John F Kennedy III
Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 13,839
I have visited the websites of both and admittedly dont know much about either one. Which do you think would be better to join and why?
Having recently been to Wyoming, I can say that I'm afraid that the biggest obstacle is the fact that the land is probably the least productive land in the USA. Homesteading Wyoming is a good way to starve to death slowly, and their economy is dismal. It's sparsely populated for a reason.
That's why I'd like to see a Free State North Dakota. great place for farming, has oil and a booming economy. Tiny population too.
People complain about New Hampshire being too cold; North Dakota makes it seem like the tropics.
You're right about the tiny population though. I remember reading an article a few years back where some ND town held an election and no one (not even the mayor) showed up to vote.

People complain about New Hampshire being too cold; North Dakota makes it seem like the tropics.
You're right about the tiny population though. I remember reading an article a few years back where some ND town held an election and no one (not even the mayor) showed up to vote.
That's why I'd like to see a Free State North Dakota. great place for farming, has oil and a booming economy. Tiny population too.

Cold = lots of time to stay indoors and breed more liberty babies![]()
Huh.
I'll have to admit, I didn't know about Free State Wyoming, and I had thought I was pretty well up on this sort of thing. I know that the Free State Project had, at one time, considered Wyoming as well as Alaska before finally settling on New Hampshire as their target. I was totally unaware of the Free State Wyoming effort.
JFK III, I'm assuming you're talking about:
http://www.freestatewyoming.org/
is that correct?
I probably say NH. I'm a Northeasterner though. Why not Montana maybe?
I'm not sure about land prices in NH but WY prices always seemed high for what you were getting.
Perhaps we can start a Free State North Dakota![]()