erin moore
Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
- Messages
- 416
good luck with this. keep it bumped, I'm out for tonight.
MONTANA!
MONTANA!
We need our own state.
- Thread starter SteveMartin
- Start date
good luck with this. keep it bumped, I'm out for tonight.
MONTANA!
Me, too. Time for sleep.
I'll second that motion - Montana or bust!
josephadel_3
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2008
- Messages
- 611
Would everyone shut up with this "I only wanna move to a warm weather state" crap. Look, I know it's winter time, but get over it. If it were summer time, you'd be begging to move North. Weather is completely irrelevant unless it is in the context of farming.
Texas is not an option.
Alaska - In November 2006, the Supreme Court of Alaska held that secession was illegal, Kohlhaas vs. State, and refused to permit an otherwise proper Initiative to be presented to the people of Alaska for a vote. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secession
Don't know if that is relevant or not. Farming may be difficult in alaska, fishing is great. Easy to defend.
New Hampshire - Small, easy to take over, already libertarian, and already has a movement going on. Is bordered by other states, but New England isn't much of a military threat. DOES have a port in Portsmouth, so trade is possible. Immigration would be a pain in the ass.
Maine - The large Aroostook county in northern Maine was won by Ron Paul. Lots of potato farms, cheap land, lots of hunting, lack of jobs. Nice and close to Canada and maritime provinces.
Now we need to discuss our military, so McCain and his neo-con army can't take us over. Would we take over the Alaska National Guard? I though alaska had a lot of military bases, so that might be a problem.
This can't be based on where you would prefer to be based on weather, family, or recreational preferences. It has to be practical.
Texas is not an option.
Alaska - In November 2006, the Supreme Court of Alaska held that secession was illegal, Kohlhaas vs. State, and refused to permit an otherwise proper Initiative to be presented to the people of Alaska for a vote. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secession
Don't know if that is relevant or not. Farming may be difficult in alaska, fishing is great. Easy to defend.
New Hampshire - Small, easy to take over, already libertarian, and already has a movement going on. Is bordered by other states, but New England isn't much of a military threat. DOES have a port in Portsmouth, so trade is possible. Immigration would be a pain in the ass.
Maine - The large Aroostook county in northern Maine was won by Ron Paul. Lots of potato farms, cheap land, lots of hunting, lack of jobs. Nice and close to Canada and maritime provinces.
Now we need to discuss our military, so McCain and his neo-con army can't take us over. Would we take over the Alaska National Guard? I though alaska had a lot of military bases, so that might be a problem.
This can't be based on where you would prefer to be based on weather, family, or recreational preferences. It has to be practical.
Look at the eastern half of Washington State.
They overwhelmingly supported Ron Paul in the caucus.
Close to the Canadian boarder.
Decent weather, (the rainy cold of the northwest is really only west of the Cascade mountains)
Actually, if you guys are serious, alaska would probably be best, if for no other reason then it's far away from the mainland; is huge in size, many of them are already don't tread on me types, has a surprisingly wide variety of climate so most people could be suitably happy, etc.
They overwhelmingly supported Ron Paul in the caucus.
Close to the Canadian boarder.
Decent weather, (the rainy cold of the northwest is really only west of the Cascade mountains)
Actually, if you guys are serious, alaska would probably be best, if for no other reason then it's far away from the mainland; is huge in size, many of them are already don't tread on me types, has a surprisingly wide variety of climate so most people could be suitably happy, etc.
Last edited:
Logical Analysis by Numbers
My analysis so far broken down logically and by the numbers:
* Population numbers is key. The reason for this statement is that we need to be able to exert enough political influence to eventually secede from the Union.
* Trade access is also of paramount importance. Two words: Sea access.
* Natural resources, renewable and otherwise are to be considered.
Starting from least populated and moving up :
1) Wyoming
Pros: Least populated. If just half (roughly 300,000) of everyone who has voted for Ron Paul moved to Wyoming they would exert a majority influence. Natural resources--coal, natural gas, oil, etc. Good tourism. Decent economy but mostly minging/agricultural in nature.
Cons: Land locked. For strategic, political and economic reasons this is simply a deal breaker. Most land owned by the Federal Government--Washington would not give this up without a major fight.
2) Vermont
Pros: 2nd least populated. Again, "relatively" easy to take over like Wyoming.
Cons: Again, land locked. Only one "pro". As far as natural resources or economy, nothing really sticks out.
3) Alaska
Pros: Natural resources. Oil rich. Sea access. Easily defendable--Canada as buffer/ally. Vast territory for settlement and population expansion.
Cons: none. Coming from a logistical, economical and strategic standpoint there's not much to complain about.
That's all I have time for now. Alaska to me seems to be the clear winner on a practical "by the numbers" standpoint. Feedback is most definitely appreciated especially from those more knowledgable about potential pros and cons for these states since I am by no means an expert. This is just a rudimentary report thrown together quickly
As far as the New Hampshire argument goes: I find it hard to consider due to the basic underlying population argument. If the free state project hasn't succeeded yet, just how many more people would it take to make it work? I'm certaintly open to argument on the matter...
My analysis so far broken down logically and by the numbers:
* Population numbers is key. The reason for this statement is that we need to be able to exert enough political influence to eventually secede from the Union.
* Trade access is also of paramount importance. Two words: Sea access.
* Natural resources, renewable and otherwise are to be considered.
Starting from least populated and moving up :
1) Wyoming
Pros: Least populated. If just half (roughly 300,000) of everyone who has voted for Ron Paul moved to Wyoming they would exert a majority influence. Natural resources--coal, natural gas, oil, etc. Good tourism. Decent economy but mostly minging/agricultural in nature.
Cons: Land locked. For strategic, political and economic reasons this is simply a deal breaker. Most land owned by the Federal Government--Washington would not give this up without a major fight.
2) Vermont
Pros: 2nd least populated. Again, "relatively" easy to take over like Wyoming.
Cons: Again, land locked. Only one "pro". As far as natural resources or economy, nothing really sticks out.
3) Alaska
Pros: Natural resources. Oil rich. Sea access. Easily defendable--Canada as buffer/ally. Vast territory for settlement and population expansion.
Cons: none. Coming from a logistical, economical and strategic standpoint there's not much to complain about.
That's all I have time for now. Alaska to me seems to be the clear winner on a practical "by the numbers" standpoint. Feedback is most definitely appreciated especially from those more knowledgable about potential pros and cons for these states since I am by no means an expert. This is just a rudimentary report thrown together quickly
As far as the New Hampshire argument goes: I find it hard to consider due to the basic underlying population argument. If the free state project hasn't succeeded yet, just how many more people would it take to make it work? I'm certaintly open to argument on the matter...
Russellk30
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2008
- Messages
- 251
Hey! How about California!!! Oh...I forgot. We are a bunch of liberal fools.
Russellk30
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2008
- Messages
- 251
Montana! Cold in the winter, beautiful in the summer.
RonPauledbyYoutube
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2008
- Messages
- 472
Ha, think big, think TEXAS!!! Good night everyone. It better to dream when you're sleeping.
The Mormons (LDS) took control of Utah, we could do the same with our state.
Columbia Blue
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 7
When the free state project started in New Hampshire, they were projecting 20,000 people moving there. I think they've ended up with about a thousand. The problem is that we can say the cold weather doesn't matter etc..but what it comes down to is......when people think of New Hampshire, Maine, or Alaska two words come to mind. Cold and Remote.
I'm not saying they won't work...I'm just pointing out it's going to be a harder sell than a warmer climate would be.
I'm not saying they won't work...I'm just pointing out it's going to be a harder sell than a warmer climate would be.
TruthAtLast
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2008
- Messages
- 1,348
Montana is beautiful for part of the year. My father has a large ranch up there. but it is CRAZY cold during the winter. Like way below 0 degrees. If you spit outside it would freeze before it hit the ground.
WilliamC
Member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2007
- Messages
- 6,682
Come on People I want to slap you guys, to wake you up. I have not even heard anyone mention about the way the state government is set up, that is one of the most important things. New Hampshire was chosen for a reason as the free state project. The New Hampshire Constitution is damn near perfect..........
~There are 400 state reps, That's one state rep for every 3250 people.
~The state reps make $100 a year, which requires a constitutional amendment to change. ~Many state reps run un opposed, you can get a big chunk of votes by just being on the ballot.
~The 10 article in the bill of rights grants THE RIGHT TO REVOLUTION
~international border, and also a sea border
I could go on and on....do some reseach before you throw up your arms and say "it's too cold"
Go here for 101 reasons to movehttp://www.freestateproject.org/files/101-Reasons-to-Move-to-NH.pdf
~the free staters have a state wide newspaper such as the keene free press
~There are several tv shows such as free minds tv and keene weekly news
~youtube videos such as The ridley report
~Radio stations like Free talk live (FTL)
~The annual pocupine festival is where free staters gather
~there is a network of housing available for new movers
~many web forums around
I highly recommend doing more reseach on the free state project, it's where I learned about Ron Paul from, and I'm planning on moving there from Ohio (BTW the weather is not any worse, people exagerate)
~some good videos to watch http://current.com/items/88792912_rent_free
And for those who say it's not doing any good, it will work in NH before anywhere else. It will work If you get off your butt and get to NH. And quit typing on you computer that "it's too cold", "too far", etc. Nowhere is too cold or too far to create a free society.
I know what I'm doing after the whole Ron Paul thing is done, and the Free State Project is it for me, I've traveled all over this country, looking for a better place, and New Hampshire is as good as it gets, while still being able to have a job.
~There are 400 state reps, That's one state rep for every 3250 people.
~The state reps make $100 a year, which requires a constitutional amendment to change. ~Many state reps run un opposed, you can get a big chunk of votes by just being on the ballot.
~The 10 article in the bill of rights grants THE RIGHT TO REVOLUTION
~international border, and also a sea border
I could go on and on....do some reseach before you throw up your arms and say "it's too cold"
Go here for 101 reasons to movehttp://www.freestateproject.org/files/101-Reasons-to-Move-to-NH.pdf
~the free staters have a state wide newspaper such as the keene free press
~There are several tv shows such as free minds tv and keene weekly news
~youtube videos such as The ridley report
~Radio stations like Free talk live (FTL)
~The annual pocupine festival is where free staters gather
~there is a network of housing available for new movers
~many web forums around
I highly recommend doing more reseach on the free state project, it's where I learned about Ron Paul from, and I'm planning on moving there from Ohio (BTW the weather is not any worse, people exagerate)
~some good videos to watch http://current.com/items/88792912_rent_free
And for those who say it's not doing any good, it will work in NH before anywhere else. It will work If you get off your butt and get to NH. And quit typing on you computer that "it's too cold", "too far", etc. Nowhere is too cold or too far to create a free society.
I know what I'm doing after the whole Ron Paul thing is done, and the Free State Project is it for me, I've traveled all over this country, looking for a better place, and New Hampshire is as good as it gets, while still being able to have a job.
Here is another good video it's a long one http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8929200413837159350&q=free+state+project&total=650&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=5
IDefendThePlatform
Member
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2008
- Messages
- 2,884
I'd encourage everyone to check out the two existing free state movements:
New Hampshire (for everyone in the east)
http://freestateproject.org/
Wyoming (for anyone west of the Mississippi)
http://www.freestatewyoming.org/
Both websites have forums for discussion. The one for New Hampshire contains an archive of their discussion 3 years ago about which state would be best to move to. I think getting a lot of freedom loving people to move to one state is a great idea whose time has come. I think it could have a major impact on things not just in that state, but also in the rest of the country by being an example of how freedom can work.
New Hampshire (for everyone in the east)
http://freestateproject.org/
Wyoming (for anyone west of the Mississippi)
http://www.freestatewyoming.org/
Both websites have forums for discussion. The one for New Hampshire contains an archive of their discussion 3 years ago about which state would be best to move to. I think getting a lot of freedom loving people to move to one state is a great idea whose time has come. I think it could have a major impact on things not just in that state, but also in the rest of the country by being an example of how freedom can work.
Live_Free_Or_Die
Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 5,852
nt
Last edited:
SteveMartin
Member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2007
- Messages
- 2,184
Wow...so many choices. Hard to know what is best.
I think we probably ought to start with an assessment of the risks of military confrontation with the District of Columbia forces, and work forward from that assessment.
I think such an assessment may begin with looking at what it is we are proposing to take from them, and thus, how hard they would be willing to work (or fight) not to lose it.
From that aspect, maybe taking a whole state is too ambitious? Just a few succeeding counties somewhere would probably do the trick. Of course, they'd have to secede from their state first, and then from the D.C.-occupied zone.
I think we probably ought to start with an assessment of the risks of military confrontation with the District of Columbia forces, and work forward from that assessment.
I think such an assessment may begin with looking at what it is we are proposing to take from them, and thus, how hard they would be willing to work (or fight) not to lose it.
From that aspect, maybe taking a whole state is too ambitious? Just a few succeeding counties somewhere would probably do the trick. Of course, they'd have to secede from their state first, and then from the D.C.-occupied zone.
