U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Hampshire
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 02-27-2009, 03:50 PM
 
49 posts, read 121,863 times
Reputation: 25

Advertisements

A recent study completed shows New Hampshire comes out the freeest state in the nation overall based upon economic and personal freedoms. Keep in mind this is based upon 2006 data.

State and Local Public Policies in the United States
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-27-2009, 03:56 PM
 
3,859 posts, read 6,994,223 times
Reputation: 2682
Yes 2006. A lot has happened since then. Smoking ban not to mention the threat of a seatbelt law among other things.

Economic freedoms? That doesn't jive with the 17.5% budget increase and whatever else we are getting this year.

Hopefully people will wake up in 2010.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 06:27 PM
 
Location: The Woodlands, TX
78 posts, read 200,925 times
Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicolem View Post
Yes 2006. A lot has happened since then. Smoking ban not to mention the threat of a seatbelt law among other things.

Economic freedoms? That doesn't jive with the 17.5% budget increase and whatever else we are getting this year.

Hopefully people will wake up in 2010.

I currently live in a state with seatbelt laws. And although I think everyone should wear their seatbelts at all times while driving, and that you'd be stupid not to, I seriously don't think there should be a law mandating seatbelt use. If you want to be stupid and risk your life by not wearing a seatbelt it's your choice. :-D On the other hand a law mandating that children under a certain age wear seatbelts while riding in a vehicle might be a good idea, because if wouldn't just be your life you're risking then.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2009, 02:09 AM
 
Location: Seabrook, New Hampshire
257 posts, read 390,454 times
Reputation: 171
The feds are withholding $3.7 million in federal funds unless NH passes a seatbelt law. I spend quite a bit of time down at the State House, and the Legislature is also looking at the extra revenue that they could get by issuing more fines. There is little mention of safety, only the extra money that could be doled out to the public sector unions.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2009, 09:27 AM
 
Location: Western, Colorado
1,562 posts, read 1,799,998 times
Reputation: 819
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxxoccupancy View Post
The feds are withholding $3.7 million in federal funds unless NH passes a seatbelt law. I spend quite a bit of time down at the State House, and the Legislature is also looking at the extra revenue that they could get by issuing more fines. There is little mention of safety, only the extra money that could be doled out to the public sector unions.

Wow, this is sad; especially since my wife and I are probably going to move there.

I'm hoping that as more people get involved politically, hopefully we can stop this crap.

"A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever."
John Adams
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2009, 06:06 PM
 
Location: ID
2,065 posts, read 4,297,005 times
Reputation: 1462
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxxoccupancy View Post
The feds are withholding $3.7 million in federal funds unless NH passes a seatbelt law. I spend quite a bit of time down at the State House, and the Legislature is also looking at the extra revenue that they could get by issuing more fines. There is little mention of safety, only the extra money that could be doled out to the public sector unions.
You have hit the nail on the head, maxxocc.

ANY money from the feds is loaded with strings.

I know that recently about 10-15 state legislatures brought up 10th amendment bills, which essentially said that the feds DO NOT control them. All powers--per the US Constitution--not specifically given to the federal government are reserved to the states, or to the people.

ALMOST ALL seat belt laws began as secondary, and predictably migrated to primary laws. Follow the money.
That's what red light scameras are all about, there is significant evidence they create more crashes than they prevent. But they are "revenue enhancers," formerly known as taxes. Just taking a different form.

Because cities have developed bloated, ineffective governments that mirror the current DC mess, they have gone fishing and thanks to the free enterprise system, the red light scameras which bring in big bucks and create many rear-end collisions have spread like a cancer. Irony of ironies.

Don't worry, that money will be wasted too.

With the neo-comm party now running NH, we can look forward to a decline in Live Free or Die, and an incline in Tax More, Restrict Freedom, Spend More, Waste More.

Now, how to fit that on a license plate...
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2009, 09:37 PM
 
Location: Monadnock region
3,712 posts, read 6,116,691 times
Reputation: 2346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwatted Wabbit View Post
ANY money from the feds is loaded with strings.
I remember the speed limit change: the Feds were withholding money from any state that did not agree to lower their speed limits to 55. Talk about blackmailers! guess it's ok if your govt does it to you

Quote:
ineffective governments that mirror the current DC mess,
I'm just about choking that it looks like DC may actually get their representative to congress they've been whining about forever. Regardless of the fact that it's unconstitutional to do so (only STATES are allowed representatives! DC is not a state, neither is Guam or Puerto Rico). DC can't even govern itself! They keep electing that fraud Marion Barry into office... turns out once again, he decided that he's too good to pay his taxes. Claims he was too worried over his health (well, he did just have a kidney transplant last week) last year to file... except he hasn't filed in, what, 4 years?! Same thing they got him on last time. <sigh> How come other people with health crises don't get a pass on paying their taxes? grrrrrr
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2009, 01:34 AM
 
1,688 posts, read 3,900,964 times
Reputation: 1787
Quote:
Originally Posted by WannaComeHome View Post
Claims he was too worried over his health (well, he did just have a kidney transplant last week) last year to file...
How worried was he about his health when he took that rolled up monetary denomination in that hotel room, and ...... Couldn't have been too worried about his nasal passages anyway.

Surely the same was true back in whenever it was (82 or 83 was it?) and the powers that be in DC told the states to raise the drinking age to 21 or get their federal highway funding cut-off. DC said "jump" and the states all replied, "How high?"

So now we have a country where you can get married, drive a car, VOTE, go fight and die in a war, are legally a "major" at the age of 18 but you cannot have a beer. Sorry folks, but I've never gotten over that one.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2009, 08:29 AM
 
Location: Monadnock region
3,712 posts, read 6,116,691 times
Reputation: 2346
I've always said that as long as they keep trusting him and electing him into office.. they just show they can't properly govern themselves (they'll believe anything and have no common sense).

I agree with your other points, too.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2009, 09:14 AM
 
3,859 posts, read 6,994,223 times
Reputation: 2682
Quote:
Originally Posted by FiveHorses View Post
How worried was he about his health when he took that rolled up monetary denomination in that hotel room, and ...... Couldn't have been too worried about his nasal passages anyway.

Surely the same was true back in whenever it was (82 or 83 was it?) and the powers that be in DC told the states to raise the drinking age to 21 or get their federal highway funding cut-off. DC said "jump" and the states all replied, "How high?"

So now we have a country where you can get married, drive a car, VOTE, go fight and die in a war, are legally a "major" at the age of 18 but you cannot have a beer. Sorry folks, but I've never gotten over that one.


I agree-the drinking age should be 18. But again, holding federal monies hostage from the states is how the federal government got states to comply with that one too.
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.


 
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 $84,000 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 > New Hampshire
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, 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 - Top