U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-19-2009, 07:16 AM
 
Location: In The Outland
6,023 posts, read 11,496,890 times
Reputation: 3535

Advertisements

Montana, The main reason I moved here, few people, few laws, few enforcers. Lots of space and freedom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-19-2009, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Boston
7,336 posts, read 15,302,120 times
Reputation: 8622
This is so debatable. It really depends on what one defines as "freedoms" I know a lot of the people here in Mass. who disagree with many of the laws love to call us a "Nanny State." This is in part due to large spending on welfare, mass transit, and higher than average taxes (among other things). It's also in part because MA recognizes gay marriage, decriminalized marijuana, etc.

For me, I am happy to live somewhere that is pushing for utilization of public transit as opposed to supporting the free ranging use of automobiles. There's a proposed gas tax in effect that will be the highest in the nation... I support it 100% as it will fund the bettering of our transportation grid. Driving is a privilege, not a right. I also like a state where consenting adults are allowed to marry as they see fit... be it of the same or opposite sex. We're free of religious beliefs in that regard (as any state should be) and I enjoy that freedom.

I don't care about guns and don't feel I need to carry one on me. Nor do I feel like I need to have an open container of alcohol in the car with me which is why I don't need to live in a state that allows those things. If my state not allowing those things and taxing (for the betterment of state infrastructure) higher than the national average (a tax which I'm FREE to avoid by moving if I wish) is a "Nanny State" then so be it. For me personally, I find that the freedoms of this "nanny state" are far more useful, practical, and important than the so called, "free" states elsewhere.

No state is truly free. It's just about which "freedoms" fit your interests. Massachusetts does well in that regard and I'm perfectly happy here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2009, 09:29 AM
 
Location: Concrete jungle where dreams are made of.
8,900 posts, read 12,703,440 times
Reputation: 1819
Not any of the bible belt states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2009, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Orange County, CA
3,730 posts, read 5,089,357 times
Reputation: 4170
Default State freedom

There are threads on this site on this topic,but if you wish to start over,suggest seeing the recent study done by George Mason University.Just enter freedom in the 50 states in a search engine.This is a study done from a Libertarian view;not liberal and not conservative.The states are analyized using seversl criteria.Interesting conclusions were that almost all of the states that had the least freedom are blue states in which liberal Democrats are in firm control,and the states with the most freedom are red states with the GOP at the helm.Very liberal California,in which I reside,ranked 47th in total freedom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2009, 12:05 AM
 
5,760 posts, read 13,323,224 times
Reputation: 4523
There was a thread about that George Mason study on this forum a couple of months back: Freedom in the 50 States: An Index of Personal and Economic Freedom.

I'm not inclined at the moment to go back and read through that thread again, but my recollection is that there were some posts on the thread which bashed the study for its "conservative" bias. I'm guessing that this was because of the fact that the results were skewed substantially (though not entirely) in favor of red states. A close look at the article about the study reveals that in fact, as BlackShoe points out, it was done more from a libertarian perspective than either "liberal" or "conservative" by the current meanings. Those who knocked the results for supposedly having a "conservative" bias homed in on the study's inclusion of factors such as low taxes and relatively low degree of business regulation, while ignoring the fact that the study also gave points for freedoms the left would be more likely to support, such as lenient drug laws.

There can be some surprises regarding red and blue states. For example, Vermont. Vermont seems to be a thorougly blue state these days. High taxes, business heavily regulated, etc. Yet Vermont is one of only two states with such unrestrictive gun laws that no permit is required for concealed carry.

All of which emphasizes the point that several people have made on here, that, in terms of everyday life at least, it matters more which place is conducive to the freedoms each individual finds most important than how a state might rate across the board.

Last edited by ogre; 05-20-2009 at 12:16 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2009, 06:28 PM
 
Location: Greater Houston
4,514 posts, read 8,597,576 times
Reputation: 2086
Quote:
Originally Posted by happ View Post
If personal freedom means being allowed to smoke in restaurants\ carrying a gun & driving with an open container than you can keep Texas. I prefer California that allows marijuana use\ sex clubs\ gambling. To each his\her own. You can have the Bible-belt. California is more my style.
Driving open-container is actually illegal in Texas. You could get a ticket with a hefty fine for that.

I think Texas is the least free-state. It seems the lege is fixated on what goes on in everyone's bedrooms, tollways (HOA-style Toll Road Authority violations, tracking system, and privatizing the public works into commoditized securities), and protecting the elite's status-quo interests (and brainwashing it into the people's heads) over the people's interests.

I like California's consumer-friendly laws such as automatic credit card privacy choice, disclosure of food-service establishments inspection grades, retail price disclosure, and other consumer-friendly measures. Big Business doesn't completely run California unlike Texas. (I'm not so sure about right-wing interest groups in the aftermath of Prop 8.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2009, 12:01 AM
 
Location: Underneath the Pecan Tree
15,989 posts, read 29,784,428 times
Reputation: 7238
Quote:
Originally Posted by KerrTown View Post
Driving open-container is actually illegal in Texas. You could get a ticket with a hefty fine for that.

I think Texas is the least free-state. It seems the lege is fixated on what goes on in everyone's bedrooms, tollways (HOA-style Toll Road Authority violations, tracking system, and privatizing the public works into commoditized securities), and protecting the elite's status-quo interests (and brainwashing it into the people's heads) over the people's interests.

I like California's consumer-friendly laws such as automatic credit card privacy choice, disclosure of food-service establishments inspection grades, retail price disclosure, and other consumer-friendly measures. Big Business doesn't completely run California unlike Texas. (I'm not so sure about right-wing interest groups in the aftermath of Prop 8.)
Texas is a pretty free state; it's just that the people that run it are pretty conservative.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2009, 12:34 AM
 
Location: Hell's Kitchen, NYC
2,271 posts, read 4,410,431 times
Reputation: 1584
I agree with what others said this really can go either way. I would think that the states with moderate laws/policies would allow the most personal freedoms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2009, 03:22 PM
 
Location: Teaneck, NJ
1,576 posts, read 5,021,543 times
Reputation: 677
Connecticut.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2009, 03:30 PM
 
Location: Concrete jungle where dreams are made of.
8,900 posts, read 12,703,440 times
Reputation: 1819
Quote:
Originally Posted by jluke65780 View Post
Texas is a pretty free state; it's just that the people that run it are pretty conservative.

Can gays openly hold hands in any area of Texas? I don't think so. You have to remember that there's another aspect of personal freedom, which is feeling socially free.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top