2013 February 02 Saturday
Adapting To Unfavorable Societal Trends
The various unfavorable trends in America and other Western societies lead me to ask how to adapt? I want to start fleshing out a decision tree. Some questions that need asking:
Where can you own sufficient means to defend yourself? For example, in California you can't buy a pistol that holds more than 10 bullets. Are any other American jurisdictions worse? In which jurisdictions is it hardest to buy a gun?
Where and when can you use sufficient means to defend yourself? Some jurisdictions basically make it legal to kill someone who breaks into your home. Well, which jurisdictions do not recognize this basic right to self defense?
Suppose you want (in some cases really need) to keep your kids out of public schools and do home schooling. Which jurisdictions disallow this or put such high hurdles in place that they might just as well disallow it?
Can you operate your own business as a way to escape from the rules imposed within and on large businesses?
Does your career tie yo to a location because it is one of the few locations where that occupation is done to a substantial extent? Which career paths are best for breaking free of geographic locations?
What other laws and customs vary by jurisdiction and region that will make it harder to carve out a larger and safer private life buffered from what our society is becoming?
The United States is not the only place where people need to ask these questions. Look at Britain, where in some communities the British have become the strangers and outsiders. Our elites are certainly quite willing to do this to us. Many Western governments have stronger loyalties to ideologies, financial interests, and really bad ideas. Loyalties to their citizens? Not so much. I am amazed at how much this has changed in my life.
Update: While top athletes have flexibility to move to states with lower tax rates this is not an option open to most of us. Plus, since the pressure is going to stay on to raise federal rates what's really needed is escape on an international level. If you can run a company in a country with very low corporate tax rates you could accumulate a lot of money in that corporation. But short of that it is hard for a highly productive US citizen to escape the growing hunger of the Leviathan for money.
Self employment in a business not tied to geographical location offers the best prospect to escape a government that shows signs it will become much more dysfunctional.
By Randall Parker at 2013 February 02 01:51 PM
If armament and homeschooling are your primary concerns, there are a lot of good locations in the US. Personally I think that having the right neighbors is more important than any particular choice of arsenal, but of course in a situation where you *have* the right sort of neighbors you should have some weapons just in order to fulfill your own community obligations.
Going forward I'm primarily curious to see whether (and how) the federal government will try to impose a nationwide sales tax. In principle, they could just keep monetizing the debt and let the inflation run. But they might not want to do that for some reason, in which case I don't think they have any chance of balancing the budget without a sales tax or VAT.
Roughly, fewer Yankees = more liberty. Yankees congregate along the coasts. Red states are better, blue states are worse. Stay off the eastern seaboard and west coast. Rocky mountain west, upper midwest, Dixie are good candidates. New England, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, California are bad. All the bad states have some good areas, but are overwhelmed by large urban progressive cancers.
The second civil war is heating up, so now is a good time to get to the winning side.
Hmmm... you would claim that Mississippi is better than New Hampshire, or Alabama better than Washington state? I'm skeptical. It's true that Dixie is good in terms of gun rights and homeschooling, but in terms of demographics and in other areas of personal liberty, not so great.
I think the rate of unsolved murders is a pretty good proxy for where to live. Parts of New England are bad. But Vermont (5.6%) is way better than Mississippi (18.7%) by that measure. Though New Hampshire (15.8%) does not beat Mississippi by much. Tennessee (14.6%) beats New Hampshire. But Louisiana (31.2%) sucks. Maine (10.4%) is excellent. Idaho (3.9%) is top of the pops. I am not surprised that DC (56.1%) is worst. But I would have expected the rest of Illinois (55.4%) to dilute the state-level effects of Chicago. But no.
If you can manage to live in a very stable neighborhood with high quality people where people know each other that's great. I can tell you I no longer do. I barely know my immediate neighbors and do not know anyone else who lives beyond them. The high plains states and Wyoming are best. But we need more easily visualized county-level data on crime.
Unfortunately, the specialty I pursued in my career was so esoteric that the only jobs in the field were available in larger metro areas (although the one from which I recently retired was based in a smaller state capital city).
Those who can have the freedom to live where they want include most health care professionals, especially physicians and nurses. If you don't have the talent and the willingness to delay gratification to pursue such a career, there are certainly other types of occupations which offer great geographical flexibility, for example
1) auto mechanic--cars are everywhere, and will still need repairs even when better built and especially when self-service is less of an option because of the complexity of their design.
2) morticians--people are always going to be dying everywhere.
3) HVAC repair and maintenance--always a good gig in extreme climate locations. Try someplace like Minnesota where the sun blazes in the summer and your pipes freeze in below zero weather in the winter.
The real problem is that everything that makes life worth living, culture, good food, beautiful people, educated people, smart people, great architecture, etc, exists primarily in places with heavy concentrations of liberals and is often created and monopolized by them. There is no point living among hicks and retards. The real problem of modern times is it is only possible to live among smart, sophisticated people, but those people have gone batshit crazy. Living among hicks is really not an appealing option. I've done it. Yeah, they're not liberals, but they're awful. No, there is no running away unfortunately.
Yes, I have to live in a large metro area too. Though I'm thinking about eventually buying land with a very modest house somewhere else as a bug-out destination. To someone living in areas with high costs of living and higher salaries the prices of homes out in rural areas are really low.
Your listed occupations: But what do they pay? You going to learn HVAC repair? Seems preferable to fixing cars.
Yes, I'm with you on the dilemma. I've opted to live in a densely populated area because that's where I can make the most money doing what I know how to do. I'm saving toward the day when it makes sense to live somewhere else.
I'm going to dig a little deeper to make sure I'm accurate on this, but it looks like over 90% of the total homicides that occur in Illinois happen within the Chicago metropolitan area. Wow. I guess that explains that.
Where do you live? On the west coast and in the northeast, you're on the mark. Not so much in the upper midwest or mountain states, though. I live in the center of the country and do work with people from Cerner, Garmin, and Honeywell. These guys are mostly sharp, witty, nerdy, middle-class suburban types who vote pretty heavily Republican. They aren't "hicks and retards", nor have they "gone batshit crazy".
One of the major points to takeaway from Gelman's Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State is that in red states, people who vote Republican are a lot more successful than people who vote Democrat. In blue states, not nearly so much. Leawood culture isn't Manhattan culture, I understand, but it's not idiotic. Personally, having only experienced the former, I can say with some confidence that I'd prefer it to the latter.
The Midwestern area between the Mississippi/Missouri rivers and the Rockies is pretty good when it comes to self-defense and gun ownership, and I can assure you, we're not all "hicks and retards". We have symphony orchestras, ballet, many art galleries, fine restaurants, a vast array of different sorts of people interested in different things, and reasonably low crime. We have immense energy resources, the most productive agriculture in the world, a fairly low divorce rate, lots of pretty women #honestly, there's lots of Scandinavian and German blood out here; I've seen blondes around here that would have Hugh Hefner whimpering in lustful agony# and fewer minorities that either coast or the South, and they are also better behaved. When our region becomes independent in a few years #and it will happen, have no doubt# we'll be one of the world's leading nations. I'm not kidding. Anyone who's fed up with the coastal life come out here. Build a new life, help build a new country...
Rate of unsolved murders it not necessarily a good marker for safety for Whites in Alabama. Why? Most murders are between blacks who don't cooperate with law enforcement. Blacks and Whites are segregated to a good degree in where they live. Concealed carry is easy. If someone comes uninvited to your house you can legally shoot them. Blacks know this.