This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
From North Dakota To New York - Let Freedom Ring In The 50 States
Every two years the 50 states compete for the title of "Most Free State," and George Mason University's Mercatus Center rankings based on 200 factors generalized under Fiscal Policy, Regulatory Policy, and Personal Freedom, provide significant color on just how free (or not) the various states are. New Hampshire was the 'free-est' state in 2011 but fell to 4th this year as North Dakota is 2013's 'free-est' state. New York and California bring up the rear as the least free states but the following clip and charts show just where the freedom is spreading - Georgia, Arizona, and Idaho; and where it is not - Oregon, Kansas, and Colarado.
Overall Freedom
The overall freedom ranking is determined by combining scores for fiscal, regulatory, and personal freedom.
Economic Freedom
Economic freedom includes fiscal and regulatory policy.
Fiscal Policy (35.3%)
The fiscal policy dimension consists of the following categories: Tax Burden (28.6%), Government Employment (2.8%), Government Spending (1.9%), Government Debt (1.2%), and Fiscal Decentralization (0.9%).
Regulatory Policy (32.0%)
The regulatory policy dimension consists of the following categories: Freedom from Tort Abuse (11.5%), Property Right Protection (7.6%), Health Insurance Freedom (5.4%), Labor Market Freedom (3.8%), Occupational Licensing Freedom (1.7%), Miscellaneous Regulatory Freedom (1.3%), and Cable and Telecom Freedom (0.8%).
Personal Freedom (32.7%)
Personal freedom dimension consists of the following categories: Victimless Crime Freedom (9.8%), Gun Control Freedom (6.6%), Tobacco Freedom (4.1%), Alcohol Freedom (2.8%), Marriage Freedom (2.1%), Marijuana and Salvia Freedom (2.1%), Gambling Freedom (2.0%), Education Policy (1.9%), Civil Liberties (0.6%), Travel Freedom (0.5%), Asset Forfeiture Freedom (0.1%), and Campaign Finance Freedom (0.02%).
»
- 33942 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
If you have a heavy foot forget about moving to Oklahoma. They are passionate about their speeding tickets in the sooner state. The basis for the Smokey and Bandit movies is the OK highway patrol.
In Indiana cops can break into your home, without warrant. And I've been told that there is now a Defend Your Castle law, and you can shoot them when they walk through the door.
trailer doors don't take too much effort to kick in. also- I think its called the "Defend Your Doublewide" law
Do NOT look a cop in the eye in Colorado.
isn't that hard to do from your prostrate position?
Portland Oregon figures freedom means lots of laws forcing you to be ''progressive''
In France it is freedom from work, from paying for school or the labor of health care professionals, among other freedoms.
CT is about to take a big dump on freedom: http://nraila.org/media/11152847/press-conference-material-4-1-13.pdf
Load a 30-round magazine with more than 10 rounds, and BECOME A FELON!!!
Own an unregistered 30-round magazine, and BECOME A FELON!!!
Just two highlights of this mind-numbingly egregious abortion of justice.
Oh pleeeeease. Any survey that puts Effing Utah in the number 10 spot in a survey about freedom of any kind is to be rejected out of hand as wildly innacurate. Incureably flawed. Someone who has obviously never ever in their entire twenty something little lives ever ventured there. It's so free one can't even buy a drink. When I left that God foresaken place for the last time I stopped at the border and cerimoniously knocked the dirt off of my shoes so as not to contaminate the rest of the world.
and north dakota at number two probably wasn't so ranked by a woman with an unwanted pregnancy:
http://www.google.com/search?q=most+restrictive+u.s.+abortion+law&hl=en&...
If she didn't want to become pregnant, WHY THE FUCK DID SHE HAVE THE SEX??
"Unwanted pregnancy" is the stupidest phrase in the English language.
Freedom does NOT mean freedom from the consequences of your own actions. Quite the opposite: real freedom DEMANDS that you accept the consequences of your actions.
I don't need any "unwanted" Hulkamaniacs running around. And while in the womb, I'm "free" to kill them all, brotha. Federal law trumps libertarian ideology.
Balkanise Amerikan Bitchez!, it's quite evident no one gets along, even on the Hedge :-/
I live in goddamn California.
...
HEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLPPP!!!!!!
SOMEBODY HELP MEEEEEE!!! PLEASEEEEEE!!!!!
Take the bus to Texas
The funny thing is the bottom ranked states are mostly the only states people outside of the US actually like. The shittier the state the higher the ranking in this list!
Who the fuck wants to live in North Dakota? New York & California (from experience) are great places to live, junk me whatever.
Georgia, Arizona, Idaho lol, freedom ain't all it's cracked up to be I guess!
I don't think you deserve to be junked for the sake of it. I agree that that is how these places are perceived.
However, the issue we are pretty much unanimous here on the Hedge is that this ponzi Keynesian scam will, at some point, come to and end. At that point I would not like to be driving a leased AMG thru LA Central (doing a pick up from LAX for the next Google conference?) on the day the EBT cards no longer buy the Free Shit Army anything. Sayin' "hey I like paying' taxes and voted for "O" is not gonna get you far has they drag your skinny arse outta the Benz and smash you into the curbside. These progressive, modern, smart city boys may well ponder at that point, when their jaw is on the gutters edge and the boot is about to fall, if an AR15 would not have been a better investment than an iphone 6?
Get out of those places before it is too late.
Get out of those places and leave them behind. Do not come to the new place and vote in the same type of assholes that ran you out of the old place!
These progressive, modern, smart city boys may well ponder at that point, when their jaw is on the gutters edge and the boot is about to fall, if an AR15 would not have been a better investment than an iphone 6?
Quite the fantasy!
So, your logic is basically because there's a looming economic apocalypse it's better to live in a miserable red state? I would think if everything were going to shit I might as well enjoy living it up in a nice city rather than stacking ammo in rural Georgia...
If people prefer sparsely populated country life that's fine - it's a psycological thing. I just found it funny that the states that actually have many people in them + are actually sought after by people outside of the US are mostly at the bottom of this list.
For people who have lots of options within and outside of the US North Dakota isn't likely to be super attractive, California on the other hand is a great place to live and has a lot of interesting industry. I'm not American but do have citizenship in 3 other countries so I'm not particularly worried about getting 'trapped' in NY or California.
For the modern city-dwelling rat.
As for Tennessee, I was renewing my license plate a few years ago, and, since their desk is across from the County Clerk, stopped by to ask MNPD if it was illegal to discharge a firearm in Davidson County, I was told that "It is not if you are hunting". I mentioned that I may be hunting for moles, since they invade my lawn. They did ask me to tell my neighbors first. I wonder if that also applies to the wild turkeys I see when I drive down to the marina? I almost hit a 40" tom with the convertible last Sunday. I didn't even have a rock to throw at him, and forgot my cellphone was in my pocket to at least get a pic.
Who wants to live in North Dakota? The one's who are out of work and like working for a living.
Right, North Dakota and their giant economy.
Texas has reached it's quota of Californians. No thank you!
That's right, they're gonna mess it up.
They've fucked up Colorado big time. Notice the 12 place plummet. It's all the Californians moving in and making it the hell hole that they just left.
They're trying to do the same thing in Idaho, but not succeeding at this point.
Yes, but hopefully they restrict themselves to little san fran of Centra Texas. Austin use to be a wonderful sleepy college town in the 80's
I see Austin turning into Modesto in another 20 years
"Take the bus to Texas"
Unless you are a Liberal, than stay were you are! Liberals are like locust. They consume freedoms and capital, and when freedom and capital is depleted, they move on to the next state. If Texas had any common sense they would set up a interstate border patrol to block liberals from taking over.
golden state no more. CA is a taxing state.
You want to kill a child pay for it yourself
Grow up, jackass.
Men pontificating about the goings on inside a women's body. How daft.......
...and equating wanting sex to wanting pregnancy, no less
Hell, with all the myriad of means to have sex and NOT get pregnant, anyone dumb enough to still get pregnant should be the one aborted (to be fair, the mindless cum-launchers should also be aborted).
That would fall under the after birth abortion issue. See below.
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/after-birth-abortion-eugenicists-say-babi...
Well, aren't you correct? Now, do you want to think for yourself or continue to consume the lies and deceit of the abortionist movement?
"The goings on inside a women's [sic] body" happen to be a human life. Abort it, murder it, terminate it. . . It is all death in the end. Deliberately taking that child's life is killing, period. To pretend otherwise is simply to buy the deceit of the abortionist crowd.
As Buckaroo pointed out, if you don't want to have a baby, then don't engage in unprotected (heterosexual!) sex. Choose otherwise, and YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for the CHOICE you make at the time you decide to have the unprotected sex. Abortion--killing the baby--is a choice made because you failed to make a good choice in the first instance. And this second choice--the choice to kill--is always a bad choice when it results in the death of an innocent. It is, after all, killing the unborn child.
Freedom AND RESPONSIBILITY. Get it? The RESPONSIBILITY part is what so many people CHOOSE to forget about. They love the choice. But they don't want to take REPSONSIBILITY for their choice. Indeed, people like Sandra Fluke want YOU and ME to pay for her bad choices. People like those in Planned Parenthood want us to pay for the killings of the children of women who made bad choices.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT a woman's health (at least not 99.8% of the time). This is about a woman's CHOICE at the time she engages in sex. This is about the consequences of that choice. This is about RESPONSIBILITY for that choice.
Anyone interested in freedom MUST choose and defend freedom for the weakest--an unborn child is exactly that--the weakest, and anyone with any decency and honesty will defend that child's right to his or her life.
We're hopefully NOT in the Middle Ages, where the damn feudal lords and the oppresive theologians/bible-thumpers tell you how to live. Hence the Constitutional separation of church & state.
True freedom includes the freedom over ones body for women as well as for men. Freedom from pregnancy includes (a) universal sex ed and (b) universal availability of contraception. Pregnancy problems in the Western world are THE worst in the US, because of bible-thumpers. I'm all for having birth control available easily & cheaply (like in other countries in the West), and that includes the morning-after pill RU486.
Having said that, I am opposed to abortion after, say, 9 weeks. If you do for prevention what I described, then the pregnancy rates that hit the 9-week mark would fall off sharply, as stats prove elsewhere in the West.
where exactly do you live that you can't walk into any 7-11/walmart/gas station and buy some condoms? the pill is only slightly more difficult to get, but it also take a little while to take effect, and the day-after pill is practically OTC at this point - and I live in a "bible-belt" state...
- I still can't buy booze on sunday before noon... i just buy more on saturday night...
A condom costs 9 cents incl. tax at the dollar store...
"True freedom includes the freedom over ones body for women as well as for men."
This makes no sense. An unborn child is not part of the woman's body. You're implying that it is and that is biologically incorrect. This doesn't magically change at your arbitrary 9 weeks mark. A society where people are not responsible for their children (like ours) will fail.
By your reasoning, neither are skin cells and blood cells. Let's protect gall, stomach acid, ear wax and boogers too. The body creates all kinds of amalgams of cells. You are the one biologically incorrect.
Your skin cells do not have a different set of chromosomes, your immune system doesn't recognize them as non-self. Why don't you read a science book, because you are talking like a fucking retard.
So, when a you get a virus and it grows within the body, we should protect it? Why don't you get a religious book, because science will continue to fail you.
First you say that the child is part of the woman's body. After being shown that this is retarded, you double down and say neither is a virus. The point is that the child is an individual human being. If it does not have a right to live, neither do you. This is where the lack of empathy, wisdom, intelligence, a functional brain becomes apparent. You think very selfishly that you do have the right to live while others don't because as a child you were abused and/or molested and never passed into maturity. This is the source of your pain.
A fetus IS a part of a woman's body. YOU decided to get persnickery, so I introduced an example to fit your definition. I can do this all day long. What you haven't yet done, is explain why YOU should be able to tell someone else how to live. This attempt at social tyranny, outside the law, is the worst type of sociopathic behavior.
While a child is an individual human being, a fetus is not. (That's why they use different terms). Selfish? I'm not trying to force my choices on the public. (By the way, never molested, never abused).
The source of my pain is rabid, delusional sociopaths that want to make the world in their image. I hate tyranny and you are its' fountainhead. Typical christian ignorance on parade.
You just used the term "freedom" and "universal" in the same sentence.
Universal demands compulsion, otherwise those who choose NOT to do something would not do it, and it would not be universal. If I am compelled to do something, I am not free.
pods
"True freedom includes the freedom over ones body for women as well as for men."
BULLSHIT.
Men don't get pregnant. That's a biological FACT.
Women have an entirely different set of responsibilities they must account for. Got a problem with that? Take it up with your Creator.
In the meantime, if you want to kill an innocent life form, have the courage to do it outside the womb. Pick on someone who can at least defend themselves. If there is any justice, they will kill you first.
Hey, I would love to take it up with this creator. Get it down here pronto! Oh wait, the creator never shows up, it's a fantasy. Let's rule everyone's lives based on the fantasy of others, a fantasy none of them can agree on, a fantasy that is responsible for more war and death than any other. One that confiscates wealth and attempts to steal everyone else's freedom to fit their morals. The fantasy of tyrants.
There is no constituional seperation of church and state. This is another fallacy promoted by progressives
A number of the original 13 states had state sanctioned religions which is legal under federalism.
Any attempt to regulate abortion or religion by the feds is unconstitutional just as is Obamacare. The fact that the supreme court made a decision in Roe v wade and accceptance of Obamacare as a tax just shows you how far off the reservation all 3 branches have gone since the founding. Don't count on the supreme court to validate the constitution. With Ginsberg, Kagan, and Sodomayer on the court, its only a matter of time before every FED action is sanctioned
What changes at nine weeks that makes the change from moral to immoral?
Freedom does NOT mean freedom from the consequences of your own actions. Quite the opposite: real freedom DEMANDS that you accept the consequences of your actions.
Yes, the difference between "libertarian" and "libertine".
Men need a reliable and safe oral contraceptive. For many many reasons. First and foremost, it would go great lengths to redressing the current imbalances related to control of childbearing.
Hard to listen to a man get on the soapbox over abortion. I think we could profit from more understanding that people don't always use the best judgement and in the heat of the moment, could use a helping hand.
Pregnancy is one of the only mistakes where you pay for the rest of your life. Yet, it is completely solvable.
People get upset, because of their "beliefs'. Well, your beliefs are your own. If you truly believe, I'm sure I can rest assured knowing that you and your brethern are actively adopting children...is that you I hear coughing on your words?
No one demands people get abortions. It is a free choice. You may think this is murder in God's eyes, well, when God shows up to help out, then it can have a say in the matter. Wishing a lifetime of poverty and hard choices on a person because you carry a god fantasy is just cruel and completely opposite of the life lived by Jesus as recorded in the Bible.
So because I'm not relieving other people of the consequences of their mistakes (adopting all of their children), I have no room to talk? I didn't fuck up so why should I pay the consequences? That is like saying since I'm not paying someone's bills, I can't say it is wrong to take on debts that one knowingly can't pay and that it is wrong to not pay and not hand over collateral. People do not want to take responsibility for their actions. Like it is that hard to avoid getting pregnant. As if women have to stay ever vigilant in case someone sneezes too close to them. You hate men (most likely yourself) and babies. Congrats on the rest of your self inflicted miserable life.
Abortion doesn't have to "cost" you anything. However, people that want to define the behaviors of others take on the responsibility of the cost of control. It's easy to make demands when it costs you nothing.
The woman didn't "fuck up" any more than the man did, she just gets stuck with the end product and the responsibility. Your lack of understanding and empathy will make you a wonderful marriage partner and father.
As if there is something magical about human babies. As if we don't have enough already. However, keep in mind that econoists have shown that the lowering of crime rates in the US coincided with the twenty year anniversary of Roe v Wade. Seems wanted children do not commit as many crimes.W hich yields a safer society for us all.
What a piece of work: intolerant and angry. Must be a christian. Don't worry, sunday's coming and you can feel all good about yourself again- for one day.
"The woman didn't "fuck up" any more than the man did, she just gets stuck with the end product and the responsibility."
That's exactly the point, dipshit. Act accordingly.
I am sick to death of women who avoid their responsibilities. You are fucking cowards.
She does act accordingly, she gets a perfectly legal abortion. Which is the definition of responsibility, you "dip shit".
Killing innocent human life isn't "responsible", fucknut. It is the exact polar opposite of "responsible".
I feel like I'm talking to a superannuated 2 year old. I would suggest you have the moral sensibility of a hyena, but that would be an insult to hyenas.
Following the law is the definition of responsibility. A fetus is not a human, it is just a collection of cells. You want the freedom to load a 30 shot magazine, but no freedom for anyone that disagrees with me!
Your definition of freedom is the same as any other tyrant. You wouldn't understand morals if they hit you upside the head.
HEADLINE: COLLECTION OF CELLS FOUND ON MARS… SCIENTISTS VOW TO CONTINUE SEARCH FOR LIFE ON EUROPA.
So okay then, just go get a fucking job at DHS so you can "legally" and responsibly murder all of those that don't obey their masters. Do you see why some here (the ones you'll be murdering) don't really like your mindset?
"Following the law is the definition of responsibility."
Sounds like something a dickhole politician would say. All the time you've spent here and you would actually type something so blatantly ignorant and ridiculous?
Following social mores has always been considered responsible. Your ignorance of anthropology is stunning. I never addressed the quality of law or the State for that matter. Different discussion. So, rebellion should be constant and ongoing, regardless of its' source or target?
Ignorance is the gist of the simple mind. You seem to be well endowed.
What the actual fuck are you on about?? I can't know you're delving into an anthropological discussion of social mores if you're going to disguise it by saying asinine things like, "Following the law is the definition of responsibility." Man, I still get a sick chuckle out of reading that! To hear you tell it, slavery was dandy because social mores held that blacks weren't humans. Hell, it was legal, too, so win-win.
Was abortion irresponsible when it was illegal and against social mores? Was it irresponsible when it was against social mores yet legal according to the law? Would it be irresponsible if it was outlawed yet permissible according to social mores?
You didn't comment on the quality of the law because that is the discussion, and you're full of shit. Bow down and responsibly lick the hand that feeds you.
So, you prefer the infinite grayness that has no standards whatsoever? A form of total anarchy? We all live in various forms of slavery depending on the time line we inhabit, you want to equate the mores of 160 years ago with today? Talk about full of shit. You have to use like terms and timeframes.
To follow the mores of the time is responsibility. It doesn't mean the mores are good or bad. That is a different argument. Your inability to make that distinction obviously leaves you laughing in a well of ignorance. Read a book.
I'm not the one arguing that following ever-changing social mores (or "laws" or whatever new topic you'd like to talk about today) is the definition of responsibility. Maybe you're confused because I presented three scenarios specifically to point out your own adherence to...nothing..."infinite grayness," if you will. Social mores shift, and the law can be changed on a whim, so again, what the actual fuck are you talking about when you say, "following the law is the definition of responsibility"? It's utter nonsense. If you want to walk back your bullshit then do so, but don't pretend that piling on more bullshit excuses anything.
Or I guess you can just define words however you want and look for some other bright, shiny topic to distract from this one. This was at least useful in that I got a glimpse in to the mind of yet another statist sycophant.
"Your lack of understanding and empathy..."
Your understanding of biology is less than a highschooler. You have no empathy for an innocent child. You seem to be projecting pretty intensely which is a clear sign of a miserable human being. You want to beat yourself up for the rest of your existence, that's your choice.
"Must be a christian. Don't worry, sunday's coming and you can feel all good about yourself again..."
Look, I (and innocent unborn babies) wasn't the one that abused or molested you as a child. Maybe all this anger should be directed at those that did.
Yet better than yours. I have plenty of emphathy for an innocent child, but a fetus is not a child by ANY definition.
As for projecting, you're projecting your narrow mwinded view unto all of society which is the clear sign of a power hungry, control freak- as miserable a human being as exists, the source of all sociopaths on Earth.
You are desperate to paint me disturbed, you will fail. Greater intelligence is not a sign of abuse, of course being easily beguiled through guilt shows very little more than an average mind.
"A society that doesn't take care of its children will fail. - tarsubil" <= Clear control freak. Wow, you got me pegged. Meanwhile, if I speak out against murdering babies, I must adopt children. Sure whatever, one final note, even though you now support murdering babies, you did not deserve the abuse you suffered as a child.
We have never discussed murdering babies, a fetus is not a baby by any definition. Please provide a single medical source that defends your definition. Your the one that wants to deny another human being a free choice- a choice your god has freely given to ALL of us. You know better than God? Yeah, I call that a control freak.
abortion is not birth control
birth control is birth control
with all the people who want to adopt going all over the fucking world to find a damn baby, just have the friggin kid
you dont want it , but someone else does
adoption, not abortion
No it is not. However, the thousands of children in foster care and orphanages put the lie to your statement. Further, you act as if the mother will somehow "not remember" she has a child. Birthing is a nine month process of homone influence to create a lifelong bond. There are ramifications beyond simple birth.
I am almost certain that I have never read anything so misguided, ill-informed, and altogether ridiculous Sean7k. The "thinking" that went into your "analysis" likely did not reach even a 3rd grade level. You throw out the tired old lies and deceits that your abortionist masters demand of you, without any rational basis whatsoever for your positions. And then you resort to an anti-Christian attack on people and pretend that it serves as an argument for abortion. Twisted, perverted . . . downright evil in every way. The only thing left to be done is to pray for you to see the light. You are shrouded in darkness as black the blackest moonless night.
"Even as you do unto the least of these, you do unto Me."
"I am the Way and the Truth and Life. No one comes to the Father but through Me."
"May the Lord bless you and keep you; may the Lord makes His face shine upon you and be gracious unto you; may the Lord lift up His Countenance upon you, and give you peace."
Well, the thinking that just went into your analysis is non-existent. Re-read your paragraph. Not one argument, just the typical christian response when confronted with an unbeliever. Name calling and moral reversion.
"He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone".
Your second quote has nothing to do with abortion, nor your third.
I actually hope you get your rapture moment, oh wait, thats for the 12 tribes of Israel(144,000), you get to stay on earth and suffer for another seven years, starved and tortured, probably because God is so wonderful. Just hope it isn't an alien transport and you've just become protein snacks from the "harvest".
Why do you think the streets are paved with gold? God needs gold? Why do you think you'll have jewels in a crown? So you can show off? You have fallen for the oldest trick in the book, promise them everything they think will make them rich.
Um, no we were looking him in the eye eye.
I don't know how they calculate "personal freedom," but those rankings are bullshit, must be weighted poorly.
for bankers, NY is a great place........
You mean Banksters.
Outside the 5 boroughs, Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, Albany and Erie counties, NY is a great place. It's a pity that the state is owned by NYC/LI. There was recently a story from state-sponsored radio station WAMC complaining about clean-up costs for a protest against Cuomo's "Safe Act". The banksters have gerrymandered the state to assure their status quo.
Usually it is lefty protesters who leave a filthy mess behind them. Oh wait, they left a huge mess behind them at obama's immaculation too.
Right, there was no story about the PETA rally, only the 2nd Amendment rally. After reporting the attendance at 5,000, officials claimed a more accurate figure of 30,000 to suit their needs. We're living in a mirage, people. Act accordingly.
They are winning the war of propaganda for sure.
Just like in school, the smart kids take things for granted and slow down a bit and the slow kids get organized and become methodical and at the end of the semester, they both have A's and B's.
The lefties are organized and methodical because they know they are the minority and the only way to win.
love the name. didnt realize it grew to
one of the biggest etf's. tmv for me tho
Espeically when you have to buy insurance for such protests. Oh, but they don't tell you that.. because they want to make you believe that the tax payer has to pick up the tab.
Bet 10 guys with a few bags of seed and some basic lawn care equipment could fix it for 1/12th of the cost.
Shit, I'd do it for 1/50th of the cost.
Welcome to constitution-free zones.
You could say the same thing about California. Take away San Diego, LA and the Bay Area and California is a red state.
Thank you. People who are bitching about NY are really bitching about NYC/Albany. I'm about 2 miles from the shores of Lake Ontario, ready with abundant fresh water if shit hits the fan. Fuck NYC/ Albany
When I lived there they said you should only eat one salmon out of the lake a year because of mecury levels, is that still true?
Probably, although not nearly as bad as Onondaga Lake outside Syracuse.
You shouldn't eat a single fish (so they say) out of there.
PA- dead middle of the road, baby! We're exactly 40" tall- right between the tallest midget (42") and the shortest midget (38").
I guess buying porn isn't part of the freedom index since Oklahoma bans it... even though its Jesse Jane's homestate
Who the hell buys porn these days?!?!
Who the fuck is Jesse Jane?
Typical lemming response. Porn is a system of control for lemmings like you. Take my guns, take my right, just give me my damned hardcore smut so I can jerk off!
Go Red State Free Shit Army!
it doesn't make fuckall difference where you live when 50% of the population is sucking at Uncle Sam's teat
and that number doesn't traditionally count the too big to fail or jail.
somehow they should count more than per capita(l).
Speak for yourself... I have always enjoyed "teat sucking".
We all lose under the reserve of federalcy.
Washington DC is so tiny compared to the United States. The federal government reminds me of a cancer with cells throughout a once healthy body.
I dig Nevada (literally), except for Clark county.
Nevada is sliding, way to much leakage from California. Both houses in the hands of the Dems and I think the Repub Gov is getting squishy.
Thanks for the input.
The attraction to Nevada is more of a reflection of the locals' sentiment per my experience. Northern Nevadans know the score. There's plenty of open space with little " enforcement" of "law".
Yep, this was not a good year for Nevada in terms of freedom. We're still suffering from a massive influx of freedom hating Californians wanting their mommy to baby sit them.
Thank God we got rid of that whacko Democrat Steven Brooks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7jIcaGF7Zbo
I guess its a good day when the Democrats snap and go crazy, fleeing to the motherland state of Kalifornia... only to get the shit kicked out of them by Big Sister on the side of a desert highway!
(I hate republicans too... party politics don't result in freedom)
Those motherfucking nannies will be banning your shopping bags soon. Dick faced cunts.
TX jumped the shartk when they mandated that back seat passengers wear seat belts. Is Bloomberg walking the halls of the capital in Austin?
The Exxon, the insurers and electric utilities run the state, and Rick Perry does whatever they want.
Gee, states with the largest economies are New York and California. Wonder how that happened?
Wonder where all the neo-Nazi buzzwords came from:
Somehow, it figures ...
don't forget the once Great State of ILL
not enough drag queens for you, stasi cocksucker?
Nope... California and Texas are 1 and 2, respectively. New York is third.
They will actually be larger economies if they did not produce a lot of paperwork, lowered their taxes and dropped welfare except for the really needy.
Wonder where all the neo-Nazi buzzwords came from:
_______________________________
They came from 'american' minds for sure.
'American' minds have a strong taste for 1/xth things. Especially when those 1/xth means absolutely nothing.
How? Ummm .... banking and international finance? Turning pristine countryside into stinking urban sprawl?
Those economies were built under societies and politicians with very different political orientations:
1) Ronald Reagan, two time governor of CA who campaigned on two themes" 'to send the welfare bums back to work', and, in reference to burgeoning anti-war and anti-establishment student protests at the University of California at Berkeley, 'to clean up the mess at Berkeley' ".
2) Ed Koch, pragmatic three time "...mayor of New York City, which he led from fiscal insolvency to economic boom from 1978 to 1989."
Looking at CA & NY today is like looking at a dead elephant and exclaiming, "It's the biggest animal in the land!"
North Dakota's great unless you're a farmgirl knocked up by a rough neck from the Bakken oil fields: North Dakota has the country's toughest abortion laws.
I'd imagine Oklahoma doesn't fare too much better in that department.
And if you're a Homo roughneck wanting to rough house on the oil derrick? North Dakota has very restrictive same-sex partnership laws...
meth dealers do pretty good in ND and SD
Truck drivers & oil rig operators gotsta stay awake!
Yea I'd reject a state based on its abortion laws. Oh, wait, no I would not. I've got a car and some plastic sheeting the girl can sit on as we drive across the border.
Coarse, vulgar, offensive, and totally in bad taste.
These are but a few of the reasons I keep coming back to ZH.
Knocked up teen girls and homo roughnecks? That's what NY is for.
I live in Cali ... the bottom of everyone's list
No surprises for me, except for Wyoming...
Great place to grow up.
I was kinda suprised by Hawaii, but then I have never lived there. Guess that succession movement has good reason.
Ironically Maryland was one state that did not enforce alcohol prohibition. You couldn't tell now.
The rankings give tobacco freedom a 4.1% weighting yet alcohol a 2.8% weighting. Ridiculous. Like who wants to go out all night binge smoking? Oh yeah, GMU is in Virginia.
yes i think the george mason rankings might differ a tad from say u.c. santa cruz, hampshire college, even ut austin.
Thats not fair, if new york was correctly portrayed, he would of mugged and shot the other contestants and won by default.
and then pissed and moaned about wanting some Hurricane Sandy bailout $
you are only as free
as that which
you can walk away from
Did Oregon's finances implode or something?
California invaded oregon
timber/wood products are a fraction of former size - those fat tas receipts are long gone - and Fed handouts are drying up. Oregon's figuring out they can't afford their little progressive paradise without federal subsidies.
public employee pension/benefit costs are a structural/economic drag in OR - a problem shared by many 'blue' states.
Clinton killed forestry in Oregon because of the Spotted Owl.
Then someone figured out that another owl was causing it's decline, so they started killing that owl...great system.
It would be interesting to see a list of (*legal) gun ownership per capita for each of the states.
*Illinois is excluded
outside of Cook County/Chicago people are armed to the teeth. actually still fairly lenient gun laws- dems tried in Jan lame duck session and it was a debacle for them(knock on wood)
I'd argue that many neighborhoods in Chicago are also armed, just not legally.
No shit. If I lived within driving distance of Chicago, I'd be armed to the teeth, too.
I call B.S. on the personal freedom rankings. My state of Washington dropped 6 places yet now pot is legal as of last december, that and gay marriage is legal too.
Freedom to numb your brain is not freedom. John Locke inspired definition of the matter lead to a lot of what's in our constitution, I mean before the 20th Century watering down and bastardisation thereof. To have a free society you cannot have people in it "alienating" their own freedom. Drug addiction and independence- destroying behavior create burdens for others that the irresponsible drug user should bear themselves.
The gay marriage thing exists because of government social engineering. Gays, some gays let's admit, not all, want the rights of succession, and federal benefits inheritance from a dead spouse, certain tax treatments, property matters and parental rights that married couples have. All of that is distortions created by government social engineering. The rest of the marriage trappings, the church wedding, walk down the aisle etc, acceptance by everyone, the govt will get around to forcing, next.
Hundreds of years ago, government got involved in the institution of marriage because the family was viewed as the cornerstone of a well-ordered and healthy society. Consequently, it was in the interest of good public policy to promote marriage.
Of course, today, government views the family unit as a competitor and threat. Families are composed of individuals, who cannot be relied upon to raise their children to put the STATE first, and all else second. Children must be raised by the state, or by the proxies of the state (i.e., the public education system, or the infotainment complex).
Gay marriage undermines the traditional family unit by making the privileges of state marriage available to people who are physiologically incapable of creating children within the strict confines of the gay family unit. Plus it helps that most (not all, most) gays are moral degenerates, and promoting moral degeneracy undermines society and promotes the interests of government.
Well half right. Government got into the marraige business to clarify that mulattos were to be considered black when it came to the established social order that blacks and whites would not intermarry. The clarifications are in the public register.
Your second point, that the state views the family as a competitor is dead on.
As for your third point, all I can say is that "the government that governs least, governs best". It would be best to take the government out of marraige and the family.
"the state views the family as a competitor" - interesting argument - I have to make an objection, though, this "state" is a "special version". we still have several countries in Europe where the state still sees the family as it's most important "building block", and this can be seen in various jurisdictions where marriage and divorce are treated differently - oldfashionedly so
it's a cultural model, and it's very strong in Northern Europe and the USA. I'd say it's embedded in progressivism
I would argue that in Europe, the state has so thoroughly co-opted the family unit that it is no longer viewed as a threat, but as an ally in promoting statism.
In the US, there is a still a direct correlation between strong families and freedom-loving/state-hating people. Consequently, the goal of the state is to destroy the family unit until this changes.
"in Europe, the state has so thoroughly co-opted the family unit that it is no longer viewed as a threat, but as an ally in promoting statism."
That is more often found in the northern and eastern european states, the southern europeans (Latins, Arabs and Greeks) are a bit more bolshy and the french will protest at the drop of a hat.
Government got into the marraige business to clarify that mulattos were to be considered black when it came to the established social order that blacks and whites would not intermarry. The clarifications are in the public register.
___________________
In an 'american' society, a government exists to serve the King class aka We The People aka the 'american' middle class.
The government had to step in to protect one of the hallmarks of the 'american' middle class.
The middle class dictates, the government provides.
It is how it works in an 'american' society.
Maybe in the USA but in England it was Elizabeth 1st that started marriage registration about 400 years ago. It was done for legal reasons for inheritance for example.
The first law in human history regarding marriage was written in Norh America, huh?
How many ways can you be wrong?
If having children defines a "good" family, should heterosexuals that cannot have children be barred from marriage?
There are no degenerate, married heterosexuals? Who's moral code? Yours? What a tyrant.
The largest church in the world is a haven of homosexuality and child abuse.
The family unit isn't a threat to government, ignorance is. Of which churches seem to have an abundance of. The church SUPPORTS the government, that is how it receives special tax status and protection. Does this mean we should eliminate religion?