Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34

Thread: Measure of Freedom

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Maple Valley, Washington, USA
    Posts
    48

    Measure of Freedom

    Just saw this report and saw that it hits a lot of our buttons.

    From the study:

    "Our approach to measuring freedom in the states is unique in three respects: (1) it includes measures of social and personal freedoms such as peaceable citizensí rights to educate their own children, to own and carry firearms, and to be free from unreasonable search and seizure; (2) it incorporates more than 150 distinct public policies; and (3) it is particularly careful to measure fiscal policies in a way that reflects the true cost of government to the citizen. "

    Open carry is specifically mentioned in the paternalism category. "...while 26 states allow anyone to wear a handgun openly on the hip without a permit of any kind....

    http://mercatus.org/publication/free...onomic-freedom

    Washington ranks down near the bottom of the overall category.

  2. #2
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Washington is still among the 10 least-free states.
    Even though gun laws are among the best Washington State has other ways to keep us under their thumb.

    Taxes and fees are among them along with regulations on Alcohol, Tobacco, and Gambling.

    As for Taxes, just remember that for the average person, they had to work from January 1 to April 12 just to pay their tax burden for 2011. Over 25% of the year, just to support the Local, State, and Federal Taxes.

    I judge my freedom also on the basis of the ability to keep a large percentage of the income resulting from my efforts. The trend of Government playing "Robin Hood" with my money, taxing me heavily to support their own waste and those who refuse to work tends to undermine not just my freedom, but the freedom of everyone else that works hard rather than going through life as a freeloader.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  3. #3
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Interesting read... but one thing I keep seeing irks me. On their "Recommendations" they keep suggesting cutting transportation and transit expenditure, when this is perhaps one of the few legitimate uses of gov't funds...
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666
    Quote Originally Posted by Metalhead47 View Post
    Interesting read... but one thing I keep seeing irks me. On their "Recommendations" they keep suggesting cutting transportation and transit expenditure, when this is perhaps one of the few legitimate uses of gov't funds...
    How are 'transit expenditure(s)' a legitimate use of government funds? (State government only)
    Live Free or Die!

  5. #5
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    How are 'transit expenditure(s)' a legitimate use of government funds? (State government only)

    Because transit is an extension of the road system (transportation), which is both a traditional role of government and constitutionally authorized. And in a purely practical sense, it reduces govt dependency by allowing those to get to work who actually want to.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666
    Quote Originally Posted by Metalhead47 View Post
    Because transit is an extension of the road system (transportation), which is both a traditional role of government and constitutionally authorized. And in a purely practical sense, it reduces govt dependency by allowing those to get to work who actually want to.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    How is transit an "extension" of the road system? That is a bit of a stretch. Generally transit costs do not reduce government dependency but increase it. They may increase independence among a small group of people (disabled) but not enough to justify the overall costs. To be honest, it may be more cost efficient to just give really small inexpensive cars to the poor instead of spreading transit costs among the general population.

    'Reducing" dependency on government would have the end goal of eliminating the cost. Providing 'free and reduced' transit does neither.

    Furthermore, transportation is NOT a traditional role nor constitutionally authorized function of government. Again, please separate the Federal Constitution and the legitimate role of state government. Post Roads are authorized in the Constitution, yet the Federal government builds very little 'post roads'. That argument no longer has relevancy. Therefore the Constitutional argument is eliminated.

    As to the state level, the people of the state and/or local government can decide that roads or transportation (public) are a legitimate use of government. I will support the notion that providing the infrastructure(roads) is necessary from a government stance as it benefits all people at some level. However, the math does not work when dealing with bus, rail, etc.

    Ben Franklin....

    "I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer."
    Live Free or Die!

  7. #7
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    ...stuff...

    Yeah, yeah, man. I'm not bringing this thread any further off topic. *I* believe that transportation is both a necessary and legitimate role of government in a society of a given size. If you don't, then we'll just have to agree to disagree since neither is going to change the others' mind on this, nor the current role of such.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Metalhead47 View Post
    Interesting read... but one thing I keep seeing irks me. On their "Recommendations" they keep suggesting cutting transportation and transit expenditure, when this is perhaps one of the few legitimate uses of gov't funds...
    Public transit is so heavily subsidized that it really does not make sense to continue. See how long public transit would last if they charged enough to break even.

    If a private business could not make it the goverment should not be doing it either.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666
    Quote Originally Posted by Metalhead47 View Post
    Yeah, yeah, man. I'm not bringing this thread any further off topic. *I* believe that transportation is both a necessary and legitimate role of government in a society of a given size. If you don't, then we'll just have to agree to disagree since neither is going to change the others' mind on this, nor the current role of such.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    How is it off topic? The thread is off topic (except for the small part about gun laws to the respective states).

    I understand what you believe, but you provide no cite's to show that "transportation" is a legitimate role of government. It is not, it is not in the Federal Constitution and it is not in our state constitution. If buses (subsidized) are a legitimate role then why not air transportation?

    Infrastructure (roads, bridges, airports) are a legitimate use of government. Transportation (buses, light rail) are not. That being said, could they be a legitimate use of government funds? Yes. Densely populated cities (San Fransico, NY, et al) But that is decidedly a local government issue, not federal and depending on the nature of the project, not state government. (i.e. look at the cable cars in SF, they were originally paid for by the city government...no state funds, no federal funds)
    Live Free or Die!

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666

    Full disclosure?

    Metalhead...what do you do for a living?
    Live Free or Die!

  11. #11
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    I never said that transit was a legitimate FEDERAL role (and neither do I think it is). I was attempting to make a parallel between the constitutional authorization for federal post roads(the modern iteration of which is the interstate) and state and local roads (intRAstate). You won't be getting any cites from me today, I have short spurts of time to try typing this stuff on an iPhone and didn't expect an aside comment to turn into an official OCDO multipage off topic rant war :P besides, the basis of my opinion here is based on 10 years of personal experience in the industry which is hardly citable.

    You acknowledged yourself the need for public transit in a large society. Now perhaps in an ideal world it could be entirely locally funded, but I don't see that happening in this day and age. From my own experience, I think a county-based or regional approach would work best, but given the ease with which one can travel an entire state today I don't think state funding is entirely illegitimate either. I actually agreed with most of what you had to say in your last post.

    Orphan: the roads are "heavily subsidized" as well, and private industry has failed to provide those too, should we scrap the road system as well?

    Transit is a logical extension of the road system once a society reaches a certain size. Podunk, IA, pop 300 doesn't need a transit system, it barely needs a road system, heck it could function with little to no government at all. Megalopolis, USA, pop 8 million is another matter. A society of that size simply could not function without transit, the population is way too dense, neither could it function without roads. Or government.

    The larger and more complex a society is, the more (local) govt it requires in order to function.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    Metalhead...what do you do for a living?
    Take a wild guess.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666
    Quote Originally Posted by Metalhead47 View Post
    Take a wild guess.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I know you are a bus driver, I just thought that others reading would benefit from knowing your background/expertise.
    Live Free or Die!

  14. #14
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    On the transportation issue, I find it interesting that in Countries where transportation falls under the "Federal" government and is relatively free of local control, it works great. How many here that are griping about our transportation system have ever lived in a Foreign Country.

    I lived in Europe for a couple of years and could travel the entire country by train for a reasonable sum of money. Get on a train in Frankfurt and step off in Amsterdam in a matter of hours. The trains ran on time and were frequent. Train stations were transit hubs. From main lines to local lines to streetcars.

    Here the poor attempt we have made involves a "Private Corporation" and it takes forever to get anywhere, assuming there is even a train that goes that way.

    The thing Europe has going for it is that it was essentially bombed flat in the 40's and when they rebuilt, transportation was considered primary. Here it's merely a political football.

    Yes, it is a responsibility of Government as no individual, or group of individuals can provide what's needed.

    It will become more evident as energy prices go up and we won't all be able to own or operate individual vehicles. Of course when that time comes we'll all realize how badly we screwed up when the "rails were torn up".
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  15. #15
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Hardly wise to go comparing anything financial to Europe considering they're even more broke than we are, and are increasingly looking at how WE do things now.

    Then there's the fact that we have some individual states that are nearly the size of europe...




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  16. #16
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Metalhead47 View Post
    Hardly wise to go comparing anything financial to Europe considering they're even more broke than we are, and are increasingly looking at how WE do things now.

    Then there's the fact that we have some individual states that are nearly the size of europe...




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    But they also have existed for far longer than this Country. You must have missed the recent news reports where Europe is increasingly saying "we don't care how you do it in the US".
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Winlock, , USA
    Posts
    501
    With respect to the transit system I think it is valid to compare us to Germany (I wouldn't put the Belgian rail system in the same class as the BundesBahn)....

    I love the way the Bundesbahn works in Germany. Yes, it is subsidized, but it works. And with gas in the 1970s being $5.00 a gallon or so in Ffm, you damn betcha I took the train instead of using a car. I did drive a lot my first tour, but the second one was mostly rail traffic...it is much cheaper.

    If the US had a rail system like that (we did, at one time) it would be wonderful. But people want to have their own cars....so the rail system dwindled and died. Yakima had a street car system once, as did Seattle, Spokane and Tacoma....where are they now? All paved over for cars.

  18. #18
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Back in the late 1800's early 1900's there was this little train that ran from Portland, OR to Vancouver, BC...It was called the "interurban" and it did just fine until the motor bus came along. It was a private RR. After the motor vehicle came along, and the roads were improved, bus lines serviced the purpose...just like the "misquito fleet" serviced the water traffic on the sound before Washington State ferry system came along.

    If there was a demand, some private company would service the demand. Why can these small operations no longer compete? Because the State subsidizes all of the "public" transportation with your tax money, if you use the service, or not.

    That is what freedom is all about. You choose live and to spend the money you worked for in the manner you want to. You do not have the state take it from you and spend it the way they want to.

    For example: Why are my fuel taxes taken by the state to pave bicycle lanes in Seattle? I will never benifit from those bycycle lanes, ever. If the bicycle people want bicycle lanes, tax the bicycle people not those that use other forms of transportation, or better yet, let them put the lanes in themselves.

    Maybe I should cry because I have to drive on 5 miles of gravel before I even get to any pavement? Anyway, WA has a lot of restrictions on what you can do that do not exist in other states. They spend a lot of public money on things that only benifit a few, and they control/tax everything they possible can (as long as it benifits their political agenda) Consider our Gov and the Indian gaming tax that didn't happen (the Native gaming people lined her coffers, the lack of a gaming tax is payback)

  19. #19
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Here I go playing for the other side, but did you ever think that americas love of cars is intrinsically linked to our (unique in the world) love of liberty? I'll be the first to admit it, public transit is an inherent limitation on personal liberty. You can only go where THEY want, when THEY want, with THEIR routing. That's why liberals and other statists love and advocate (to the point of force) public transit. It's control. Perhaps it's cliche, but the car IS freedom. Go where YOU want, when YOU want, with whom YOU want, on the route YOU want. Anywhere there's a road. And with some vehicles you don't even need the ROAD (liberals hate these "cars" most of all, go figure).


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Stupid tapatAlk...

    Public transit in a large, dense population are is a necessity, just like the roads themselves. Yes, it's a limitation on liberty, but so is that apartment building the city dweller must live in. The trade off to living in a dense population center with all it's conveniences is greater restrictions on your own liberty.

    Now somewhere in the middle there's gotta be common ground as far as equitably and constitutionally funding a regional TRANSPORTATION system that meets the needs of bus riders, car drivers, and yes even the obnoxious fruits on bicycles, from the fArm to downtown, that also respects everyones's liberty.

    Based on my own experience, I simply don't see how a private company can efficiently and SAFELY provide public transit. Perhaps in some libertarian perfect world, but not in the here & now.

    As I'm fond of saying, if we'd quit wasting money on illegitimate liberAl social programs and other unconstitutional BS , there'd be plenty of funding available for legitimate ones like transportation & transit.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    343
    But they also have existed for far longer than this Country.
    I beg to differ.

    Which European government is older than the U.S.? If you only meant the names of said countries, I would suggest that the Germany of today is NOTHING like the Germany of 1780, Spain was totally rebuilt after the Blitzkrieg war that Germany pounded it with, France, Italy?

    While their language may also be the same as it was in earlier times, their current form of government, in the context of this discussion (as in being broke), is how you must figure their age.

    And in that respect, the U.S. IS the oldest, compared to Europe.

    The Vatican could be considered a government by some,though what form of government I have no idea....Theocracy?


    As I'm fond of saying, if we'd quit wasting money on illegitimate liberAl social programs and other unconstitutional BS , there'd be plenty of funding available for legitimate ones like transportation & transit.
    +1
    Last edited by xd shooter; 06-11-2011 at 09:13 PM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Um... When did germany ever invade Spain? Spain was neutral in WWII following an ugly civil war...

    And actually the modern Vatican city state has only existed since 1929, and is technically an elected monarchy.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Winlock, , USA
    Posts
    501
    Germany didn't become a country until 1871, which is besides the point. The Germans did help Franco during the Spanish Civil war, but that was the extent of their involvement, there was no blitzkrieg there, Italy wasn't a country until maybe after WW2? There are some that still argue about that....

    Which still isn't the point. Mass transit CAN work. I've seen it, and in my two tours (by tours I mean military type, not a two week trip) I was able to get anywhere I wanted to go whenever I wanted to do it....It could be made to work here, if we had the national will to make it work...

    But if we had the national will to make things work, there are a whole lot of problems we wouldn't have....

  24. #24
    Regular Member amzbrady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,522
    No offense metal, but the few times I have ridden on a bus, I got stuck sitting by stinky people, so I have found I dont need public transportation in my life. There should be cutouts in the roads for bus drivers to pull over and get out of our way, so they dont create more traffic by holding people up. just my opinion.

    as far as our roads, I for one dont think people from Alaska, Montana, and Oregon should be able to come here and get purchase things tax free. They use our roads to get here, so they should have to pay our taxes.
    Last edited by amzbrady; 06-12-2011 at 02:35 AM.
    If you voted for Obama to prove you are not a racist...
    what will you do now to prove you are not stupid?

    "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas

    "They who can who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve niether liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    343
    Um... When did germany ever invade Spain? Spain was neutral in WWII following an ugly civil war...
    Your right, I was thinking of the Civil War, when the Nationalists of Germany took sides with the Nationalists in Spain, including using Stuka dive Bombers, to which I was referring to as a Blitzkreig tactic.

    My apologies.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •