Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Poll

What best describes your position on moving for the FSP?

I'll go anywhere for the FSP!
- 101 (32.5%)
There are a couple states I won't go to.
- 93 (29.9%)
I'll only go if the selected state is east/west of the Mississippi.
- 38 (12.2%)
There are a few states I'd go to, but that's it.
- 34 (10.9%)
I'll only participate if my favorite state is picked.
- 10 (3.2%)
I haven't decided!
- 35 (11.3%)

Total Members Voted: 288


Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7]   Go Down

Author Topic: Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)  (Read 49692 times)

johnadams

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 630
  • Friend of the FSP, Libertarian
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #90 on: September 11, 2003, 04:26:51 pm »

....
I have already address that. Besides I would skip newspapers and agencies when looking for job
....

I hear you on that, Tony. In my own past career searches, newspapers and job agencies have been the least helpful. The most help has come from people I knew or came to know who live and work in the area I was moving to or resided in. The statistics I have seen in career search books and resources bear this out, as I recall. I am short on time right now, but anyone can look this up and verify it if they don't believe me or Tony.

In one of my newspaper-search nightmares early on in my career, one job that I applied for that was in a newspaper turned out to have over 8,000 applicants--for a single position. I had to wait for over an hour in a line and then fill out forms, take a screening test, present my resume and undergo a quick interview. When the interview was over the interviewer informed me that the opening did not really even exist!!! They were just collecting resumes in case a position opened up in the future. I later read an article that explained that this is a common practice that many corporations use. They put out ads even when there is not a job and keep resumes on file.

There are some actual openings for quality positions with quality companies in newspapers, but they tend to get a lot of responses. Networking is by far the most effective way to get a good job. If you have an inside connection you can find out about a job opening before it is publicized in the newspapers, and if you are lucky, the person doing the hiring may decide to take you without putting an ad out (this has happened to me), because few owners or managers enjoy the process of finding a new employee any more than job searchers enjoy looking for a job. A business may spend an enormous amount of time and effort to get a good person for a position, only to find out later that they are not what they expected, or have the person quit on them within a few months. I have been on both sides of the process and know it can be a pain from either side. Whatever networking and insider help you can get is invaluable--don't ignore it, you'll only be doing yourself a disservice.
Logged
"men are born equally free and independent" - John Adams
World's Smallest Political Quiz

vepope

  • Guest
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #91 on: September 13, 2003, 07:59:05 am »



That is an excellent example, Tony. While help at the destination is more crucial for international migration, it is still also crucial for a mass migration within a nation--especially for those who will be moving great distances and are unfamiliar with the state they are moving to. This is so obvious that I do not know why someone is arguing this point with you.

I am familiar with how local immigrant groups help new immigrants to get situated in their new country and how they attract more migrants in this way and by communicating with people in the old country. Word spreads that people and groups in a certain city or town are very helpful in getting new immigrants situated and more people are thus attracted to that area. Usually, this involves earlier immigrants helping out later immigrants from the same national and/or ethnic background.

The same sort of thing will need to be done by native Porcupines, early movers, and their allies in the destination state if the FSP is to succeed. It is very disturbing that some people in these fora do not even recognize the importance of this.

There is a difference of point of view here.  Westerners (I come from the plains states) have a very strong "independent" streak in them.  They prefer to do things for themselves, if possible, so they know it gets done right the first time.  

That also includes not asking the government to do it for them.  Something like the "Brady Bill"  or the "Patriot Act" wouldn't stand a chance in most of the "Midwest" or "North Central" states, because people prefer for government to just leave them alone most of the time.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2003, 08:10:05 am by vepope »
Logged

johnadams

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 630
  • Friend of the FSP, Libertarian
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #92 on: September 14, 2003, 04:33:34 pm »



That is an excellent example, Tony. While help at the destination is more crucial for international migration, it is still also crucial for a mass migration within a nation--especially for those who will be moving great distances and are unfamiliar with the state they are moving to. This is so obvious that I do not know why someone is arguing this point with you.

I am familiar with how local immigrant groups help new immigrants to get situated in their new country and how they attract more migrants in this way and by communicating with people in the old country. Word spreads that people and groups in a certain city or town are very helpful in getting new immigrants situated and more people are thus attracted to that area. Usually, this involves earlier immigrants helping out later immigrants from the same national and/or ethnic background.

The same sort of thing will need to be done by native Porcupines, early movers, and their allies in the destination state if the FSP is to succeed. It is very disturbing that some people in these fora do not even recognize the importance of this.

There is a difference of point of view here.  Westerners (I come from the plains states) have a very strong "independent" streak in them.  They prefer to do things for themselves, if possible, so they know it gets done right the first time.  

That also includes not asking the government to do it for them.
I think that a tradition/stereotype of "independence" and "orneriness" is something that longtime residents of both the Mountain States and New England have in common (recall that the American Revolution started here, for example). While no characteristic applies to everyone or in every case, I think this is an aspect of our historical cultures that we Yankees (New Englanders) and Mountaineers? can celebrate together in commiseration.

I don't know if you are implying it, but I wasn't talking about government help being crucial for immigrant newcomers, I was talking about private help from private citizens and groups. This is something that is well known and understood in immigrant communities--perhaps you have not heard of it?

A mass migration of 20,000 or more people will require the cooperation of a large network of people. A local infrastructure of people and other resources will be required to assist this project, regardless of what state is chosen. The sooner it is developed, the better for the FSP.

Quote
Something like the "Brady Bill"  or the "Patriot Act" wouldn't stand a chance in most of the "Midwest" or "North Central" states, because people prefer for government to just leave them alone most of the time.

I believe the Brady Bill and Patriot act are national, rather than state or local laws, and that the states weren't given any choice about enforcing them. Do you mean that there is not much chance of additional state restrictions on gun ownership or additional invasion of privacy by state government to be enacted in Midwestern or North Central states? The same could be said of New Hampshire (and no state has better gun laws than Vermont).
« Last Edit: September 14, 2003, 04:35:08 pm by johnadams »
Logged
"men are born equally free and independent" - John Adams
World's Smallest Political Quiz

vepope

  • Guest
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #93 on: September 15, 2003, 08:25:38 am »

I don't know if you are implying it, but I wasn't talking about government help being crucial for immigrant newcomers, I was talking about private help from private citizens and groups. This is something that is well known and understood in immigrant communities--perhaps you have not heard of it?

A mass migration of 20,000 or more people will require the cooperation of a large network of people. A local infrastructure of people and other resources will be required to assist this project, regardless of what state is chosen. The sooner it is developed, the better for the FSP.

Quote
Something like the "Brady Bill"  or the "Patriot Act" wouldn't stand a chance in most of the "Midwest" or "North Central" states, because people prefer for government to just leave them alone most of the time.

I believe the Brady Bill and Patriot act are national, rather than state or local laws, and that the states weren't given any choice about enforcing them. Do you mean that there is not much chance of additional state restrictions on gun ownership or additional invasion of privacy by state government to be enacted in Midwestern or North Central states? The same could be said of New Hampshire (and no state has better gun laws than Vermont).

Yes, JohnAdams, both are national.  I wasn't trying to imply that they weren't.  I was trying to say that the backers of those bills were FORCED to go for national legislation, because so many states wouldn't have passed them if given the chance.  Also, seeing that either bill makes major changes in the interpretation of existing constitutional law, they are both unconstitutional if for no other reason than that neither was sent to the states for ratification as a constitutional amendment.  That is the constitutional "due process" for amending constitutional law.  The current administration has blatantly disregarded that fact.

I wasn't saying that there is anything wrong with NH or VT gun laws, either.  But, some people posting on here seem to have found ONE PARTICULAR hobby horse to ride, and can't seem to see anything good about any other horse when compared with their favorite.  When I see something like that, I just feel compelled to point out the similarities of the others (they all have four hooves, two ears, two eyes, a tail, etc.)   ;)

It seems to me that we MUST plan as if we are going to be working alone, because initial local support is an unprovable unknown.  Because of that, we should pick a state where we have the greatest chance of  success without help.  There are 2 0r 3 states where we could perhaps carry a ballot with only 10K members.  In NH, 5 years from now, 20K might not make a measurable difference.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2003, 08:29:43 am by vepope »
Logged

johnadams

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 630
  • Friend of the FSP, Libertarian
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #94 on: September 15, 2003, 12:02:52 pm »

....
I wasn't saying that there is anything wrong with NH or VT gun laws, either.  But, some people posting on here seem to have found ONE PARTICULAR hobby horse to ride, and can't seem to see anything good about any other horse when compared with their favorite.  When I see something like that, I just feel compelled to point out the similarities of the others (they all have four hooves, two ears, two eyes, a tail, etc.)   ;)
Well, Tony certainly does favor NH and he doesn't pretend otherwise, but his posts have generally been very civil and I think his questions were fair. If you choose not to answer them directly that is your right of course.

Quote
It seems to me that we MUST plan as if we are going to be working alone, because initial local support is an unprovable unknown.  Because of that, we should pick a state where we have the greatest chance of  success without help.  There are 2 0r 3 states where we could perhaps carry a ballot with only 10K members.  In NH, 5 years from now, 20K might not make a measurable difference.
There's nothing wrong with not taking anything for granted and being cautious, but the NH Porcupines and the LPNH have demonstrated their support and have done actual groundwork which could be verified if anyone doubts it. This is one advantage that NH has over the other states, though it is only one to consider among many factors when weighing the various states. Ignoring the help that NH offers would be irrational and only makes sense if one has opted out of that state or does not wish to acknowledge any of the plusses of that state.
Logged
"men are born equally free and independent" - John Adams
World's Smallest Political Quiz

vepope

  • Guest
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #95 on: September 15, 2003, 01:52:40 pm »

I do recognize that there are benefits to having help, particularly from those who are like minded.  That is the whole point of the FSP, isn't it?  But I do want to be cautious, and therefore question the NUMBERS of the LPNH and the NH porcupines.  The actual numbers that are with us at the polls are the factor that will swing any real advantage to our side, or not.

I also question how committed to the FSP some of the NH porcupines are, since they were the only sub group that I've heard of that joined the FSP, but effectivelly said that they were only with us if they wouldn't have to move, by opting out of every other candidate state.  That action alone makes me suspicious of everything else that comes out of NH - cautious but not unpersuadeable.  In truth, I have already sent in my ballot, and while I won't reveal everything about how I voted, NH did make the top 4, but wasn't number 1 because of the population growth predictions.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2003, 01:55:07 pm by vepope »
Logged

Tony Stelik

  • FSP Participant
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 326
  • I'm a rabid individualist
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #96 on: September 15, 2003, 02:07:19 pm »

I do recognize that there are benefits to having help, particularly from those who are like minded.  That is the whole point of the FSP, isn't it?  But I do want to be cautious, and therefore question the NUMBERS of the LPNH and the NH porcupines.  The actual numbers that are with us at the polls are the factor that will swing any real advantage to our side, or not.

I also question how committed to the FSP some of the NH porcupines are, since they were the only sub group that I've heard of that joined the FSP, but effectivelly said that they were only with us if they wouldn't have to move, by opting out of every other candidate state.  That action alone makes me suspicious of everything else that comes out of NH - cautious but not unpersuadeable.  In truth, I have already sent in my ballot, and while I won't reveal everything about how I voted, NH did make the top 4, but wasn't number 1 because of the population growth predictions.
I know that there is around 19 members who opted out all the other states. Also I know that if eastern state is elected big numbers of western members will drop out. I am not sure if you know that most if not all of active NH supporters are glass eaters.
I was skeptical about NH before I visited this state and talked to regular people. NH is already the most free state and NH people are most zealously guarding old “live free or die” style of life and they are passionately  politicking. I call this “do it yourself politics”
If we will find ourselves alone we are doomed to fail even in WY. We need locals to help in what we plan to do. I think WY population is more Republican than Libertarian that is why I am skeptical about WY.
Logged
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forgive you

vepope

  • Guest
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #97 on: September 15, 2003, 05:42:29 pm »

What is a "glass eater?"

As for WY being more republican than libertarian, that may be the way the registration goes.  I'll not argue that one, I could loose.  But, my own father is a registered republican, but he agrees with the libertarian party more than he realizes.  He won't change his affiliation, won't even talk about it, because he believes that US politics is a two-party system and that voting any other way is just wasting your vote.  I think a lot of people in the midwest feel the same way, but would support us on individual issues.  I admit - that is IMHO.
Logged

johnadams

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 630
  • Friend of the FSP, Libertarian
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #98 on: September 15, 2003, 05:51:36 pm »

I do recognize that there are benefits to having help, particularly from those who are like minded.  That is the whole point of the FSP, isn't it?  But I do want to be cautious, and therefore question the NUMBERS of the LPNH and the NH porcupines.  The actual numbers that are with us at the polls are the factor that will swing any real advantage to our side, or not.
I appreciate your caution. I think Tony was talking more about the preparation work that people in NH have done and are doing than the numbers that NH proponents have quoted. Perhaps there was some misunderstanding here?

Quote
I also question how committed to the FSP some of the NH porcupines are, since they were the only sub group that I've heard of that joined the FSP, but effectivelly said that they were only with us if they wouldn't have to move, by opting out of every other candidate state.  That action alone makes me suspicious of everything else that comes out of NH - cautious but not unpersuadeable.
I haven't heard of this. Who is this "sub group"? Can you link me to where this subgroup said this?

Quote
In truth, I have already sent in my ballot, and while I won't reveal everything about how I voted, NH did make the top 4, but wasn't number 1 because of the population growth predictions.
I don't even have a vote, so I don't have much at stake here either. I think that NH, ID, WY, SD and DE all have numerous positive factors and even the other states have survived previous cuts and are better than most of the 50 states. My own weighting of the various factors on two FSP matrices came out with somewhat different rankings (which shows that much depends on which factors you include and how much you weight them), but these states fared well overall. There doesn't seem to be much support here for SD or DE, so I think that NH, ID or WY will win. I think NH and WY do especially well on some of the intangibles that are difficult to enumerate, and I think that some of the business and economic factors probably rank SD and DE higher than they actually deserve.

I'm thinking that WY's low population might hurt it in the actual vote, because there will be fewer people from there voting and Porcupines might be less willing to move there, but we'll see. I am also concerned that if NH is not selected, that a high proportion of Porcupines will be drained from that state, as it has the highest proportional membership in the FSP. It would not be good to undercut the exciting new progress that has been made there recently.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2003, 05:54:10 pm by johnadams »
Logged
"men are born equally free and independent" - John Adams
World's Smallest Political Quiz

vepope

  • Guest
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #99 on: September 15, 2003, 06:45:21 pm »

responding to johnadams in post #99:

Your first question was: Perhaps there was som misunderstanding here?

I'm certain of it, looking back through the last 10-15 posts of the thread.  I don't doubt that there are porcupines in NH that are working very hard, but what I would like to know is how much impact they will add to ours at the voting booth.

Your second question is answered by Tony in post #97.  I have no information about what percentage of the NH porcupines did this, but I did learn a few months ago that it had happened and resulted in a change in the membership rules that restricted the number of opt-outs for active membership in the FSP.  Those 19 NH who were already in were allowed to keep their votes, but nobody else was given a vote if they weren't willing to move.

As for the rest, I doubt if SD or DE have any chance, along with ND, ME, AK, or (possibly) MT.  Although, since one of my hobby horses is gun freedom, I would like to see AK or MT or WY at the top, if that were my only concideration.
Logged

johnadams

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 630
  • Friend of the FSP, Libertarian
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #100 on: September 15, 2003, 07:40:04 pm »

....what I would like to know is how much impact they will add to ours at the voting booth.
That is an interesting but different question that has been addressed elsewhere.

Quote
Your second question is answered by Tony in post #97.  I have no information about what percentage of the NH porcupines did this, ....

Actually, I was asking for a link so I can read about this myself, but I'll go by the 19 figure if both you and Tony accept it and no one can direct me to where this issue was originally discussed.

Regarding percentage: when the count of total members was 4,719, the count of NH-resident members was 154, so that 19 would represent only 12% of all NH-resident Porcupines at the time of that count. The total NH supporters from all states is likely to be much higher than 154, and since no more people were allowed to opt out of all other states, the percentage of total NH supporters who opted out of all states but one is likely to be very small.

Note that Tony also said: "Also I know that if eastern state is elected big numbers of western members will drop out." I don't know about big numbers, but I have seen posts in which WY supporters said they would not move to NH, so that would make the words of WY supporters suspect as well, using your criteria.
Logged
"men are born equally free and independent" - John Adams
World's Smallest Political Quiz

Michelle

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #101 on: September 15, 2003, 09:17:22 pm »

Hi JohnAdams and Vepope -

I don't have time to read through this whole thread, but did want to clarify one thing. There were members in nearly every candidate state opting out of all but their own state. In NH, from what I understand, there were 20 prior to the rule change. BUT, as a percentage of the membership of each state, DE, AK, and MT all had higher percentages of opt outs than NH ever had.

Until this weekend, I didn't know who any of those 20 in NH were. This weekend I talked to someone who said they had opted out of all states but NH. The reason given was that they believe NH is the only place where success is really likely; if another state is chosen they plan to reevaluate their options then. I imagine the reason is pretty much the same for others who did this too.
Logged
Please join NHLA today! http://www.nhliberty.org With every new member we gain political weight to support liberty-friendly candidates and promote liberty throughout NH.
Support the Liberty Scholarship Fund. Please make a donation today! http://www.lsfund.org

Tony Stelik

  • FSP Participant
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 326
  • I'm a rabid individualist
Re:Location Requirements (TAKE THE POLL)
« Reply #102 on: September 16, 2003, 07:51:33 am »

Quote
Posted by: vepope  Posted on: September 15, 2003, 06:42:29 pm  
What is a "glass eater?"
 

Glass eater means the member will go wherever. If there will be nothing to eat he / she will (exaggerating) eat glass  â€œGlass eaters” did not opt out any state, or they opted in any previously opted out states.
In NH process of freeing the state is underway by now. Therefore I have tremendous respect for NH porcupines who signed up to FSP inspite the process going in there. Even more respect for NH “glass eaters”. Their commitment to FSP is without precedence.
I know some people in VT who plan to move to NH and they do not sign up to FSP – they would be perfectly OK to opt out every state except NH, but they think it would not be ethical.
Many spouses do not sign up to FSP although they are willing to move to FS with their husbands / wives. Since they do not plan to be active, they think signing up for voting would not be ethical.
As for me, I would not have the problem with the people opting out all the states except the one they live in, but that is only my opinion. There are some people in WY who do not wish to move out of WY and that is perfectly OK. After all if one strongly believes his / her state is on the best way to freedom, decision not to move is rational. But if somebody signed up to FSP that means that person can see further than others and has more love for freedom than others. It is more honorable to create new political trend in America than have own little freedom in the neck of the woods.
Logged
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forgive you
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7]   Go Up