Friday, May 08, 2009

Wisconsin Ranks Low on Freedom

And the trend is downward...

Wisconsin is ranked 37th in the nation in terms of the freedom it allows to residents, according to the Freedom in the 50 States study performed by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

The study ranks various personal and financial freedom laws in each state, such as smoking bans and tax laws in order to judge how many choices residents have.

According to the study, Wisconsin ranked high in spending and taxes, leading to an overall rank of 35th in the nation in economic freedom. The study says oversight on home schooling is pretty lax and local smoking bans have numerous exemptions, but overall Wisconsin ranked 37th in personal freedom.

The only neighboring state to score lower than Wisconsin was Illinois, which had an overall ranking of 42.

(17) Comments
Posted by Owen at 0720 hrs
Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

  1. And the trend is down - that statewide smoking ban doesn’t have a lot of loopholes in it.

    Posted by steveegg on May 08, 2009 at 0848 hrs


  2. So where does Texas rank?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 08, 2009 at 0856 hrs


  3. I’m thinking about voting with my feet in the near future.

    Posted by Matt on May 08, 2009 at 1023 hrs


  4. Now how does that work. Someone doesn’t care about mucking up someone else’s lungs and that is what Wendy Gramm calls a “freedom/”

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 08, 2009 at 1408 hrs


  5. Keith is it a legal product?
    I dont smoke, although i enjoy a fine cigar, once in a while.
    I would not take away another mans freedom to smoke.
    I know when i go out i will face cigarette smoke.
    and i deal with it.
    my dad used to smoke so im used to the smoke.
    It is my choice to go out to a bar, or bowling alley where there is smoke.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 08, 2009 at 1435 hrs


  6. So where does Texas rank?

    Fifth in personal and overall freedom.

    Study: Page 17 rankings

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 08, 2009 at 1447 hrs


  7. So is dynamite.

    But seriously, any product is subject to regulation, like your car.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 08, 2009 at 1802 hrs


  8. Come on keith think about it
    you can drive drunk, sleepy, not pay attention, hot rod etc.etc
    should we take away driving also, make people only walk.
    its a health risk.
    You have to have a better argumant than that.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 08, 2009 at 1821 hrs


  9. Oh the convolutions Keith makes amuse my friends and family to no end.

    If cigarettes are so unhealthy why isn’t the statewide ban in the mostly democrat legislature not a ban on the sale of them?


    Russians have more freedom now than Americans have.  Once they have enough leisure time, like us, liberals will gain a foothold and ruin their society too.  Just like what happened to Rome, Greece, Egypt…

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 08, 2009 at 1840 hrs


  10. That’s good Terry, because you guys amuse the crap out of us. If it weren’t for you all, there would be no Daily Show.

    Well, let’s play softball. Banning cigarettes and banning where you can smoke them are two different things. That, is so darn simple.

    People do “drive drunk, sleepy, not pay attention, hot rod etc.etc,” and they can get their privileges taken away from them.

    People do and can do anything they want. It just turns out that the people of Wisconsin don’t want someone else’s smoke invading someone else’s lungs.

    It’s called respect. Have to introduce you to that concept because the right wing seems to not recognize it.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 08, 2009 at 1938 hrs


  11. OK Keith,

    Lets move to some of the other nanny-state BS shall we?  Why should the state of WI tell me that I can’t take my 5 year old into the hot tub at the local water park to warm up because she isn’t 6?  Why should the state tell me that I am not allowed to buckle that same 5 year old into the car without a booster seat just because she isn’t 8. 

    Just a couple of examples.

    And don’t give me the tired “because we know better and its for your own good” paternalism s**t

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 08, 2009 at 2002 hrs


  12. Russians have more freedom now than Americans have.  Once they have enough leisure time, like us, liberals will gain a foothold and ruin their society too.  Just like what happened to Rome, Greece, Egypt…

    Having read a little history I stand by my words.  Why the fruck does your majority legislature not ban the evil, instead of where you can indulge in it???

    p.s. If you can’t honestly answer this I will enlighten you later…

    p.fuing s.  It has everything to do with the loss of freedom and the realization of revenue.

    But your people insist they have your best interest at heart, WTF that means…

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 08, 2009 at 2101 hrs


  13. Keith,
    Is there a way for you to not have smoke affect you while not affecting my rights?  YES.  You do not have to go into a private establishment.  There!  Problem solved!  You are not exposed to smoke and you do not take away my property rights.  Why isn’t that good enough for you?
    Tad

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 09, 2009 at 0008 hrs


  14. There are SO many other issues; smoking ban is a very minor part of this whole thing.  It’s only 1/76th of the calculation (page 58).  You can see there are any number of more important items.  I fully understand the nanny-state symbolism of smoking bans, but I’ll live with that to get the hand of government out of my pocket.

    Posted by Steve on May 09, 2009 at 0732 hrs


  15. Owen, I strongly suspect, added to the list of limited freedoms in Nov. 2006 when he cast a ballot to make sure gay Wisconsinites had a hard time to wed in the state for a long time.  Not only unable to wed, but as the the amendment read, denying “legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state?”

    So cry me a river about your two-sided views of freedoms.  You can’t have it both ways.

    Posted by Gregory on May 09, 2009 at 2147 hrs


  16. not good enough keith.
    there privilage might be taken away but the car is still there.
    they can still drive.
    nice try

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 10, 2009 at 0835 hrs


  17. I don’t understand you guys - I mean, why do you need freedom, anyways?

    See? I can think just like Keith.  I just had to have my wife pistol whip me until I couldn’t see straight, first.

    Posted by Mike Gallo on May 10, 2009 at 1022 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.