FSP too much to ask? What about simply leaving tyrannical states?

[nobody's_hero]

I got to thinking earlier while watching youtube videos on guns, there's this guy with a youtube channel who lives in california and says he can only have 10 rounds in his pistol magazine. 500 CCW permits were issued in a state that has a bazillion people in it.

So I started wondering just how many small gov't libertarians/conservatives are living in California who never stand a chance at winning elections, but they still get counted in a census to determine how many liberal nanny-statist representatives California gets to send to Washington. Think about it. You can't win, so the only purpose you have, politically-speaking, is to be added in with a gigantic population of citizens so that they can continue to make up about 1/9th of the U.S. House of Reps.

I just listened to this guy go on and on, "yeah I know I live in California" and I'm like, "Why haven't you left yet?" With the exception of Illinois, New York, or Massachusetts, just moving to any other state would help the liberty movement, because you'd no longer be counted in the California population during the census.

Best to move now while we still have (relative) freedom to travel in this country.

[thoughtomator]

The main driver of tyranny is at the federal level. There is no escape within the US from that. You can get yourself off the grid and become as self-sufficient as possible, looking for a location with zero property tax so you don't need US dollars to function, but that's the best you can hope for here.

[TheTexan]

double post

[TheTexan]

The main driver of tyranny is at the federal level. There is no escape within the US from that.

I disagree with this. With the coming economic collapse and possible civil war, there are very real chances of nullification and secession.

And even without economic collapse or civil war, nullification remains our best bet to counter the federal government

[Keith and stuff]

The main driver of tyranny is at the federal level. There is no escape within the US from that. You can get yourself off the grid and become as self-sufficient as possible, looking for a location with zero property tax so you don't need US dollars to function, but that's the best you can hope for here.

Where is that offered, though? I believe in parts of AK and NH you can live without property taxes, state personal income taxes and a state general sales tax, but in what other states is that available?

As for the FSP, some people see that as a way to counteract the federal government. For example, what bxm042 said.

[WilliamShrugged]

I always think of this. During the primaries we saw Ron have more than a 100,000 votes in many states(http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/candidates/302). some of those states are not even close to being free. I wish Ron would have done more to advertised for the FSP while he was doing his "education" run.

[nobody's_hero]

The main driver of tyranny is at the federal level. There is no escape within the US from that. You can get yourself off the grid and become as self-sufficient as possible, looking for a location with zero property tax so you don't need US dollars to function, but that's the best you can hope for here.

I don't disagree.

My point though, is that even if you don't vote for nanny-statists, you still help them out by living in their states because representation is based on population.

There are about 7.4 million registered democrats in California, 5.2 million republicans, and 3.7 million independents. Over 25% of eligible voters there don't vote.

But, they're all counted amongst the population for determining that california gets to send 53 Representatives to the U.S. house, the majority of them being democrats. So if California's population dropped say, 6 million people, and Texas gained 6 million people, then California loses seats and possibly has democrats competing against each other over seats after re-districting. Could you imagine nancy pelosi losing her seat because of population dropping off? (I doubt they'd cut her district seat out if it happened, but it's nice to think about, right?)

I know it seems like I'm coming down heavy on California, and no offense to folks who live there. I know it isn't easy to pack up and leave a whole life behind.

But I think it's high time we start finding ways to deny the nanny staters our support (even passive support, like being counted in a census or being taxed to fund welfare schemes—your wealth is being used against you, so leave already! lol)

The beauty of the plan is that you don't have to move TO any particular state, just move AWAY from states that are sending the idiots to Washington and making life hell for the rest of us. Don't be a mere 'warm body' for them to say they represent you.

[FSP-Rebel]

I endorse this concept.

[Czolgosz]

We have enough numbers to form America v 2.0. Find a relative climate that people won't completely hate, freedom is reborn.

Dibs on the weed n guns business.

[nobody's_hero]

I mean, think about the amount of debt California's state gov't has. Do you really see a prosperous future for you or your family if you stay in California? Come on.. . . they're going to hunt down the people with money like hounds running after foxes. Oh but, 'You need to stay and pay off this debt.' The longer you stay, the more wealth they will tax and it will actually become more difficult to move as time goes by.

Keep in mind that all you have to do is step over the border and at least you won't be responsible for the state's debts. It's so easy, it's a wonder why they haven't made it illegal to move from state to state yet. Federal debt is another matter, of course, we're all screwed on that one.

[Czolgosz]

It's simply an eventuality that you'll need papers to cross borders.

[klamath]

The trouble is California is driving businesses to Texas and other states. For every business owner that employes 10 people, that leaves for texas that is one non nannystate voter for texas. However the 10 nanny state voters that lost their jobs in california are now looking for work. Guess what they are hiring in Texas, where do they move.....Texas. Now Texas has gained 10 to one nanny staters to non nanny staters.
How do I know this? California usted to be a driving economic engine that used to elect people like Reagan but add 15 million laborers from the northeast and midwest states and south of the border and suddenly you become a solid blue state. Texas meet your fate.

[nobody's_hero]

The trouble is California is driving businesses to Texas and other states. For every business owner that employes 10 people, that leaves for texas that is one non nannystate voter for texas. However the 10 nanny state voters that lost their jobs in california are now looking for work. Guess what they are hiring in Texas, where do they move.....Texas. Now Texas has gained 10 to one nanny staters to non nanny staters.
How do I know this? California usted to be a driving economic engine that used to elect people like Reagan but add 15 million laborers from the northeast and midwest states and south of the border and suddenly you become a solid blue state. Texas meet your fate.

And that's the one thing I haven't figured out. It's no secret that wherever wealth flows, leechers will follow. I think we are reaching 'critical mass' in this country where the dependents will outnumber the producers (If we aren't there already). When that happens, there's no where to go—only to wait for the collapse and the reset.

[gerryb1]

And that's the one thing I haven't figured out. It's no secret that wherever wealth flows, leechers will follow. I think we are reaching 'critical mass' in this country where the dependents will outnumber the producers (If we aren't there already). When that happens, there's no where to go—only to wait for the collapse and the reset.

We've been there quite a while, consider the fedgov is 25% of GDP, add in state, then county and local - and then add in those dependent upon gov't "services"... Granted 20% of the things are useful functions done poorly.

[pochy1776]

I got to thinking earlier while watching youtube videos on guns, there's this guy with a youtube channel who lives in california and says he can only have 10 rounds in his pistol magazine. 500 CCW permits were issued in a state that has a bazillion people in it.

So I started wondering just how many small gov't libertarians/conservatives are living in California who never stand a chance at winning elections, but they still get counted in a census to determine how many liberal nanny-statist representatives California gets to send to Washington. Think about it. You can't win, so the only purpose you have, politically-speaking, is to be added in with a gigantic population of citizens so that they can continue to make up about 1/9th of the U.S. House of Reps.

I just listened to this guy go on and on, "yeah I know I live in California" and I'm like, "Why haven't you left yet?" With the exception of Illinois, New York, or Massachusetts, just moving to any other state would help the liberty movement, because you'd no longer be counted in the California population during the census.

Best to move now while we still have (relative) freedom to travel in this country.

Some of us like living in nice cities. Not Louisville,KY but New York City, Boston, LA, SF and Chicago are usually the big places. Plus i was raised in NYC, i can't leave just yet.

[LibForestPaul]

nyc is a cess pool. if you eran 100k+ it is tolerable.

Boston SF, ok...

[pochy1776]

nyc is a cess pool. if you eran 100k+ it is tolerable.

Boston SF, ok...

My dad is loaded. So it is tolerable.