3 ms·

> I'd really like to see some state attempt step up and tackle totalitarianism organically. The state closest to what you're looking for, I suspect, is New Ham

by bmelton 11y ago

> I'd really like to see some state attempt step up and tackle totalitarianism organically. The state closest to what you're looking for, I suspect, is New Hampshire. I don't know how much of it is due to their Free Stater influence or what, but among other things, they have relatively low burdens for living a legal life. There are some stupid laws (namely, not being able to pull backward into certain types of parking spots), but for the most part, they take their "Live Free or Die" motto pretty seriously. If they could only fix the weather...

mindslight 11y ago
I'm personally lukewarm on NH. My general take is that their foundation of freedom heavily skews towards dismantling local organization while tacitly approving larger power concentrations. I'd obviously welcome any pushback against USG or private surveillance, it just feels more likely they'll destroy more municipal services. While everyone having a generator is self-reliant and robust, it's also indicative of infrastructure collapse.
- bmelton 11y ago
  I've found the contrary to be more true. They do have, perhaps, a different view of what the local legislature ought to look like than most, in that the legislators are only paid $200 per two year term (to keep it from being a career position), but they also have the best representation in the nation, as each legislator only has ~3200 constituents. Compared to California's ~450,000 constituents per legislator, it's much, much easier to imagine getting a lunch date with your lawmakers so that your ideas are heard. Meanwhile, on infrastructure, New Hampshire has a better rating than the national average. On top of that, there's no sales tax, no income tax (though a higher than average property tax probably makes up some of the difference), has the highest overall quality of living, is the second healthiest state in the union, the most livable, the safest, and has the lowest poverty rate in America. Certainly, everywhere has its perks and pitfalls, but if totalitarianism is what you're looking to escape, New Hampshire considers mandatory seat belt laws too authoritarian to pass.
  - mindslight 11y ago
    NH has an income tax that starts at 25%, but none of it goes to the state government (therefore it has one of the highest proportions of wasteful tax burden). The speed limit is still capped at 65mph (even though motorcycle helmets are not required). And I doubt one can simply walk into a pharmacy and buy whatever they'd like. The general response to these points is the root of my objection to the NH ethos. The few times I've heard about the FSP from the locals, it was not positive. Of course the mostly-accountable local government is easily gutted! Meanwhile the larger and more resource-draining tyranny remains intact, and perhaps even more supported due to less immediate intrusion. This seems less like actual freedom, and more like a sandbox for pretending to escape.

by bmelton 11y ago

mindslight 11y ago

I'm personally lukewarm on NH. My general take is that their foundation of freedom heavily skews towards dismantling local organization while tacitly approving larger power concentrations. I'd obviously welcome any pushback against USG or private surveillance, it just feels more likely they'll destroy more municipal services. While everyone having a generator is self-reliant and robust, it's also indicative of infrastructure collapse.

bmelton 11y ago
I've found the contrary to be more true. They do have, perhaps, a different view of what the local legislature ought to look like than most, in that the legislators are only paid $200 per two year term (to keep it from being a career position), but they also have the best representation in the nation, as each legislator only has ~3200 constituents. Compared to California's ~450,000 constituents per legislator, it's much, much easier to imagine getting a lunch date with your lawmakers so that your ideas are heard. Meanwhile, on infrastructure, New Hampshire has a better rating than the national average. On top of that, there's no sales tax, no income tax (though a higher than average property tax probably makes up some of the difference), has the highest overall quality of living, is the second healthiest state in the union, the most livable, the safest, and has the lowest poverty rate in America. Certainly, everywhere has its perks and pitfalls, but if totalitarianism is what you're looking to escape, New Hampshire considers mandatory seat belt laws too authoritarian to pass.
- mindslight 11y ago
  NH has an income tax that starts at 25%, but none of it goes to the state government (therefore it has one of the highest proportions of wasteful tax burden). The speed limit is still capped at 65mph (even though motorcycle helmets are not required). And I doubt one can simply walk into a pharmacy and buy whatever they'd like. The general response to these points is the root of my objection to the NH ethos. The few times I've heard about the FSP from the locals, it was not positive. Of course the mostly-accountable local government is easily gutted! Meanwhile the larger and more resource-draining tyranny remains intact, and perhaps even more supported due to less immediate intrusion. This seems less like actual freedom, and more like a sandbox for pretending to escape.