Question about the libertarian attitude in Wyoming (low income, appointed)

[BennyPhoenix]

A post from Molon Labe in another thread got me thinking.(and I didn't want to hijack that thread).
He said "...LIBERTARIANS DON'T FORCE THEIR VIEWS ON OTHERS. They are firm believers in people choosing for themselves, while "liberals" (socialists) want to force social programs, environmental laws, a myriad of other restrictive laws, and the resulting taxes onto the backs of everybody else."
Supposedly that is the general feeling in Wyoming.
If that is true, why doesn't Wyoming get rid of many of the laws that restrict or prohibit individual behavior and personal responsibility?
Why does wyoming have govt schools, speed limits, licensed automobiles, property taxes that fund more than minimal govt....among other things?
I dont want this to get in to a political debate; I just want to know why there is an apparent contradiction between what people say and what they do.

[sunsprit]

You have a false premise here, BP, when you're seeking to expose "an apparent contradiction" ...

MolonLabe's assertion of "libertarian" attitude may be a valid outlook for many people in Wyoming, but it's not absolute in action because there are other practical realities at work beyond what happens solely within WY borders.

For example, education is pretty much a government function around the country ... although you will find a lot of home schoolers here in WY. But with folks having the freedom to move around the country, they have to have some recognized standard of educational performance for their children, so Wyoming residents must have some conformity in this regard.

Another example, car registration/licensing: if WY residents are going to travel freely out of the state, or residents of other states are going to transit/visit WY, there must be some reciprocity of registration for many aspects of legal responsibility/operation/ownership of the vehicles.

From a practical standpoint, there's a lot of social programs, business laws, and similar programs in other states which you won't find in WY. It would be reasonable to compare CA's anti-business climate from all of their programs & regulations to WY's limited statutes.

Take just one very egregious aspect of CA residential development laws ... a developer must set aside a significant portion of any development for low income housing. I have personal experience with this one through a cousin ... where they were building condo's in the Malibu area (beachfront, no less!), and had to build two comparable units in size (although not so well appointed) as part of the project and rent those out at government mandated "prevailing" rates at a loss to low income people in order to get approval to build the multi-million dollar condo's of the rest of the development. The incremental losses to the project had to be borne by the 10 condo owners who could afford to live there; my cousin said that the increase in costs to the 10 units made them uncompetitive in the marketplace and he wound up defaulting on his construction loans because he couldn't sell the units at the price point needed to break even, let alone make a profit. No such development law is in WY.

Another aspect of CA's residential property taxes ... I believe due to the Prop 13 (I could be citing the wrong prop) ... where you have a very unlevel playing field. I have friends in San Diego who bought their townhome for $800,000, and that's the basis for their assessed valuation for taxation. They have a neighbor who bought the identical unit on the pre-build for $200,000, that's their basis. Yet another neighbor bought the same model unit more recently at $1.3 million, and that's their basis. No such unleveling of the property assessed valuations here in WY ... the property tax mil levy is applied to the FMV assessed valuation for all. Similarly, I own a (very small, minute) percentage in some hotel properties in the LA area (an old family investment partnership) ... which are valued on their very old basis. The 2nd & 3rd generations of the partnership would like to sell the properties as going operations ... and we can't because the new owners of the properties would have the tax basis on the sale of the places ... which makes the annual tax burden the marginal difference between being able to make the properties profitable or not. We're stuck with these properties, and would really like to cash them out and each go our separate ways ... thanks to CA law, we cannot afford to do so. No such laws in WY.

Where do these CA tax monies go? to their myriad social programs which we don't choose to fund in WY. These were very easy examples to pick out, there's literally hundreds more ... but I hope you get my point. WY residents choose to not fund a lot of these types of programs by taxing all of their citizens to excess ....

[WyoNewk]

"Supposedly that is the general feeling in Wyoming."

That might be supposing quite a lot. I'm not suggesting that Libertarianism is a stranger to Wyoming, but I've not seen any reliable survey results indicating that it's "the general feeling" either. There's probably a little Libertarian in all of us, but only so much.

And while I'm not an expert on Libertarians, I don't think they're against forcing certain views onto others. There must be some limits -- some laws and restrictions.

And finally, certain laws are pushed down our throats by the federal bureaucracy. Wyoming was one of the last states to pass a law making 21 the minimum age for alcohol. The Wyoming Legislature fought it, but it came down to highway funding. Wyoming simply couldn't afford to turn down federal highway funds, which it was doing by refusing to step into line. As I recall, it was a similar situation with the 55/65 mph speed limits. And seat belt laws. State lawmakers can resist federal demands only so long before the reality sets in that we need that allowance from Uncle Sam.

[BennyPhoenix]

I'm not arguing about specific examples per se; I am merely pointing out the contradiction I am observing. Obviously the socialists dont get everything they want, but the swing of things gives them more than what liberty lovers get. If wyo is being so hamstrung by the feds then maybe wyo should secede or declare absolute sovereignty and become a haven for those who want liberty.
What I am really interested in is whether there are really that many folks in Wyo who are libertarian to a strong degree. And given what I see in the voters I'd have to say "no". What is all of yours opinions?

[WyoNewk]

Originally Posted by BennyPhoenix

What I am really interested in is whether there are really that many folks in Wyo who are libertarian to a strong degree. And given what I see in the voters I'd have to say "no". What is all of yours opinions?

To a strong degree? It depends on how many "that many" are, but I'd also guess no, not hundreds of thousands. Maybe not even not tens of thousands. (Remember, we only have a couple hundred thousand of voting age who might have a political opinion.)

[jdavid93225]

Originally Posted by WyoNewk

State lawmakers can resist federal demands only so long before the reality sets in that we need that allowance from Uncle Sam.

If I understand this correctly, we need to comply with the fedgov's terms in order to receive back our portion of the tax money we sent in!!! Why do we have to send our money to the fedgov, just to have (some of) it sent back with conditions? Crazy, isn't it?

[WyoNewk]

Originally Posted by jdavid93225

If I understand this correctly, we need to comply with the fedgov's terms in order to receive back our portion of the tax money we sent in!!! Why do we have to send our money to the fedgov, just to have (some of) it sent back with conditions? Crazy, isn't it?

It's how the federal government gets back the controls that the Constitution gave to the states. Sad, not crazy.

[jdavid93225]

Originally Posted by WyoNewk

It's how the federal government gets back the controls that the Constitution gave to the states. Sad, not crazy.

Unfortunately, I know you're correct. That is the biggest problem I have with the fedgov.

[Happy in Wyoming]

Sadly, Woming is no more libertarian than California. The difference is in the particulars. Ranchers demand, and get, subsidized grazing leases. Unintelligent government school teachers demand, and get, obscene salaries, and so the list goes on. Until last year, government expenditures were growing at a rate higher than any other state. Energy companies are taxed at exhorbitant rates.

On the other hand, personal tax rates are low, and gun laws are less onerous than in many other states. But people here have no more concept of ethics and morality than do any others. The best thing here is that it's easy to stay away from other people.

[molon labe]

I believe you took a rather broad statement and picked it apart. I simply mentioned that Libertarians (somebody else mentioned them) do not tend to force their views on others as the socialist/liberal/marxist/environazi groups do.

I did not suggest that Wyoming is Libertarian, although that mindset is probably more prevalent here than a lot of other places. There are always limits on freedom, but the point was that the socialists/greenies force their social programs, enviro laws, etc on others at THOSE PEOPLE'S expense. Please tell me where this is the policy of Libertarians.

Just for the record, I'm a mix of Independent/Libertarian/Conservative.