Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6   Go Down

Author Topic: More NH, ID, WY debate  (Read 28751 times)

jgmaynard

  • FSP Shadow Advertising
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2288
    • The Light of Alexandria
Re:How would you vote if we voted today?
« Reply #15 on: April 06, 2003, 12:04:56 am »

Did you check out his site to judge for yourself?

He's not perfect. pretty pretty darn good, and getting better.

I dunno... I have often thought common sense is an oxymoron... lol

JM
« Last Edit: April 06, 2003, 12:06:19 am by jgmaynard »
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

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:How would you vote if we voted today?
« Reply #16 on: April 08, 2003, 11:48:35 am »

Hmmm, now that this thread is thoroughly off-topic, I think I'll add my 2c.

You know, I'm 53 years old now, and I can remember how many times I was elated by the election of a particular person - and how disappointed by the time the end of his term rolled around. I hope you folks in NH are not setting yourself up for disappointment. We'll see how Benson looks in a couple of years. I wish you luck.

Quote
Robert, you misunderstood my statement about activism - it was meant to include the concern that only a small portion of any group will be extremely active, and that others will be active to different degrees. This isn't 'patently ridiculous' My point, was that if 10k go to WY, this same spread will apply when it comes to political activism.
Robert bought your reasoning on this, Dad, but I don't. You NH advocates specifically went out to recruit people who would not so much as move to another state. What a level of commitment that demonstrates! Personally, I see these big-state candidates as engendering a lot of "arm-chair activists", and not only because the commitment of recruits would be suspect, but because you'd have so much less influence in the state unless your numbers were very large. Low influence translates into discouragement, which depresses activism even more.

You can look at it another way. Say this country contains 2000 "very very committed" freedom activists, and 10,000 "very committed" activists, and 100,000 "committed" activists. Say we manage to shove only 10,000 into Wyoming (despite its 27,000 jobs in the projection - already hard to believe we can't do better than that but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt) and we get 25,000 into NH. What do we have?

We would have 2000 "very very committed" and 8000 "very committed" activists in WY. On the other hand, in NH we'd have 2000 "very very committed", 10,000 "very committed", and 13,000 "committed" activists. Ignoring entirely that the population ratio puts Wyoming in a better light with this scenario (more activists overall per capita in Wyoming), you can see the average level of activism in Wyoming would also be higher.

Of course I pulled these numbers out of my hat, but this analysis works the same way no matter what numbers you want to put on the "very very committed", the "very committed", and the merely "committed". Wyoming will always have a higher average level of activism out of its FSP members than New Hampshire will.

Quote
In other words, you are choosing once again to ignore the very serious concern that WY is unlikely to succeed because of the high probability that it will fail to draw 20,000 people, at any level of activism. This is more than just speculation - various posts from different people have indicated this is likely. What if WY wins and only 5,000 people make the move?
No one is ignoring that there will likely be a differential. But it's kind of interesting you kick around numbers like 5000 for Wyoming; you have to get down to something below 7800 to be as bad off in Wyoming as you'd be with a full 20,000 in New Hampshire!

But guess what, Dad? At the time of the vote we will already have 5000 for Wyoming (minus some opt-outs, including those one-state wonders you've managed to recruit in NH). How hard will it be to get from 5000 to 7800? Especially considering people can move to Wyoming right away and start doing some good? Compared with that, how hard it will be to climb from 5000 to the 20,000 we'll need in New Hampshire? And nobody can move until we're near that total?

Hell, anyone can see Wyoming is much easier to do.

Quote
Joe, I have never expressed anything but appreciation and admiration for the extensive research which has been done, and continues to be done. My concern is that you and a few others seem to rely on spreadsheet data to the exclusion of other forms of analysis...
What "other forms of analysis" would that be, Dad? If we had something else that resembled true analysis, then we'd have something subject to rebuttal.

Quote
The data are there to support these two larger states in pretty much all variables except population...
And the data are there to support Wyoming in all variables including (especially) population. So why do we even look at these larger states, since population is so important?

Actually, NH is not all that good after all.

I just went to my big spreadsheet (which has a much more extensive collection of variables than the one on the state data page), and created a weight vector called "Social freedom", and another called "Economic freedom". I created these vectors without any reference to the data, or what state was being favored. They also have nothing to do with things like population or FSP viability.

Then I pasted them into the comparison page, and this is what I got:

Social freedom
ID 1848
WY 1760
AK 1655
NH 1652
ND 1507
SD 1467
MT 1451
VT 1356
ME 1138
DE 1036

Economic freedom
WY 1444
SD 1389
ID 1319
ND 1277
AK 1172
NH 1124
MT 1046
VT 914
ME 905
DE 869

Now you can quibble with my weighing; and clearly, by examining the data, you can always fudge weights to make one state or another move up in the rankings. But I think it is pretty interesting how poorly NH does when not trying to fudge things. NH is always inferior to ID - if we were going to pick a big state, ID should be the one. NH is always inferior to a WY/VT 2-state project - why would we do NH when that better alternative is available, and takes care of the east-west split? And NH is always inferior to WY, whether we worry about population or not.
Logged

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:How would you vote if we voted today?
« Reply #17 on: April 08, 2003, 03:30:37 pm »

Quote

BUT, the above would be bad two-state projects
because they would still have
unhappy and whining rural westerners in New Hampshire
and
unhappy and whining city easterners in Idaho
Better for only the most committed, dedicated, ambitous, and liberty-hungry half of the 20,000 to move to Wyoming. The rest can stay home where they can go to the concerts/symphony, super-malls, warm beaches or stadium games instead of getting involved in serious politics like actually going to political meetings and seriously running for office. See this thread (and note how little has been added there)
What I learned today at my local council, board, or commission...

Joe, Wyoming has stadiums, it even has a pro football and pro baseball team.  Wyoming has tons of sports, hockey, baseball, football, rodeo, pro fishing, big game hunting, windsurfing, golf, wrestling...  Wyoming has concerts and symphonies.  It has a botanical gardens and many other things.  If you want super-malls, go to Denver and Salt Lake City.  Billings has a nice, tax-free mall.  Ft. Collins and Boulder have very nice outdoor malls, just like Burlington, VT does.  I have been to the outdoor malls in Burlington and Boulder, they are both very, very nice to city folks and country folk, alike.  Do you want a zoo?  30 minutes from Wyoming, in NE, you have a zoo.  Wyoming is not far from big cities.  Wyoming is not in the middle of no where.  Wyoming is very close to massive, quickly growing MSAs.

Wyoming might have a lot of country people, but so does Vermont.  I've traveled though VT, up and down, in and out, you will find many country people.  Vermont is full of farmers and the like.  
« Last Edit: April 08, 2003, 07:09:08 pm by FreedomRoad »
Logged

exitus

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • To face freedom, turn 180º from tyranny.
    • Mercados libres y paz: El Cato Institute
Re:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #18 on: April 08, 2003, 09:08:21 pm »


Though I've documented the following statement on the other threads (links posted above) several times...

A vote for New Hampshire
IS a vote for a two state project --

the equivalent of Wyoming in the North
AND
the equivalent of Vermont in the South.

A vote for Idaho
IS a vote for a two state project --

the equivalent of Wyoming in the Southeast
AND
the equivalent of Delaware in the Southwest.

Referencing Joe's post above, I much prefer Wyoming to take the vote with this in mind:

Let all of the fellow FSP members who happen to opt-out of Wyoming and new recruits who resist going to Wyoming go join the friendly NHLP, who will welcome them with open arms, or,  if they were unwilling to move back east, go move to sunny Boise and help us keep a sympathetic state next-door.

---How about it?
A vote for Wyoming is a vote for New Hampshire! (to welcome all the FSP remnants)
A vote for Wyoming is a vote for Idaho (to receive all those who for some reason or another refuse to make a move into Wyoming or move back East?)

I'm not proposing that the FSP do anything different, I am merely suggesting what will be done anyways if Wyoming is chosen to point-out how a vote for Wyoming is actually in the self-interest of most everyone.
Logged
". . .the foundations of our national policy should be laid in private morality. If individuals be not influenced by moral principles, it is in vain to look for public virtue” -- U.S. Senate's reply to George Washington's first inaugural address

jgmaynard

  • FSP Shadow Advertising
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2288
    • The Light of Alexandria
Re:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #19 on: April 08, 2003, 09:40:06 pm »

"This is more than just speculation - various posts from different people have indicated this is likely. What if WY wins and only 5,000 people make the move? "

That we NH Libs get the other 15,000? ;o)    

Don't bash kids, it's a joke.

Here's the problem with the population ratios - You don't need to convince everybody- Just those who don't agree with you. :o
If you wanted to get a libertarian agenda passed, would it be easier to do in a room of 100 libertarians or 50 socialists?

I know the difference is not as dramatic as pure libs vs pure socialists, but the idea is that population doesn't matter as much as starting point. A race on a 10km track is shorter than on a 5 km track, as long as you start much closer to the finish line.

PLUS OUR Governor's better than your Governor... He wants to MEET with us!  :P

Benson's property tax relief plan:

Current law - $5.80

    2004 - $5.10    $67,347,000 in property tax savings
    2005 - $4.99    $82,810,000 in property tax savings
    2006 - $4.43    $148,316,000 in property tax savings
    2007 - $3.73    $237,428,000 in property tax savings
    2008 - $3.00    $340,000,000 in property tax savings



JM



« Last Edit: April 08, 2003, 09:44:59 pm by jgmaynard »
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

jgmaynard

  • FSP Shadow Advertising
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2288
    • The Light of Alexandria
Re:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #20 on: April 08, 2003, 11:27:56 pm »

"Saying you'll cut taxes is easy.
Even cutting the taxes is easy -- until you face having to cut the programs or services those taxes funded.
THEN the catterwalling starts."

Catterwalling has started from some media already... :o) Benson and the legislature are going straight for it any way. The only way to be assured of losing an election in NH is to say that you are going to raise taxes...

"As to number of libertarians.
Since the numbers you are using are products of W.A.G.
Two can play that game."

Wild A-- Guess, I assume? I am only talking about what makes NH great, the fact that we are so close. I wasn't comparing it to any other state. We just elected a very small-l libertarian Governor 2:1. That means ~66% of NH voters supported a sll platform just 6 months ago...  worse is very likely to be found. No, we are too busy here in NH showing off our wonderful state to worry about bashing other states... Not worth our time.

"Wyoming has more small "l" libertarians than New Hampshire.....and other data (oops - dirty word)"

lol.... We were the first with hard, verifible, quantified data... http://www.lpnh.org/why-nh.htm . My my, shame on you for not paying attention... And I have been spending time trying to educate myself about the west and your efforts.. Did you know we are having a week long camping trip and showing people around NH?

"You say New Hampshire has more?
Does it have two hundred and fifty thousand?"

Hard to quantify, but yes, I'm willing to bet it is in that neighborhood. Perhaps more, since I live in the southern part of the state... Up north is far more inclined in that direction...

Here are some links to our states largest media outlets... WMUR and the Union Leader (NH's largest TV station and newspaper).
http://www.thewmurchannel.com/
http://www.theunionleader.com/

That might help give you more of a feeling for the NH mindset...  Could you please do the same for me for your favorite state(s)?

Thank you!

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

George Reich

  • FSP Participant
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 546
  • I just *love* it when Hank and Dagny brainstorm!
Re:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #21 on: April 09, 2003, 07:30:38 am »

Wyoming is the best chance for a Free State.

No, Wyoming is actually among the worst chances for a Free State. All votes there are counted on machines (of some of the worst kind) and out of sight of the public.
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:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #22 on: April 09, 2003, 09:19:06 am »

Quote
No, Wyoming is actually among the worst chances for a Free State. All votes there are counted on machines (of some of the worst kind) and out of sight of the public.

Well, for one thing, there is much more to the issue of creating a free state than election law, and Wyoming consistently outperforms the competition in the broad spectrum of criteria.

For another, you have yet to present any evidence to demonstrate why we should believe that voter fraud is either: 1) happening in Wyoming right now, or 2) likely to happen, and to such an extent that it would ruin our chances there.  In fact, the available evidence points to the contrary: a minority party governor, and the LP winning major party status.  

Besides this, as others have mentioned, election law should be one of the simplest, most appealing reforms that we could sponsor.  In the meantime we'd have exit polling data and a whole lot of angry people making a whole lot of noise if something appears awry.

Wyoming is just not a state that is synonymous with voter fraud, and I believe that it's very difficult to make a case that this is something we'd have to view as a significant threat there.  Particularly when the evidence seems to be telling in the opposite direction.

Kelton Baker

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Freedom is Free, it's tyranny that costs us dearly
    • Kelton Baker
Re:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #23 on: April 09, 2003, 11:34:14 am »


No, Wyoming is actually among the worst chances for a Free State. All votes there are counted on machines (of some of the worst kind) and out of sight of the public.

Why all this trust in the political process anyways, I wonder?

 Even if we have the world's most honest and ethical voting system in our state, in order to get our candidate elected, we still have to have a majority of people who agree with our candidate in the first place.

--but that isn't all,

  We have to find candidates who are not only electable, but honest, ethical and truly dedicated to liberty themselves or we are in for big dissapointments

--and even if we were to have a near-perfect voting system, a near-perfect majority of liberty-hungry voters, and near-perfect candidates,

   We will still have a minority of voters who do not agree with our proposed changes and will scream and assail for loss of their beloved big-government policies, possibly bringing many of the voters on our majority back to their side
 
--but, let us suppose that we did have a perfect voting system, a majority of liberty-hungry voters, perfect candidates and a largely complacent populous who did not vote for our candidates,
 
    Our candidates will still face opposition from the most dedicated statists.  Most states allow recall elections of even just 10% of the voters in the last election to oust a candidate.  There will likely be marches in the street, money flowing-in to support the flanks of the anti-liberty activists, (who already live and work in our candidate states and have favorable friendships with the media  and positions of power in each of our candidate states), and knowing the tactics of the leftists, there WILL be attention-getting publicity stunts, including threats of suicide, vandalism, intimidation from pies-in-the-face to threats of assasination, traffic-snarling  violent protests,  sit-ins, bomb-threats, strikes, boycotts, and that is in addition to the run-of-the-mill opinion articles, news blogs, the jokes about our movement on the Letterman Show, and public school-sponsored indoctrination of children to be 'ambassadors' to their voting parents

--but, let us suppose that we did have a perfect voting system, a majority of liberty-hungry voters, perfect candidates, a largely complacent populous who did not vote for our candidates, and opposition activists who fall all over themselves and let us roll over them, then what?

     It only takes one individual to launch a lawsuit arguing that their 'rights' are being violated by the state to change the interpretation of the state constitution, in which case we may be set-back by years on some issues even if we are successful otherwise.  Even if we do have libertarian judges in place statewide, our proposals will likely still face challenges in federal courts.  Will we have enough sympathy and support from the populace to spend the money necessary for legal work all the way to the Supreme Court?  So, if at every turn, the will of the majority is denied, how much opposition will we face, and how much support will we have in our state to use revolutionary tools in our state-power toolbox such as nullification?

--but, let us suppose that we did have a perfect voting system, a majority of liberty-hungry voters, perfect candidates, a largely complacent opposition populous and activists,

      Consider sinister tactics like those used against George Hansen, Republican Congressman from Idaho in all of his efforts at trying to put the IRS in its place.  He wrote a book early in his career called To Harass our People back  in the 1970's detailing more of what he successfully overcame in facing opposition against him then.  The website link above shows only the worst of what he faced at the end of his career.

 I believe that the sooner this movement starts to focus on gaining the hearts and minds of the people rather than token seats of power, the more successful we will be.  For me, I feel our cause for liberty will be more welcome and less outnumbered in Wyoming than any other candidate state.

“Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it.” --Justice Learned Hand, 1944

96
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

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5725
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #24 on: April 17, 2003, 02:54:42 pm »

Don't forget the Great Nekkid Wars. ;)
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:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #25 on: April 17, 2003, 06:06:20 pm »

I feel like I missed out; I haven't seen any Nekkid Wars.  ;)

Quote
No, Wyoming is actually among the worst chances for a Free State. All votes there are counted on machines (of some of the worst kind) and out of sight of the public.
That's quite an observation, coming from the guy who tried to throw the FSP election (and found "nothing unethical" about it) by packing the ranks with non-moving "one-state wonders", to send the Project to a state famous for throwing an election via fraud to George Bush I.

Just teasing, George.

What's that you say? NH has cleaned up its election process? Why, so it has, very commendable. And if NH managed it (without an FSP), then I guess WY can (with an FSP). There is no constituency for crooked elections - except within the halls of power in such places as Florida and Chicago.

We WILL fix the voting machines if we end up in Wyoming, I promise you.  :)

NH fans, my spreadsheet is yours for the asking. I'm up to 80 rows, now.

Joe, you were exaggerating a bit when you said,
Quote
Go look at Zxcv's big spreadsheet and substract the population variables. New Hampshire loses (though not as badly as some).
It actually does quite well when you toss the SIZE and QUALITY variables, third place behind WY and ID (that's the bad news for NH proponents; the other big state is ahead of it). When I add in the QUALITY variables, SD just slightly sneaks ahead of NH, but it's really a toss-up. But that certainly calls into question your analogy, James:
Quote
I know the difference is not as dramatic as pure libs vs pure socialists, but the idea is that population doesn't matter as much as starting point. A race on a 10km track is shorter than on a 5 km track, as long as you start much closer to the finish line.
The way it looks to me, we have two races. The 10km track is having its start about half-way to the finish line. The 5km race is having its start about half-way, or even a little further, to the finish line.

Look, if you New Hampshire guys would stop and think a bit, you'd see that Wyoming is not your problem. Idaho is. People may decide to buy your big-state arguments, but pick the "wrong" big state!  :o  Here's the way it plays out, the way I see it anyway:

Scenario 1: Wyoming wins. People start moving immediately to WY because there is no fallback disaster to worry about. We start helping freedom right away. What do NH proponents get out of this? Most people who opted out of Wyoming. And some who later cannot find jobs (if the jobs issue is as bleak as you say - you do believe your own assertions on that, don't you?  ;) )  And NH may later harvest some easterners who move to Wyoming but can't fit in. And some new post-5000 recruits who would have gone Wyoming but prefer a place back east if it is a reasonable alternative. (With Wyoming's small size, losing some activists won't be a disaster.) Finally and most important, you still have Jason's idea, of moving to a place to be free, by concentrating activists. With a respectable showing in the FSP vote, which is almost assured, you can put together your own project and convince all those freedom-lovers left in that statist wasteland back east to move to New Hampshire. And we end up with a 2-state project, whether Jason wants it or not.  ;)  But only if Wyoming wins.

Scenario 2: Idaho wins. We start recruiting like crazy because we will need at least 20,000 there and even more. ID is easier to move to and find jobs, and I'll bet it's the state with the fewest opt-outs. So there will be almost no fallout left for NH to harvest. Even city-dependent easterners will have an easier time fitting in. A complete loss for NH. My guess is if we are going to hit 20,000, we will certainly do it in Idaho, so the FSP will likely "succeed", although the jury is out whether we will have an impact there.

Scenario 3: NH wins. You are fat, but you'd better hope we can find 20,000 for you, from outside the state. If not, there will be a mini-disaster and we will probably have a sort-of 2-state WY/NH project again, but it will be a shambles...

Scenario 4: MT wins. NOW we are all in deep doo-doo...   :P

To reiterate, Idaho is your problem, not Wyoming.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2003, 06:52:36 pm by Zxcv »
Logged

Dalamar49

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 509
  • I smoked out the sheriff and his deputy! : )
Re:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #26 on: April 17, 2003, 06:09:23 pm »

Ouch poor Zack. Not to sound like a bleeding heart liberal, but leave the poor little guy alone.  :'(

I don't think Zack's obsession with state takeover makes NH a bad choice....of course a lot of other things do, including NH's really, really, close proximity to the People's Republic of Boston and other pinko conclaves.

Even with Wyoming's provincial attitude and antidrug feelings it still wins the state contest hands down.

Logged
Get up, stand up, stand up for your right. Don't give up the fight.

Robert H.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #27 on: April 18, 2003, 02:37:17 am »

Scenario 2: Idaho wins. We start recruiting like crazy because we will need at least 20,000 there and even more. ID is easier to move to and find jobs, and I'll bet it's the state with the fewest opt-outs. So there will be almost no fallout left for NH to harvest. Even city-dependent easterners will have an easier time fitting in. A complete loss for NH. My guess is if we are going to hit 20,000, we will certainly do it in Idaho, so the FSP will likely "succeed", although the jury is out whether we will have an impact there.

I agree that Idaho will likely attract more activists than any other large state choice due to the fact that easterners and westerners, urbanites and suburbanites could more easily find what they're looking for there (or at least a reasonable approximation).

Reflecting on Zxcv's comments, as well as prior research and discussion, I believe that the best chance for a free state (given the unknowns that we confront) come from voting WY>ID or ID>WY.  This is more than simply a reflection of my belief that Wyoming is the best candidate for liberty in our lifetime; there are some other considerations here as well.  Let's reflect on some of those for a moment here, keeping in mind that life seldom plays out as we would have it, and that more people are likely to take the path of least resistance (or go with what suits them best personally).

Say that 5,000 or so move after the vote (which either goes to New Hampshire or Idaho), but the FSP fails to reach 20,000 and a fallback scenario goes into effect; which of the following would be most likely to work (thus doing less potential harm to the prospects of a free state)?

  • Persuading 5,000 people to uproot (again) and fallback from New Hampshire across the continent to Wyoming, or...
  • Persuading 5,000 people to uproot again and fallback across the state line from Idaho into Wyoming?


Idaho has a clear advantage here in terms of protecting free state success by keeping a larger number of FSPer's working together.  If the vote goes to New Hampshire and a fallback to Wyoming comes into play, the FSP is much more likely to be split as a larger number of easterners seem to object to Wyoming than to Idaho.  A fallback scenario will likely split the project to some degree anyway simply given the number who will move after the vote and will not (or cannot) move again, but I believe that a fallback from New Hampshire would split the project more deeply than a fallback from Idaho.  Remember that the SOI only requires people to move to the chosen state; it does not address fallbacks, thus all bets are off after the state vote itself.

Now, let's consider a sort of "reverse fallback" scenario...

Say that Wyoming wins and urbanites either cannot acclimate to it, or large numbers of FSPer's cannot find employment (which seems to be the number one concern expressed about Wyoming - accurate or not).  Consider another 5,000 moving to Wyoming sometime between the state vote and reaching 20,000 (or the FSP's 5th anniversary in 2006, by which time we have not reached 20,000).  

If the FSP then elects for a reverse fallback because the majority of 20,000 cannot acclimate to Wyoming or cannot find jobs there, then the FSP's most economically robust state (with all of its more urban opportunities) is right next door in Idaho.

Also, FSPer's could more reasonably start to move right away if the vote goes to either WY or ID for two compelling reasons:

  • Less than 9,000 activists could saturate Wyoming to the same degree as 20,000 in Idaho, Maine, or New Hampshire; thus, recruiting fewer activists harms us least significantly in Wyoming (thus enhancing the chances of achieving a free state).  And Idaho is the most likely state to reach 20,000, thus, once again, enhancing the chances of achieving a free state.
  • Wyoming and Idaho are perfect fallbacks for one another in the event that problems arise (either for the FSP itself, or for its individual members).  Too few recruits to handle Idaho? - fallback across the state line to Wyoming.  Too few jobs for recruits in Wyoming?  - fallback across the state line to Idaho.


And consider possible splits once again.  

If a fallback to Wyoming becomes necessary, and more early adopters or other members refuse to go along with it, such attrition will hurt Wyoming's chances less than any other state because our numbers, combined with the state's social and political climate, count for so much more there from the beginning.  If a fallback from Wyoming to Idaho comes into play, then more are likely to go along with it because anyone willing to move to Wyoming probably won't object to Idaho, and the logistics of such a move would be less strenuous.

And even if 5,000 or so cannot or will not move from Wyoming to Idaho, then the chances of a free state are more realistic once again because fewer numbers are needed for a greater impact in Wyoming, and Idaho may attract enough recruits to make up for its losses (and Idaho is another state where the social and political climate may help make up for lost numbers).

Thus, based on the above, I believe that the WY>ID or ID>WY combinations offer us the best chances for protecting the possibility of achieving a free state.  Together, they address the greatest number of unknown factors to a greater degree than any other combination I can see.  

An argument could be made for a Vermont/New Hampshire combination (using each as a fallback for the other); however, Vermont is not nearly as advantageous as Wyoming (meaning that we would probably need our full potential membership there), and more westerners are likely to object to moving to either Vermont or New Hampshire (thus potentially reducing overall participation or splitting the project more harmfully should a fallback occur).

Even if you believe that the east/west and urban/rural disputes are irrelevant to the question of a free state, their prominence in our various discussions (both here in the forum and on the state discussion lists) suggests that they are a significant factor to a number of people.  And this is likely representative of more who are not actively discussing the issues among us given that we see new recruits introducing the same arguments, objections and theories as more long-term members.  Consequently, we have to believe that these issues are going to factor into the state vote whether they should be irrelevant or not (along with issues like convenience, proximity to family and friends, "likability," etc...)  

But to what extent will they affect the vote?  Good question.

For me, the issue then becomes: how do we best protect the possiblity of achieving a free state among such a host of possible difficulties and unknowns?  Personally, I think that the WY>ID or ID>WY scenarios offer us the best chance of protecting our mutual investment in the future.

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #28 on: April 18, 2003, 09:05:18 am »

Well, just to give an example, George voted this way in the "How would you vote" thread:

NH>VT>MT>AK=SD>ME>ND>ID>WY>DE

My point was, if you are a real NH proponent (and I think George qualifies  ;) ) then it makes more sense to put WY ahead of ID, because if WY wins then at least NH gets something out of it. In fact if I were an NH proponent I'd probably put WY very high, although still below NH, because of the potential to harvest some of the WY fallout if it wins. If I understand Condorcet correctly, changing your vote from this:

NH>everything else>WY

to this:

NH>WY>everything else

in no way harms NH even if you think WY is NH's greatest competitor. Putting WY at the end only harms WY's chances against "everything else", not against NH. You do not help NH by putting WY at the end.

Of course someone will probably rap my knuckles by saying I'm getting into the "strategic voting" area here, but I'd say putting WY at or near the end is pretty strategic anyway (although perhaps not well thought out) because it doesn't deserve to be there - unless you think, as George seems to do, that voting technology far outweighs everything else!  ::)

But Robert, all this talk about fallback and ID>WY or WY>ID makes my head hurt. I kinda see your point, sort of. But here's the way I look at it:

1) If we have to go to a fallback, it will be a big disaster for us. Just think of all the time wasted, all the freedom lost in the interim. <shudder>

2) We will never go to a fallback if WY is chosen, because WY is its own fallback. So we avoid entirely at least that disaster by picking WY.

3) If we pick NH or ID, and only get up to 19,000 or so, we will not fall back, unless we can round up a prior commitment from 13,000 or so to move again to Wyoming. Yes, some lesser number like 10,000 is better in WY than 19,000 is in NH or ID, but not that much better, such that it's worth the big disruption.

4) As you say, falling back from ID to WY is much easier than NH to WY, a point in ID's favor.

5) Another point in ID's favor is that it is less likely we will get into the fallback scenario than with NH, because (just a guess) it is more likely we will hit 20,000 there, ID being a more generally aceptable state. I think easterners are more likely to give a try moving west, than the reverse.

But let's be smart, and avoid these ugly fallback scenarios altogether by picking Wyoming.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2003, 09:10:25 am by Zxcv »
Logged

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:More NH, ID, WY debate
« Reply #29 on: April 18, 2003, 10:45:06 am »

But let's be smart, and avoid these ugly fallback scenarios altogether by picking Wyoming.

All of this is great.

However, the real question is, why would anyone vote for Idaho, at ALL.  Idaho has over 1,350,000 people right now but is expected to grow so fast that is has 2,600,000+ people by 2025 (with a very large amounf of these people coming from CA).  Seriously, that is TOO LARGE FOR US.  What is the point?  We will need 50,000 people and not 20,000.  Idaho is only an option if it can give up 50,000, if those population projections are correct.  I hope they are not, because if they are, it might be a REALLY BAD idea to even vote for Idaho.

What about all of these people that want to live in the West picking the leading West state, Wyoming.  Why?  Because, Idaho is growing to quickly for the FSP!!!  Wyoming has a similar climate to Idaho, is closer to really big cities and really big airports, still has some farming (if they like that), is right next to a high tech center (Ft. Collins/Loveland, CO), and has compare gun freedoms, libertarian Congressmen, and an overall feel to Idaho.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6   Go Up