Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

Libertarianism and Society

DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2011 5:06:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
New Hampshire is the most Libertarian State in the Union, according to a paper published by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University
http://www.legalzoom.com...

In New Hampshire;

*We have no sales tax, no state income tax.
*we are ranked number 49 in regards to the tax burden. With only 7.3% of income going towards taxes. The only state with less of a Tax burden is Alaska .
*In regards to the State Debt Crisis, we are ranked Number 2 in the Country, and given a 5 star rating, according to Forbes.
*We have very loose gun restrictions
*We have have the lowest crime rate in the union
* We have no seat belt law for adults
*We have no motorcycle helmet law.
*We are not required to buy Insurance
* We have a low rate of uninsured population at 10.4%
* We have a low premature death rate with 5,792 years of potential life lost before age 75 per 100,000 population.
*We have a low percentage of children in poverty at 10.5% of persons under age 18
*We are ranked number 3 in the American Health Ranking by the United Health Foundation
* We have the 4th lowest unemployment rate, right behind South Dakota, Nebraska, and North Dakota.
*We have the highest Median House Hold Income in the union according to the US Census Bureau
*We are ranked number 8 in regards to the environment according to Greenopia

http://www.forbes.com...
http://www.insurancejournal.com...
http://www.americashealthrankings.org...
http://www.bls.gov...
http://www.census.gov...
http://www.legalzoom.com...
http://www.greenopia.com...
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2011 6:25:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I will start with the economic side for today.

Being that I'm basically close enough to a socialist (at least when it comes to fiscal policies) there are two numbers that I'd like to look at (well, three, but the third is just derived from the first two).

This all comes from here.
http://www.census.gov...

1) The percentage of homes making over $75k a year by state.

I've choosen $75k a year because it is not neccessarily overly rich, but it is a comfortable level. According to the raw data (meaning, not a survey of a sampling, but of actually every tax paying home in America), the most recent available year is 2009.

The Top10 states in this category are...

1. Maryland - 55.95%
2. Connecticut - 55.32%
3. New Jersey - 55.26%
4. Massachusetts - 53.88%
5. Alaska - 53.05%
6. Hawaii - 50.05%
7. New Hampshire - 49.12%
8. District of Columbia - 48.26%
9. Virginia - 47.47%
10. Rhode Island - 46.04%

USA average - 39.60%

Looking at this, it is clear that we are looking at wealth in the North East. And if we look based upon what their state taxes are, http://money.cnn.com... we see that Maryland is 4th for tax rate (state and average local), Connecticut is 3rd, New Jesery is 1st, Massachusetts is 23rd, and Alaska is last. Apparently, high taxes are not stopping people from achieving wealth.

2) Average percentage of homes making less than $25k a year (by state).

This shows how much of a state is left (can be used to show a wealth gap, or to show how well the most people are doing, rather than the few). The worst 10 are (tax ranking)...

41. OK - 20.46% (19)
42. SC - 21.65% (37)
43. TN - 21.73% (44)
44. LA - 21.97% (42)
45. NM - 21.98% (39)
46. AL - 22.29% (38)
47. KY - 22.90% (25)
48. WV - 22.95% (29)
49. AR - 24.81% (14)
50. MS - 27.23% (36)

I'm willing to bet that we can see the pattern here. Having lower tax rates is not giving them any more income.

3) Overall "wealth" (percent of over $75k - percent of under $25k)

1. MD - 45.94% (4)
2. CT - 44.46% (3)
3. NJ - 43.71% (1)
4. AK - 43.50% (50)
5. MA - 42.06% (23)
6. NH - 38.97% (46)
7. HI - 38.18% (5)
8. VA - 34.53% (18)
9. DE - 33.23% (24)
10. WA - 31.96% (35)
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2011 6:29:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I think the correlation is more along the lines of wealth and business heavy states are taxed heavily, that is taxes came after wealth in that chicken and the egg scenario.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2011 6:36:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/10/2011 6:29:28 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
I think the correlation is more along the lines of wealth and business heavy states are taxed heavily, that is taxes came after wealth in that chicken and the egg scenario.

Yeah, but the theory is also that taxes chase the wealth away into lower taxed places. Obviously, these states did not just become highly taxed recently, they've been some of the highest taxed for a long while and the rich continue to choose to live there.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2011 6:44:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I will also quickly touch on the poverty rate.

This also comes to this as a source. http://www.census.gov...

New Hampshire does have the lowest poverty rate (I'm looking at individual rather than family, but the rankings are not that much different).

NH has pretty much always had the lowest poverty rate (with a 1 year exception when they fell to #2 in 2006). But the stability of their poverty is something to be concerned about.

I looked at two numbers, the change in poverty from 2007 - 2009 (the current economic issue) and from 2000 - 2009.

From 2007 to 2009, NH's poverty rate went fom 7.1 to 8.5, a 16.8% growth. The national average for this time was only 9.6% growth. And compared to other top ranking poverty states, Alaska (ranked #2) grew 1.0%, Maryland (#3) grew 8.9% and New Jersey (#4) grew 8.5%. The average growth of the top 10 states was only 9.8% (with Hawaii being the only state that faired worse than New Hampshire with 23.1% growth).

From 2000 to 2009, a much worse picture appears. New Hapshire grew from 5.3 (the lowest by a full 1.6 points) to 8.5, or 37.7% growth. That gives it the highest growth rate of any state (followed closely by Michigan at 37.6% and Minnesota at 37.1%).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2011 7:40:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/10/2011 6:36:39 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/10/2011 6:29:28 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
I think the correlation is more along the lines of wealth and business heavy states are taxed heavily, that is taxes came after wealth in that chicken and the egg scenario.

Yeah, but the theory is also that taxes chase the wealth away into lower taxed places. Obviously, these states did not just become highly taxed recently, they've been some of the highest taxed for a long while and the rich continue to choose to live there.

I think that takes a very long time to observe, just from looking at California.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2011 9:36:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/10/2011 7:40:23 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 11/10/2011 6:36:39 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/10/2011 6:29:28 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
I think the correlation is more along the lines of wealth and business heavy states are taxed heavily, that is taxes came after wealth in that chicken and the egg scenario.

Yeah, but the theory is also that taxes chase the wealth away into lower taxed places. Obviously, these states did not just become highly taxed recently, they've been some of the highest taxed for a long while and the rich continue to choose to live there.

I think that takes a very long time to observe, just from looking at California.

These states have higher tax rates than California, and have consistently had higher tax rates than California, and for a long time. It's not like they suddenly became big tax states over the last 5 years.

While taxes can "chase away" businesses and wealthly people, taxes are only one part of the equation, and often a small part. Others are services available, the workers that live in the area, the safety of the area, etc. Often it is worth paying a little higher taxes (a few percentage points) in order to have that added security, a better work force, and what not.

That is why they stay and will continue to stay (so long as those other needs outweigh the taxes), because they offer a higher quality, rather than a lower price. And honestly, I believe that is what this country needs to strive for moving forward, higher quality that people are willing to pay more for, rather than dirt cheap, lowest price. I'd rather us be Mercedes Benz than Kia, but that is just me.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2011 9:56:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/11/2011 9:49:49 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Great post Oregon!

However, someone has to clean the toilets, so to speak :)

In the "high quality" circles, they have self cleaning toilets (at least those that are made from special porcelain so they don't get dirty easily). But of course, a company that is doing well, with people that are paid well can also afford to pay their custodians well. At my company, every single employee is provided healthcare coverage, free of charge (for single, you have to pay a bit out of pocket for family), from the office workers like me, to the factory workers, to the custodians.

Why, because we make high end knives (and soon, hopefully high end razors, once this thing gets all worked out) and so can afford to offer better benefits to get better workers.

Of course, other options are teenagers that need jobs, not much is more humbling than working cleaning toilets (and God knows, our youth need a good leason in humility).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2011 10:12:06 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
In regards to the Seatbelts and Helmet laws, which were brought up, I think it should also be wise to bring up auto-deaths.

http://www.census.gov...

In 2008, New Hampshire ranked 16th (out of 51, with DoC). That is certainly above average and respectible in it's own right, but I'd like to also point out.

Massachusetts, ranked 1st
Rhode Island, ranked 3rd
New Jersey, ranked 4th
New York, ranked 5th
Connecticut, ranked 8th
Vermont, ranked 12th

When looking at the entire country, it is certainly doing just fine, but looking at its particular corner of the country, we can see that it is certainly falling behind its neighbors.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2011 10:32:24 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
http://www.census.gov...

Moving on to crime rates, we don't see NH as #1, but it is still doing good (as of 2009).

For Violent crimes, it comes in at #3 (behind Maine and Vermont). For Property crime, it comes in at #7 (behind SD, NY, ND, ID, NJ, and PN). You may be wondering how New York did #2 in property crime, that is because New York's biggest issue is Robbery (which is classified as a violent crime, because it involves force [1], like muggings and such.

If we look at individual things, we can see that New Hampshire is 1st in regards to Murder, but #23 in forcible rape, 8th in robbery, and 3rd in Aggravated assault. Of course, looking at these, we also find that the rest of their neighbor's do pretty good too, with Vermont and Maine often beating them out (both beat them in 3 of the 4 Violent Crimes).

Another thing to note, is that between 2008 and 2009, the US average for violent crimes dropped by 5.89% and property crimes dropped 5.43%. And if we just look at the NE, their violent crimes dropped 3.52% and property crimes dropped 4.99%.

However, New Hapshire saw a 2.11% increase in violent crimes, and a 2.97% increase in property crimes.

[1] http://criminal.laws.com...
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2011 10:51:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I sould add a note that the economic section was looking at Family income, rather than household income. I will now present the household income.

For % making over 75k

1) Maryland - 46.1%
2) New Jersey - 45.9%
3) Connecticut - 44.8%
4) Alaska - 44.3%
5) Massachusetts - 42.8%
6) Hawaii - 42.1%
7) DoC - 41.2%
8) Virginia - 39.3% (39.29%)
9) California - 39.3% (39.28%)
10) New Hampshire - 39.3% (39.27%)

For states with the lowest % under 25k

1) Alaska - 14.7%
2) Maryland - 16.0%
3) Hawaii - 17.5%
4) New Jersey - 17.8%
5) Connecticut - 18.3%
6) Utah - 18.4%
7) New Hampshire - 18.5%
8) Virginia - 19.5%
9) Delaware - 20.1%
10) Washington - 20.4%

So the difference (% 75k+ - the % 25k-)

1) Maryland - 30.1
2) Alaska - 29.7
3) New Jersey - 28.1
4) Connecticut - 26.5
5) Hawaii - 24.6
6) Massachusetts - 22.3
7) New Hapshire - 20.8
8) Virginia - 19.8
9) California - 18.6
10) DoC - 17.1
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2011 1:35:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/10/2011 6:25:24 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I will start with the economic side for today.

Being that I'm basically close enough to a socialist (at least when it comes to fiscal policies) there are two numbers that I'd like to look at (well, three, but the third is just derived from the first two).

This all comes from here.
http://www.census.gov...

1) The percentage of homes making over $75k a year by state.

I've choosen $75k a year because it is not neccessarily overly rich, but it is a comfortable level. According to the raw data (meaning, not a survey of a sampling, but of actually every tax paying home in America), the most recent available year is 2009.

The Top10 states in this category are...

1. Maryland - 55.95%
2. Connecticut - 55.32%
3. New Jersey - 55.26%
4. Massachusetts - 53.88%
5. Alaska - 53.05%
6. Hawaii - 50.05%
7. New Hampshire - 49.12%
8. District of Columbia - 48.26%
9. Virginia - 47.47%
10. Rhode Island - 46.04%

USA average - 39.60%

Looking at this, it is clear that we are looking at wealth in the North East. And if we look based upon what their state taxes are, http://money.cnn.com... we see that Maryland is 4th for tax rate (state and average local), Connecticut is 3rd, New Jesery is 1st, Massachusetts is 23rd, and Alaska is last. Apparently, high taxes are not stopping people from achieving wealth.

2) Average percentage of homes making less than $25k a year (by state).

This shows how much of a state is left (can be used to show a wealth gap, or to show how well the most people are doing, rather than the few). The worst 10 are (tax ranking)...

41. OK - 20.46% (19)
42. SC - 21.65% (37)
43. TN - 21.73% (44)
44. LA - 21.97% (42)
45. NM - 21.98% (39)
46. AL - 22.29% (38)
47. KY - 22.90% (25)
48. WV - 22.95% (29)
49. AR - 24.81% (14)
50. MS - 27.23% (36)

I'm willing to bet that we can see the pattern here. Having lower tax rates is not giving them any more income.

3) Overall "wealth" (percent of over $75k - percent of under $25k)

1. MD - 45.94% (4)
2. CT - 44.46% (3)
3. NJ - 43.71% (1)
4. AK - 43.50% (50)
5. MA - 42.06% (23)
6. NH - 38.97% (46)
7. HI - 38.18% (5)
8. VA - 34.53% (18)
9. DE - 33.23% (24)
10. WA - 31.96% (35)

The point is it's not giving them any less income.

The income after taxes is also much higher, because of the low tax rate. New Hampshire's Tax rate is second only to Alaska.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2011 1:37:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/11/2011 10:51:26 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I sould add a note that the economic section was looking at Family income, rather than household income. I will now present the household income.

For % making over 75k

1) Maryland - 46.1%
2) New Jersey - 45.9%
3) Connecticut - 44.8%
4) Alaska - 44.3%
5) Massachusetts - 42.8%
6) Hawaii - 42.1%
7) DoC - 41.2%
8) Virginia - 39.3% (39.29%)
9) California - 39.3% (39.28%)
10) New Hampshire - 39.3% (39.27%)

For states with the lowest % under 25k

1) Alaska - 14.7%
2) Maryland - 16.0%
3) Hawaii - 17.5%
4) New Jersey - 17.8%
5) Connecticut - 18.3%
6) Utah - 18.4%
7) New Hampshire - 18.5%
8) Virginia - 19.5%
9) Delaware - 20.1%
10) Washington - 20.4%

So the difference (% 75k+ - the % 25k-)

1) Maryland - 30.1
2) Alaska - 29.7
3) New Jersey - 28.1
4) Connecticut - 26.5
5) Hawaii - 24.6
6) Massachusetts - 22.3
7) New Hapshire - 20.8
8) Virginia - 19.8
9) California - 18.6
10) DoC - 17.1

That's looking at a single year not a 3 year average.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2011 1:51:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The whole point was that society can flourish without violating liberty. Oregon seemed to miss the point.

New Hampshire is one of the safest states to live, has one of the most cleanest environments, and has low poverty and a high average income.

It has the second lowest tax burden, and has little to no arbitrary laws.

The live free or die state with out a doubt respects freedom, and without a doubt is better of because of it.

Oregon brought up NH's neighbors. New Hampshire has way more liberty than it's neighbors, and according to Oregon NH's neighbors do only slightly better than New Hampshire.

So in regards to liberty lost, vs societal benefits, New Hampshire does better than it;s neighbors, and way better than the rest of the country.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2011 4:17:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/11/2011 1:51:18 PM, DanT wrote:
The whole point was that society can flourish without violating liberty. Oregon seemed to miss the point.

New Hampshire is one of the safest states to live, has one of the most cleanest environments, and has low poverty and a high average income.

It has the second lowest tax burden, and has little to no arbitrary laws.

The live free or die state with out a doubt respects freedom, and without a doubt is better of because of it.

Oregon brought up NH's neighbors. New Hampshire has way more liberty than it's neighbors, and according to Oregon NH's neighbors do only slightly better than New Hampshire.

So in regards to liberty lost, vs societal benefits, New Hampshire does better than it;s neighbors, and way better than the rest of the country.

Not really, NH has shown that having lower taxes and all these freedoms does not improve the state in other measurements by any significant measure. Yes, allowing freedoms will not cripple the state, that is true, but holding them back will not cripple the state either.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"