Quote: (07-26-2016 11:40 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:
What are your thoughts on N.D. and S.D., if any?
ND/SD
Growing season: 3b-4a/4a-5a
Tax burden: 8.78%/6.94%
Water: 2.4%/1.7%
ND<SD, but both are certainly viable states, and still remain on my list particularly SD due to lack of an income tax. They both enjoy low population density, a predominantly conservative population, low unemployment, and relatively low tax burdens especially SD. Housing and land are extremely affordable and available there (minus the Bakken in ND). The state govt is smaller and less intrusive than most other states.
The big factor for me, is weather and the resulting growing season. Microclimates certainly exist that can be favorable but if you look at the map here: USDA Plant Hardiness Zones the climate is frigid. Also I think the water % is misleading due to the rivers, as Ive read consistently that wells can be deep, slow, and full of minerals.
There is (was?) a demographic concern, that the smaller towns are literally dying off as the old farmers and farms pass on and their lands get incorporated into bigger farms. There was an initiative a few years back where they were giving away plots of land if you developed it. I list it as a negative here, but a more enterprising man than myself could surely get a head start on a literal empire that way if conditions were right.
A few articles on the free land phenomenon:
Money/CNN
AOL
NYT
Bismark Tribune
So in closing, there are better and worse places to choose but the Dakotas definitely bring some good things to the table, and do so cheaply.