxed in
- is distant enough from the liberal meccas that statists won't find it easy to help their comrades there
- has grocery stores and a moderately low starvation rate  ;D
- has a very low outrage rate considering the amount of vote-thievery going on there  ;D

Dave Mincin

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2099
  • I'm a llama!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #102 on: March 13, 2003, 08:12:28 pm »

My understanding was that the intent of the statistics was to determine the 10 states best suited for our purposes, and to that end, job well done.  Are you now saying we are to chose a state, simply because it has good stats?  Have you ever looked at your favorite team, especially their glowing stats and be certain they would win?  Ooops and then they didn't! (the human factor)  Oops forgot that! Spent a lot of years in the investment business, and followed the stock analysis,  wow what numbers stock x and y are sure winners.  Oops they went in the tank (human factor). Oops forgot that!

Have already been informed, by you statistic folks that livablity and people have  0   credibility.  Hmm, been around the block a few times in my life and have found that the only thing that matters is people!

Are we not really back to the same old argument People vs statistics?

While you talk numbers I see action in NH.  You see numbers I see people doing, getting involved, building!
The Welcome to The Granite State Committee, promoting FSP, working on a system to help us find jobs and a place to live.  I see action not talk, passing out fliers, maning phones, knocking on doors, and electing freedom loving people.

I see excitment, enthusiasm, the will to win.  People will win our quest for freedom and the people of NH have begun the fight, and they  have my support.  Isn't the Free State Program really about people?

Logged
Please join us!
http://www.nhliberty.org/ New Hampshire Liberty Alliance.

" A leader knows that if he is generous with his time, his people will be generous with their effort."

Plug>>>>Realtor Lovejoy Real Estate!

George Reich

  • FSP Participant
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 546
  • I just *love* it when Hank and Dagny brainstorm!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #103 on: March 13, 2003, 08:30:37 pm »

There is a bill working its way through the NH legislature right now to make NH a right-to-work state. Quite frankly though, a right-to-work law does not seem to me like something libertarians ought to support. If a factory and a union reach an agreement that all labor in the factory will be union labor, does the state really have any business intervening in this arrangement?

I'm not sure how much practical effect this will have in New Hampshire anyway - not much of the workforce is unionized.

Regarding vote counting, how would those cowboys know whether thier votes are being stolen? This all happens behind closed doors and Wyoming law does not allow for the public to observe the process.

Regarding the NH income tax, do you honestly think the Democrats would try that idea again any time in the next ten years after what happened to them in the 2002 election? You must be kidding.

Regarding your idea that "Education freedom and reform is going to be a tough sell there with so many advocates for "the children" working so well-equipped", I don't think you could be more wrong. NH taxpayers are so fed up with high property taxes that they are willing to consider all kinds of alternatives which might help reduce their tax bills.

NH has a different type of term limits than the statist type you prefer. We pay our representatives and senators $100 per year. At that salary they don't have much incentive to hang around for too many terms. Incumbency rates are not high in New Hampshire.

NH has a rather unique form of intitiative and referendum - if our elected officials are not doing what we want we simply re-elect the entire government (from governor on down) as often as every two years. I believe only one other state does this.




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

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #104 on: March 13, 2003, 09:22:30 pm »

Quote
The "right-to-work" issue is a huge matter by itself for me.  I absolutely refuse to live in a state where I can be forced to pay some fat-cat union bosses dues for the privilege of working, and then watch them turn those dues into political activism, most likely for causes I would spend my own activist time and money working against!
There are actually ways around that, even if you're in a non-right-to-work state. There is the "deauthorization election":
http://www.nrtw.org/d/deauth.htm

There is also a way for individual employees to not pay union dues for political purposes:
http://www.nrtw.org/a/a_4.htm

Somehow I don't believe these are actually exercised that much. Probably more info is there in that site, it is a very good site.

Quote
There is a bill working its way through the NH legislature right now to make NH a right-to-work state. Quite frankly though, a right-to-work law does not seem to me like something libertarians ought to support. If a factory and a union reach an agreement that all labor in the factory will be union labor, does the state really have any business intervening in this arrangement?
George, I can certainly understand this point of view, in fact I share it somewhat. After all, the employee can go work somewhere else if he doesn't like being a union member (voluntary or forced).

However we get down to the old question of "initiation of force". The fact is, these unions do lobby government to place all sorts of regulations on employers. And anyway, the national (and thoroughly unconstitutional) labor relations act, mentioned in that web site, was the thing that got the whole country in the default mode of not-right-to-work in the first place, such that states like Idaho and Wyoming were forced to pass right-to-work laws to counter it. They even tried back in the Truman administration to pass a law (it came very close) that would have made it impossible for any state to make itself a right-to-work state. Read the history in that site, it is very interesting. So the bottom line as far as I'm concerned, is that there is ample initiation of force already from the unions, and right-to-work laws are a reasonable self-defense response to it.

Quote
I'm not sure how much practical effect this will have in New Hampshire anyway - not much of the workforce is unionized.
NH has about 12,000 NEA members, about twice as many as WY. I don't know about general union membership. Can you dig out those figures?

Quote
Regarding the NH income tax, do you honestly think the Democrats would try that idea again any time in the next ten years after what happened to them in the 2002 election? You must be kidding.
Don't worry, they don't give up that easy! In Oregon we have defeated the sales tax something like 9 or 10 times in the last 100 years. Guess what the ruling class is pushing hard now? And this is just 2 months after the state, 55% to 45%, defeated a referendum to "temporarily" increase the income tax a couple percent (we're already at a 9% rate!   :o  )

They keep pushing and pushing and pushing. All you ever hear is that we are betraying our children. It wears you down.

I think Keith could tell you, even after that famous tax revolt in Tenn. recently, they still slid a tax hike in here and there. And they are always moving revenue collection to user fees - but they never somehow manage to cut the broad-based tax after doing that (a favorite tactic in Oregon).

I think the voter resistance in NH is admirable, probably the best in the nation. But the other side is not down and out, by any means. There are all sorts of ways to squeeze money from the people.

Quote
NH has a rather unique form of intitiative and referendum - if our elected officials are not doing what we want we simply re-elect the entire government (from governor on down) as often as every two years. I believe only one other state does this.
Come on, George. When was the last time the entire government was thrown out? Or even 50% of it?  ::)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 ... 12   Go Up