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.
the Free State Project is a political 'group' who decided to choose a state that was the most like their ideas and try to move there en masse in order to influence the state gov't by electing in their own libertarian candidates. they chose NH. some have moved in, but I haven't seen that it's really accomplished much.
So a fiscal and social conservative wouldn't fit in well?
NH has a lot more fiscal conservatives compared to social conservatives. Social conservatism just doesn't factor into the culture of New England that much compared to the South and Great Plains.
A lot of old time NH people take pride in calling themselves conservative and for some the "live and let live" mentality has allowed them to not pay attention to how much conservatives are not what they were under Reagan. The majority of people I talk to around the state are not far off in their beliefs, they just label themselves differently.
Live and let live is the best way to put it...stay out of my business and I'll stay out of yours
NH has a lot more fiscal conservatives compared to social conservatives. Social conservatism just doesn't factor into the culture of New England that much compared to the South and Great Plains.
And I think that is part of why I think of the state as more liberal. Not saying folks in New Hampshire are like this, but most "fiscal conservatives social liberals" I know are the first to compromise their conservative beliefs on fiscal matters. Maybe because their conservatism is intellectual and not personal I don't know.
It sounds like a fun place. The northern part sounds like a real frontier, and I'd finally get snow. Alas it'll probably be a few years if ever before I move.
A lot of old time NH people take pride in calling themselves conservative and for some the "live and let live" mentality has allowed them to not pay attention to how much conservatives are not what they were under Reagan. The majority of people I talk to around the state are not far off in their beliefs, they just label themselves differently.
Live and let live is the best way to put it...stay out of my business and I'll stay out of yours
Your idea is correct. The rest isn't about or for you.
Many locals see no republican party anywhere.... if you ask us, the 2 parties are the same thing. Moving here to change the place isn't a great idea.
Moving here because you like the old ways and the nature is. If yer heart is set on making maple sugar, hicking anywhere even on other peples lands, and you won't trash the place in the doing, that is more or less what NH is.
If you move here and the 2nd thing you do is post your land, just stay where you are.
A lot of locals are getting ready for another kind of Tea party much more like what happened in Boston about 1774. We are fed up with Big Govt. We are fed up with HIGH property taxes, and the greedy based prices of land and homes.
A camp on a couple achers of land has no bee's wax costing over $33,000.00 damnned dollars and most of you have never even seen, much less held a real dollar in your hands once.
Back a bit, I built a small barn by my self with 24 man hours of asistance. I had reciepts to show I spent 800 bucks. The tax man showed up with a hard hat, and a clip board, un-announced and sauntered by the windows.
I went out to see who he was, and then he told me this barn was worth 30,000 buckos. I damned near shot him, but 'we' did adjust a few little things, and i agreed it was worth 3,000.00. Of course that took some time, since he was invited the hell off my place, and that .45 I carry made a point with him. All he was, was some city slick from away anyway.
He couldn't tell which way was up, and probably couldn't drive a nail.
And I think that is part of why I think of the state as more liberal. Not saying folks in New Hampshire are like this, but most "fiscal conservatives social liberals" I know are the first to compromise their conservative beliefs on fiscal matters. Maybe because their conservatism is intellectual and not personal I don't know.
It sounds like a fun place. The northern part sounds like a real frontier, and I'd finally get snow. Alas it'll probably be a few years if ever before I move.
I would respectfully suggest that you are falling into a familiar trap.
You seem to operate under the impression that if one is not self-designated as a "social conservative", he or she must be, by process of elimination, a "social progressive".
This isn't so. Nor is it accurate to assume a correlation between fiscal and social ideals as you have.
Indeed, the simplest way to approach this might be to eliminate nebulous and loaded terms (conservative/progressive) and just step back for a more nuanced perspective.
The truth is, many NH residents (like those in some other states) take the view that when it comes to government, less is more. More or less.
Which is to say that the very fiscal philosophy driving many conservatives in NH (take less and spend less) also guides their social perspective (meddle less and dictate less).
For many, at the end of the day, the smaller the government, the better.
The less it has to do with taxing and spending, the better.
And the less it has to say about things other than traffic lights and fire houses, the better.
Constrained or reduced government is indeed a conservative ideal. On both sides of the coin.
I do not believe any government should rely on some arbitrary (as in Mac’s example the initial assessment for the shed was 30 grand and the real assessment wound up at 3k) value determined by an assessor whose job is to keep the tax values as high as possible. The bigger problem with property tax is the lack of any fairness. This is particularly apparent when the owners (I am not counting zillionaires here but retired working folks) have the old family house continuously assessed at a higher values while their retirement income stays the same. Or the factory owner that is driven to move his business overseas because his mill is very heavily taxed.
IMHO, and I know this will irritate some people, the only fair tax is based on current income and applied in a progressive manner with the working incomes effectively untaxed and the huge investment income heavily taxed. That way the tax is assessed on the folks that can afford it.
In my personal case I have seen my assessment and associated taxes continuously increase over the 25+ years we have lived in Londonderry. They have grown faster than the value of my home. Even if I get a Veteran’s exemption it is a fixed value and has not been raised to account for inflation. When I retire the property tax will consume a substantial, and greater, portion of my income than now. As much of this tax burden is for a local and expensive school system that we, being childless, have never used I am not getting much value for the money I send to the town. If I were taxed on my income, instead of on what I own, I would be paying about what it cost the town to provide the services I use instead of far more for services I do not use.
And I think that is part of why I think of the state as more liberal. Not saying folks in New Hampshire are like this, but most "fiscal conservatives social liberals" I know are the first to compromise their conservative beliefs on fiscal matters. Maybe because their conservatism is intellectual and not personal I don't know.
lol! that's cause you've never been to town meeting where they argue over the cost of changing the lightbulbs in the school. 'those lights were good enough for me when I was in school, we don't need to go changing them now!' (actual discussion when my mother stopped going to town meetings).
Sometimes the fiscal conservativism comes back to bite us in the butt: many towns are not good as spending the bucks to maintain the schools or other town buildings, until it becomes a big problem and the building is finally declared unsafe for whatever reason (mold, or not ADA compatible...) and new structures need to be built which cost a lot more. No, NH towns mostly do not like to spend money and try hard not to.
Since there aren't many social programs in NH, most socially progressive views are not in conflict with fiscally conservative ones. I suspect that's where you're seeing compromise happen. Remember: it was NH towns a few years ago that first tried arresting illegal immigrants for criminal trespass!
When I hear of the "Free State Project" all I can visualize is trying to herd 20,000 cats and get them going in one direction. They might have the best intentions but they are without a doubt one of the most unorganised and unfocused groups I've ever heard of.
I've read their Statement of Intent; They cannot even meet their only goal of acheiving 20,000 participants by September 2006.
I'm not knocking them though it may appear so, but if they cannot meet their stated goal four years after a self imposed deadline I will question their ambitions. [SIZE=2][SIZE=2]
[/SIZE][/SIZE]
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 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.
