TheMobyDicks t1_itqv6su wrote on October 25, 2022 at 5:14 PM

Reply to comment by pahnzoh in Full video: Don Bolduc answers viewer questions on social media by movdqa

>apologist for the Democrats

Dude. You're out of your mind. I don't apologize for anybody. I fucking hate both parties. Agree that Hassan and Pappas are establishment Dems, just as Chuck Morse and Matt Mowers are establishment Repubs. It's just Bolduc and Leavitt tout ridiculous, election-denying, anti-abortion far-right agendas and I'm not having it.

pahnzoh t1_itqvwrc wrote on October 25, 2022 at 5:18 PM

Those are literally propaganda talking points to play to emotions. The Dems and repubs agree on 95% of governance.

What is the executive, judicial, legislative, and administrative state actually doing under both of their rules?

The same thing maybe to minor degrees of differences.

None of these people are far right. They're all authcenter. Both the Dems and repubs. If you forget the terms and look at what they actually support outside of the 3 social issues that are constantly repeated you'll see very little difference.

Joeyeastman t1_itr6t2h wrote on October 25, 2022 at 6:28 PM

"Those are literally propaganda talking points to play to emotions."

No he has said that multiple times. You lose me right there. I don't want our state to be a circus. I don't want the Boeberts or the AOC's monopolizing time while issues just get forgotten.

He said it. He lost me. It's as simple as that.

TheMobyDicks t1_itqy5ni wrote on October 25, 2022 at 5:33 PM

It's all fucking gridlock. Federal and state. I've punched a few things through the statehouse and it's crazy how so many things are party driven. And if someone goes "rogue" the shit they take is nuts. There are TONS more differences besides the "3 social issues that are constantly repeated". Affordable housing in NH, for example, is a tremendous issue for our state and there has been plenty of sensible legislation that has been proffered. But (and this is just one issue) every time it comes to the floor it's been bastardized in committee or had something that would never pass tacked on to it, etc. Okay, some things have passed on this but they're mostly ineffectual. Fact is, we're working on something now that we've devoted a bunch of time to and are worming our way forward knowing that likely it'll get torpedoed or hung up as a non-vote. And everybody knows how insanely important housing is to our workforce and the drastic demand on companies. I was told - so it's not firsthand - that a manufacturing company on the Seacoast is losing $1 million a month in potential revenue because it can't hire a hundred more workers. And, again, that's just one issue. I hate that the system dictates that if you're one party or another you have to sabotage the other party's efforts. So, yes, an independent.

pahnzoh t1_itr0ew2 wrote on October 25, 2022 at 5:47 PM

That's a problem of not only political party but the idea that you need the state to solve a problem.

The issue with affordable housing is that the state claims legal title to all land not already privately owned and you need to go through the state to own or develop the land.

TheMobyDicks t1_itr4uzc wrote on October 25, 2022 at 6:15 PM

That's so not close to the reality of needed solutions. I'm extremely versed in this matter - asked to speak on it all the time, invited to groups trying to turn the tide, asked to meet with companies having workforce issues, etc. I'm not going to go into it here but there are many issues and few solutions. Yes, enabling legislation that encourages local zoning changes that incentivize such housing stock would be a good place to start but there are many, many more issues. If you want to see who's getting it right, check out Harmony Homes in Durham, who built housing for their workers and are continuing to do so.

Edit: This is good discourse and I appreciate it.

pahnzoh t1_itr6o6n wrote on October 25, 2022 at 6:27 PM

Of course it's way more complex, but it's largely complex because of supply and demand of humans seeking housing, builders and developers, and supply of materials and equipment. The costs of materials and labor is another issue but that's not something the state can solve. All of that is not really related to the government so I didn't mention it.

The state is causing the problem for which you are seeking a solution. If you could homestead unimproved land like you could 200+ years ago, you would solve a major issue. The state through land claims, zoning laws, property laws, local code requirements, etc. is creating artificial barriers to entry. Right now you have to buy property from existing owners at very high prices and not many are selling. But if you look at the actual state of unimproved land there is a lot of it where people could live, in thoery. Satellite images show this vividly.

Yes that's only part of the issue of housing. But again, realistically neither party seeks to change that. Libertarians have a property ethic that fairly deals with property outside of the states current system, but of course that's not on the table.

TheMobyDicks t1_itr8vgy wrote on October 25, 2022 at 6:41 PM

Interesting concept for sure but untenable as, you know, NH and local control and all. Any politician that would champion anything but, would get the brakes beat off 'em. One of the largest problems we have is communities that have no interest in being part of the solution and zone accordingly. One very interesting example of this is the yes vote Exeter took to supply water/sewer to Stratham and the overwhelming no vote Stratham took; Stratham naysayers lobbied the public stating that they don't want multifamily housing as...oh no...schools and "less than desirable people". All BS, of course, but that's the game. The InvestNH $100 million program is seeking to incentivize both developers and municipalities that prioritize affordable housing. This is a drop in the bucket, of course, but it will give the state and us (citizens) some insight into how effective such investment is, if at all.

pahnzoh t1_itra4ma wrote on October 25, 2022 at 6:49 PM

I agree. Because the incentives are so perverse for both voters and politicans. When you setup a system of institutional coercion it's nearly impossible to scale back. People want to use the system for their own benefit to the detriment of others. That's why I have such disdain for the political parties and can't see how adults who have been around long enough still put effort into supporting shitty politicans.