Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Free State Project] Re: Thoughts from Idaho

Expand Messages
  • Debra
    What a marvelous way to put it - thank you for clarifying what I couldn t quite put my finger on. It is so much more difficult to change the status quo;
    Message 1 of 17 , Mar 31 10:53 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      What a marvelous way to put it - thank you for clarifying what I
      couldn't quite put my finger on. It is so much more difficult to
      change the status quo; walking into a state where a great
      number of laws need to be changed seems to be handicapping
      ourselves from the get-go.

      Once the local population has acclimated to laws, any attempt
      to change them will be met with resistance: "Get rid of zoning? There'll
      be junkyards in the middle of my neighborhood!!" They don't realize
      that many states get along well without many of the laws that they
      consider absolutely essential.

      The more freedom a local population already has, the less difficult
      it will be to implement a more freedom-oriented form of government.
      The local population will already be used to taking care of itself and
      taking responsibility for its own actions, at least to a greater degree.

      Thanks again!

      Debra "For the love of all that's holy, don't make me move east!" Ricketts

      At 06:22 AM 4/1/2002 +0000, you wrote:
      > Phylilis,
      > I forgive you. I believe you did misjudge me, although that isn't
      >the word I would have chosen. I think you simply misunderstood me. It
      >is hard to put all my thoughts and beliefs into a single post. I will
      >attempt to further explain myself. I am fiercely independant. I have
      >a good idea of what I want out of life. Basically, I want the freedom
      >to do what I want to do, when I want to do it, with whomever I want
      >to do it with, as long as I don't bother anyone else, and I want to
      >be able to do it without having to request permission from a stuffed
      >shirt hundreds or thousands of miles away. I am a firm believer
      >in "Live and let live.", and minding my own business. I also believe
      >others should do the same. Between the 10 Commandments and the
      >Constitution, we have a pretty good set of guidelines we can follow.
      >Religious conotations aside, does anyone disagree that the 10
      >Commandments are a decent guide? I believe in Religious freedom, and
      >have no intention to impose my beliefs on others, and don't care to
      >have their's imposed on me. I still think the 10 Commandments are a
      >good guide.
      >I disagree with the numerous unConstitutional laws that have been
      >passed over the years, restricting our freedom at every turn.
      >I thought this was a like-minded bunch.
      >I think a best use of my time in wanting to live free of interferance
      >is to go to where the interference isn't quite so onerous, and
      >attempt to repeal as many of the onerous regulations as possible.
      >This will be easier to do, if there are only 10% of the onerous rules
      >in place to start with.
      >If I want to live at Sea-level, I think it would be foolish to buy
      >property on top of a mountain and started digging.(How much would an
      >Environmental Impact Study cost? LOL)
      >
      >Instead of moving East, where I have to go to a meeting of City
      >Council and have hearings etc. to repaint my garage a different
      >color, I prefer to go to a place where no permit is needed to build a
      >garage, and oppose any future attempt to pass such a regulation.
      >Instead of moving to a State, and attempting to repeal their income
      >tax laws, I prefer to move to where there are no income taxes, and be
      >damn sure they don't start any.
      >If your major passion was gun control laws, would you move to New
      >Jersey,(Ithink) which has none, or to Washington DC or California?
      >
      >If we want to get rid of government regulations, why move to a State
      >where every action is regulated on every inch of land? Why not move
      >to where Zoning laws are only applicable inside City Limits?
      >
      >Maybe my sub-conscious is forcing me toward So Dak, so I can vote
      >against Daschle(sp?)? LOL
      >Think of the National implications if we could make him look for a
      >job in the private sector. I'll be in Minnesota at least through the
      >elections, and I'll do my best to remove the Wellstone thorn from the
      >Nation's side.
      >None of us need to wait until there are 20,000 members, and everyone
      >gets moved, to start being active. Start now in whatever state you
      >are in. Once we all move to one state, that is the only state we can
      >all legally vote in.
      >I guess my position boils down to the question of, if we want Freedom
      >what is the 'best' approach. Moving to a place with fewer
      >restrictions on freedom to start with, or should we move to a 'Target-
      >rich Environment'? My personal preference is for fewer restrictions
      >to begin with, and some room to breath.
      >Have I clarified myself any?
      >
      >Motie
      >
      >
      >
      >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      >freestateproject-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • Phyllis
      ... Thanks for clarifying that. It seems that you and I are ... Since I have never been to the East (except to visit my sister in Florida), I was trying to
      Message 2 of 17 , Apr 1, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        --- motie_d <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
        > --- In freestateproject@y..., Phyllis <adelaide31@y...>
        > wrote:

        > > *****************************
        > > Forgive me if I misjudge your motivation, but as I read
        > > your objections, I detect that the desire for immediate
        > > enjoyment of life would at all times be placed above
        > the
        > > cause of liberty and Constitutional guarantees. There
        > is
        > > nothing wrong with that attitude, but IMO, persons with
        > > that attitude do not belong in FSP.
        > >
        > > Phyllis
        > > *****************************
        > Phylilis,
        > I forgive you. I believe you did misjudge me, although
        > that isn't
        > the word I would have chosen. I think you simply
        > misunderstood me. It
        > is hard to put all my thoughts and beliefs into a single
        > post. I will
        > attempt to further explain myself. I am fiercely
        > independant. I have
        > a good idea of what I want out of life.
        > > *****************************
        Thanks for clarifying that. It seems that you and I are
        more alike than I thought. More comments below:
        > > *****************************
        >snip>
        >
        > If we want to get rid of government regulations, why move
        > to a State
        > where every action is regulated on every inch of land?
        > Why not move
        > to where Zoning laws are only applicable inside City
        > Limits?
        > > *****************************
        Since I have never been to the East (except to visit my
        sister in Florida), I was trying to defer to the judgment
        of those who know that part of the country. From what I
        read, we in the Mountain states are much more free, but you
        can't always believe what you read.
        > > *****************************
        >
        > snip>
        > None of us need to wait until there are 20,000 members,
        > and everyone
        > gets moved, to start being active. Start now in whatever
        > state you
        > are in.
        > > *****************************
        My name will be on the ballot for the Idaho State
        Legislature this year. Of course, I don't expect to be
        elected, but I hope to give more credence to the
        Libertarian Party by contributing to a greater number of
        candidates. We are trying to replace the Democratic Party
        in this state (their candidates have slim chance of winning
        also).
        > > *****************************
        > Once we all move to one state, that is the only
        > state we can
        > all legally vote in.
        > I guess my position boils down to the question of, if we
        > want Freedom
        > what is the 'best' approach. Moving to a place with fewer
        >
        > restrictions on freedom to start with, or should we move
        > to a 'Target-
        > rich Environment'? My personal preference is for fewer
        > restrictions
        > to begin with, and some room to breath.
        > Have I clarified myself any?
        *****************************
        Definitely. I think we both believe that the FSP would have
        a greater chance of success in the West, because - with the
        exception of California - we already have greater freedom
        from government tyranny. I also believe that having more
        land per person can be a major asset in any argument with
        the Federal government.

        Phyllis
        >
        >

        =====
        "To stay young requires unceasing cultivation of the
        ability to unlearn old falsehoods."
        - Robert Heinlein

        "May you live all the days of your life."
        - Jonathan Swift

        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Yahoo! Greetings - send holiday greetings for Easter, Passover
        http://greetings.yahoo.com/
      • Snyder, Gary
        From: motie_d . ... If ample evidence surfaces that many, like Motie, would not relocate east of the Mississippi, while thousands of easterners exist who are
        Message 3 of 17 , Apr 1, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          From: motie_d
          .
          >I have no intention to move anywhere East of the Mississippi River.
          >If So Dak or Wyoming or Montana or Idaho are chosen, it's quite
          >likely I'll move.

          If ample evidence surfaces that many, like Motie, would not relocate
          east of the Mississippi, while thousands of easterners exist who
          are drawn to the FSP but wouldn't relocate west of the Mississippi,
          then it might make sense to consider coordinating two distinct
          FSP efforts - one east and one west.

          Just a thought.

          >I need some room for a few cows and horses and a very large
          >garden/greenhouse, and a place to go fishing. I'm a competitive
          >rifle target shooter and need room for a shooting range,600 yards,

          Delaware has miles and miles of farmland and coastline. :)

          Gary


          ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the designated recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. This communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any financial product, an official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official statement of Lehman Brothers. Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as such. All information is subject to change without notice.
        • elizabeth_freestate
          Phyllis -- I hear you, completely. My current line is, I ll go to the moon if it means I ll be free! (Props to R.A.H., of course.) I do not understand how
          Message 4 of 17 , Apr 2, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Phyllis --

            I hear you, completely. My current line is, "I'll go to the moon if it means I'll be free!" (Props to R.A.H., of course.) I do not understand how climate or cultural preferences can be more important than the great experiment we are undertaking.

            The important thing to take away from this, though, is the realization that some who consider themselves libertarians *would* rather be warm than free. The question then is, how can we still use these people and their interest in the project to our advantage?

            My typical spiel (you can read my canned speech on the files section of this group) is that if you can't or won't sign, you can support us by passing the word onto others. Because a Free State, even if you don't live there, is a benefit to all freedom-lovers, as an example and inspiration. Yada yada yada.

            --- In freestateproject@y..., Phyllis <adelaide31@y...> wrote:
            > I firmly agree that the important issue at this point is
            > how to get to the 20,000. At the same time, I feel that it
            > is beneficial to discuss any and all issues related to the
            > prospective Free State.
            >
            > What I can't understand is why so many people are reluctant
            > to sign on until they know what state will be chosen. It
            > seems to me that this attitude represents a lack of
            > dedication to the cause of liberty. I freely admit that I
            > used the option of reserving the right to refuse to move to
            > Delaware, Rhode Island or Hawaii, but that was because I
            > feel there would be little chance of success in such
            > densely populated areas (not to mention the popularity of
            > Hawaii for vacation spots). Although I would like to see my
            > home state of Idaho chosen, I am at this point leaning
            > toward Alaska because of population density (or lack
            > thereof). This could be very important if the worst
            > scenario is played out (more opportunity for self-defense).
            > Also, the geographical separation might work in favor of
            > negotiating with the Feds for more autonomy.
            > I much prefer a moderate climate, but that is irrelevant. I
            > am willing to move wherever we have the best chance of
            > succeeding.
            >
            > Phyllis
            >
            > =====
            > "To stay young requires unceasing cultivation of the
            > ability to unlearn old falsehoods."
            > - Robert Heinlein
            >
            > "May you live all the days of your life."
            > - Jonathan Swift
            >
            > __________________________________________________
            > Do You Yahoo!?
            > Yahoo! Greetings - send holiday greetings for Easter, Passover
            > http://greetings.yahoo.com/
          • elizabeth_freestate
            Although personally I would go anywhere for this project, I can understand that some people have family and/or other commitments that would preclude them from
            Message 5 of 17 , Apr 2, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Although personally I would go anywhere for this project, I can understand that some people have family and/or other commitments that would preclude them from moving to certain states. Not everyone is mobile.

              What I don't get is people who are so certain the project will only succeed in certain states that they refuse to consider other options. This is the other face of the individualism we all treasure so highly -- the lack of ability to work together and compromise to reach a common worthy goal. I believe that a real 50% free state is better than an imaginary ideal 100% free state. Maybe I'm crazy. But I really believe our goal is "LIBERTY IN MY LIFETIME." I don't have time to insist that everything be done my way. I will go along with the best decisions of a large group of smart people who share my main values, I'll live with decisions I don't like, and I'll do whatever it takes to make this a reality. Is this too much to ask?

              --- In freestateproject@y..., shadowstrider <no_reply@y...> wrote:
              > This just boggles me completely too. Some of the complaints to that
              > effect seemed to have followed the poster reading the website or
              > other documents which pretty much explain that this is an
              > inapplicable concern. Are people THIS dumb, or what am I/we missing
              > that we keep getting this question? The former there isn't any hope
              > for. The latter is something we could solve if we knew what the
              > confusion was.
            • elizabeth_freestate
              Randall -- You make an excellent point about the free market. I believe that we will succeed (if we advertise our product well enough) because we *are*
              Message 6 of 17 , Apr 2, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                Randall --

                You make an excellent point about the free market. I believe that we will succeed (if we advertise our product well enough) because we *are* filling a need in the marketplace. If we do not, then it will prove that all the whining and complaining about government interference and lack of liberty is really not as important to people as other concerns. People get the government they deserve.

                Now regarding the state/federal thing -- I have to say that in all of the many discussions I've had with prospective FSP members, the issue of whether reform at the state level will have enough impact on quality of life rarely comes up. This might be your concern, but I don't experience it as a major sticking point for most. As we have discussed many times, while staying within the current political structure of the electoral process and federalism will not produce libertopia, it will certainly produce a significantly different community.

                --- In freestateproject@y..., randallsquared <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                > I think that part of the problem is this: people are reluctant to
                > sign up for this much uncertainty for so little potential return.
                >
                > Let me explain that last. It seems to me that most people correctly
                > believe that there is simply no way that a state, EVEN IF it becomes
                > libertarian, can eliminate most of the violations of liberty in the
                > US, since many of the worst ones are federal in nature. If this were
                > not the case, normal competition should have already produced the
                > outcome that the FSP project members desire. There are already states
                > with no income tax, states with low regulation, etc, but libertarians
                > aren't significantly more likely to live there because they can't get
                > away from the much more significant taxes and regulations at the
                > federal level.
                >
                > So while if a state was already picked, these people could examine the
                > pros and cons of moving there (aside from FSP goals), since we don't
                > know which one, there is little reason to join.
                >
                > A smaller factor is that the libertarian movement, as a whole, has a
                > history of lofty goals that never get met for lack of participation,
                > so it is easy to rationalize non-participation in what would (in the
                > average libertarian's eyes) surely fail in any case.
                >
                > Randall.
              • elizabeth_freestate
                Aren t all your considerations exactly what we re doing this for?
                Message 7 of 17 , Apr 2, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Aren't all your considerations exactly what we're doing this for?

                  --- In freestateproject@y..., motie_d <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                  > I have no intention to move anywhere East of the Mississippi River.
                  > If So Dak or Wyoming or Montana or Idaho are chosen, it's quite
                  > likely I'll move. I may move to one of them without waiting for the
                  > rest of the 'herd'. So Dak has got my interest, particularly the
                  > Black Hills and Rapid City.
                  > I'm an alternative renewable energy 'freak' and the hills and Hot
                  > Springs are intrigueing to me. I can see much potential for Solar,
                  > Geothermal, Hydro and wind energy.
                  > I can almost picture myself now, in a Hot Tub filled with Hot water
                  > from a Hot Spring, with the overflow circulating through the rest of
                  > the house heating it, and where it runs on down the hill, turning a
                  > water wheel or turbine to keep the electric running, and a wind
                  > turbine on the roof.
                  > The Arabs can go fly a kite.
                  >
                  > Anyway, that is part of the reason I haven't signed up. I don't want
                  > to artificially inflate your numbers, and mislead you. I need some
                  > room for a few cows and horses and a very large garden/greenhouse,
                  > and a place to go fishing. I'm a competitive rifle target shooter and
                  > need room for a shooting range,600 yards, without neighbors calling
                  > the Cops everytime I run a practice session, or take a leak outside.
                  > I don't want to have to beg permission to plant a tree or cut one
                  > down. I'll go where there are many fewer regulations to repeal.
                  > Where can I buy 600 acres East of the Mississippi at a reasonable
                  > price, that isn't all subdivided and regulated/zoned against what I
                  > may want to do.
                  > Just a few of my many reasons for not signing yet.
                  >
                  > Motie
                • elizabeth_freestate
                  You know, another thought that often occurs to me is that the very characteristic that makes us libertarian -- a fierce pride in our individuality and
                  Message 8 of 17 , Apr 2, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    You know, another thought that often occurs to me is that the very characteristic that makes us libertarian -- a fierce pride in our individuality and responsibility -- is what keeps us from getting what we want. Take any other group of common interest, in a small minority, like, say, plushophiles ;^) They still manage to come together and, um, get their needs met. But all the ultra-minority libertarians all over the country who are fighting to get 2% of the vote in their location won't come together to one place to get their needs met. Why?

                    --- In freestateproject@y..., Jason P Sorens <jason.sorens@y...> wrote:
                    > On Sun, 31 Mar 2002, randallsquared wrote:
                    >
                    > > outcome that the FSP project members desire. There are already states
                    > > with no income tax, states with low regulation, etc, but libertarians
                    > > aren't significantly more likely to live there because they can't get
                    > > away from the much more significant taxes and regulations at the
                    > > federal level.
                    >
                    > But without the Free State Project, libertarians are even less likely to
                    > get any change at the federal level. At least a Free State would have a
                    > representative and 2 senators. So even if the FSP has less than even odds
                    > at creating a free society (I would admit to that), it seems to have
                    > significantly better odds than any other strategy.
                    >
                    > ________________________________________________________________________
                    >
                    > Jason P Sorens---jason.sorens@y...://pantheon.yale.edu/~jps35
                    >
                    > http://www.freestateproject.org - Do you want liberty in your lifetime?
                  • elizabeth_freestate
                    The problem being that most western states have a large % of gov t-owned land. So they still trump on that measure.
                    Message 9 of 17 , Apr 2, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      The problem being that most western states have a large % of gov't-owned land. So they still trump on that measure.

                      --- In freestateproject@y..., Phyllis <adelaide31@y...> wrote:
                      > Definitely. I think we both believe that the FSP would have
                      > a greater chance of success in the West, because - with the
                      > exception of California - we already have greater freedom
                      > from government tyranny. I also believe that having more
                      > land per person can be a major asset in any argument with
                      > the Federal government.
                      >
                      > Phyllis
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.