Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: The case for Alaska  (Read 12096 times)

varrin

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 999
  • THE air male
    • Varrin's FSP Info Page
Re:The case for Alaska
« Reply #15 on: March 15, 2003, 08:40:20 pm »

Keith,

First off, I profusely apologize for making the statements I made without having the data to back it up.  I should not have done that and will make every effort not to do that again.  It is unlike me, and I don't want to be known as someone who just puts stuff out there without doing the research.

Also, thank you for sending on the Wyoming report.  I haven't had a chance to dig into it yet but I will.  It looks to be most enlightening.

I didn't find the set of weather data I wanted but I did find some of it and completed the rest using a couple of different sources.

My goal was to come up with the average temps for the 5 largest cities over 10,000 pop (census data) in each state.  I am missing a couple pieces of data and had to duplicate a couple due to missing data and the proximity of cities, however I have a chart that I think is useable.  If you want it, or think I should post it, I will.

I ranked each state according to the average of the yearly average temps for the top 5 cities and according to the average of the yearly average snowfall for the top 5 cities.  With respect to our conversation and this thread, here are the results:

Alaska: #10 warmest (#1 coldest), #10 least snowy (#1 most snowy)
Wyoming: #7 warmest (#4 coldest), #5 least snowy (#6 most snowy)

If you add the other 4 wyoming cities over 10,000 population, the snow ranking remains the same, however, it moves *down* one spot in temperature ranking.  I'm reasonably confident my missing data wouldn't affect those rankings, however, just for the record, that only affects 3 states (ME, NH, and VT) which are all ranked lower for snow, and (strangely) higher for temp.  

My original post said WY was about 6th (which is about right).  I said DE and AK were best, which is correct.  I said AK and ND were worst, which is correct.  If you want the full data, I can provide it.... now... ;-)

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.

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:The case for Alaska
« Reply #16 on: March 15, 2003, 09:16:09 pm »

Keith,

First off, I profusely apologize for making the statements I made without having the data to back it up.  I should not have done that and will make every effort not to do that again.  It is unlike me, and I don't want to be known as someone who just puts stuff out there without doing the research.

Also, thank you for sending on the Wyoming report.  I haven't had a chance to dig into it yet but I will.  It looks to be most enlightening.

I didn't find the set of weather data I wanted but I did find some of it and completed the rest using a couple of different sources.

My goal was to come up with the average temps for the 5 largest cities over 10,000 pop (census data) in each state.  I am missing a couple pieces of data and had to duplicate a couple due to missing data and the proximity of cities, however I have a chart that I think is useable.  If you want it, or think I should post it, I will.

I do not find average temps to be useful data.  The only thing that I find to be useful is average temp in Jan or something extremely similar.  Average temps can be good or bad.  Is the average temp of 50 better than the average temp of 70, I do not have a clue.  The average temp takes all 12 months in to consideration and not just the coldest month, so it does not relate to which state is the coldest during the winter.

AK, for example, has parts of the state that get very, very cold during the winter and quite hot during the summer.  Again, average Jan temps according to the official 'Taps' is what is important to me.  

Also, I am not interested in finding temps in the 5 largest cities.  I am interested in finding the 'Taps' of the cities the FSP member are likely to move to.  In Wyoming, this is the area between Cheyenne, Torrington, and Casper.  This is where most of Wyoming population is and the area closest to Ft. Collins, Boulder, and Denver so this is an area where any of the people that move to WY will want to live for easy travel out of state.  This area just happens to be the warmest part of Wyoming.  This part of Wyoming is warmer than any part of any state except for the warm part of ID and all of DE.  

Wyoming is a large state and its temps vary widely based on where in the state you are.  The coldest part of Wyoming is where very few FSP members will live.  This area goes from Jackson to Riverton and includes the cities near these cities.  Much of the area is an Indian Reservation and much of the rest of it is mountains.  

MT, AK, and ID are also large states and temps vary widely.  Mostly, when people talk about moving to ID, on these boards, they talk about moving to southern ID and this just happens to be the coldest part of ID.  However, the highly populated and regulated area near Boise is pretty warm, and this makes ID the 2nd warmest state. The western part of MT is very statists and a core union area.  This area has some very cold, snowy cities, and a couple that are a little less cold and snowy.  The northern part of MT is cold.  The warmest part of MT is the Billings area and even that area is 2-5 degrees cooler than the warm part of WY.  The eastern 3rd of MT is the coldest, most windy part of MT.  This is also the part of MT that is most freedom oriented, although, it is very dependent on farm subs.  The eastern 3rd of MT is very much like ND is climate.  SD is very much like ND except it is a little warmer, although still the 3rd coldest of all 10 states, and the windiest.

Varrin, I do not know where you got your info but I highly suggest you use 'Taps.'

Quote
I ranked each state according to the average of the yearly average temps for the top 5 cities and according to the average of the yearly average snowfall for the top 5 cities.  With respect to our conversation and this thread, here are the results:

Look at Jason's report for average Jan temps in the top 2 cities of every state.  The order is DE, ID, and WY

Again, average yearly temp means nothing to me.  We are not trying to compare temps for any time except for the coldest time, Jan.  And, I do not care about the top 5 cities.  In VT, the top 5 cities are extremely tiny and not that relevant to the state of VT where MSA are more important.  In AK, Fairbanks, one of the top 3 cities is of little importance because it is too cold to live in, same with Nome, AK.  Many of ND's cities are too cold to live in, even if they have 20,000 5th generation North Dakotans.  All of NH's top 5 cities are in the same area, so this does very poorly at describing the temps for the entire state.
 

Thanks for the information.  I am glad we are moving on.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2003, 12:06:44 am by FreedomRoad »
Logged

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5722
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re:The case for Alaska
« Reply #17 on: March 15, 2003, 10:00:40 pm »

AK, for example, has parts of the state that get very, very cold during the winter and quite hot during the summer.  Again, average Jan temps according to the official 'Taps' is what is important to me.  


I'd revise that slightly to say that what we're probably most interested in is average January highs, rather than just average temperatures for the whole day.  The reason for that is that most of us will be active during the day rather than the dead of night, so that the high temperature will have more meaning for us.  Of course, when you're going to work in the morning, that would be a time when average lows might mean something!
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

Robert H.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:The case for Alaska
« Reply #18 on: March 16, 2003, 08:32:30 am »

Here's an Alaska analysis from Peter Jenkins' recent book Looking for Alaska:

"This giant place is filled with people determined to live as free as possible of others' intervention.  Alaska may have served as the incubator for the behavior now termed politically incorrect.  They despise being herded; if they were sheep, they would never go off the cliff together.  More than likely, they'd trample the shepherd."

Robert H.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:The case for Alaska
« Reply #19 on: July 08, 2003, 02:59:58 am »

There are a few Alaska advantages that I believe people should be more aware of, as they could potentially be of tremendous importance to us:

1. Although it's the third least populous state, Alaska's legislature is the best in terms of how many seats it would take to create a majority there.  Here's a ranking of states that I posted on another thread:

Alaska:  House: 21 Senate: 11  Total: 31 seats
Delaware: House: 21 Senate: 11  Total: 31 seats
Idaho/South Dakota: House: 36, Senate: 18, Total: 54 seats
New Hampshire: House: 201, Senate: 13, Total: 214 seats
Maine: House: 76, Senate: 18, Total: 94 seats
Montana: House: 51, Senate: 26, Total: 77 seats
North Dakota: House: 48, Senate: 24, Total: 72 seats
Vermont: House: 76, Senate: 16, Total: 92 seats
Wyoming: House: 31, Senate: 26, Total: 57 seats

Delaware has the same number of seats, but I believe that its districts contain many more people than Alaska's.  The biggest problem in Alaska would be finding people to run in some of the more far-flung districts; however, those areas are not the most populous parts of the state.  Concentrating in the most populous (best climate) areas of the state should allow us to win the seats we need.

2. As mentioned elsewhere, the AIP (over 17,000 registered voters) and AKLP present us with a significant advantage in terms of third party infrastructure, and Alaska's huge number of "unaffiliated" and "non-partisan" voters could be a potentially large base of support to draw from.

Here were the number of registered voters by party in 2000:

Unaffiliated: 165,222
Republican: 115,966
Democrat: 76,248
Non-partisan: 75,022
Alaskan Independence: 19,293
Libertarian: 6,510
Other: 5,135
Green: 4,285
Moderate Republican: 2,185

Between "unaffiliated," "non-partisan," and "other," there are 245,379 "homeless" voters waiting for something viable to come along.  And, if we were able to forge any sort of alliance between the AIP, AKLP, and "moderate Republicans"...

I don't know of any other state that offers these advantages.  

Here's the source for that Alaska voter information:

http://www.gov.state.ak.us/ltgov/elections/vhist00g.htm

And here's the thread where I orginally posted these numbers and broke them down in an analysis of how the FSP could figure in (I did the same thing for Montana at the time as well):

Number of FSP'ers needed to change local politics

jenlee

  • FSP Participant
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 198
  • Freedom Lover
Re:The case for Alaska
« Reply #20 on: July 08, 2003, 11:27:58 am »

.  Fairbanks is also home to the Alaska State Fair in the summer.

RobertH

Palmer also has the Alaska state fair. It is held in the last part of Aug. Pretty neat too. We have people, famous people come to it. Sing at it. Not Toby Keith but then again we already had him come up to Anchorage.

Also, from what I have been told Feb is supposed to the coldest month and luckily it is the shortest.

Alaska is far better than Idaho and Montana do to the fact we do not have those militants those two states have.

Another big plus is, Alaska is far away from the lower 48. Up here we are more free than any of the other candidate states. We have a small pop with most of the people living in Anchorage.

We have an international pop. We have people from every country in the world living here and we are very proud of that fact.

Another bonus is, we have the room for all 20,000 with room to spare.

And Idaho does get very nasty weather. And the views aren't all that much there.

So unless you are scared to move to the best state in the US and the best place in the world, please consider Alaska. You wont be sorry if you move here.
Logged
Choices. One, plenty of room to expand. Two, freeze em and stack em like cords of wood, thaw em out to vote and then refreeze em. Choices.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
 

anything