Posted on 03/01/2007 9:43:26 PM PST by skeptoid
The day after the Alaska Permanent Fund lost $630 million - in what may have been the largest one-day loss in the fund's history - members of its board met in Juneau to discuss taking even more risk with fund investments. Done right, the alternative investments to the usual bonds and company stocks could actually reduce losses like Tuesday's, fund managers say.
"This area is in great contrast to conventional stocks and bonds," said Allan Bufferd, advisor to the board.
The Alaska Permanent Fund, created by voters in 1976 to save oil profits for the state's future, has grown steadily. It was at nearly $38 billion Monday, before U.S. and global stock markets fell precipitously.
(Excerpt) Read more at juneauempire.com ...

OH KATHY you may get less money this year thanks to stock market meltdown earlier this week
The Juneau Empire is just another dinasour about to expire, when it thinks its control over access to news available elsewhere is worthy of "membership".
Newspapers (and their liberal opinions) are beyond archaic...as fishwrap, they were long ago replaced by plastic bags & tinfoil, now they are too expensive to use for lighting fires in my wood stoves...save the trees, tell the liberals who run them to get a real job that produces something of higher value than liberal lies about global warming...what a joke...except that liberals are far more dangerous than their subject matter.
Your math is off by a factor of 100. The fund actually took a 1.7% hit.
Thanks, I used my Windows calculator .017....and a lot of other numbers.
The Fund took a 1.7% hit on a day when the Dow was down 3.3% and some international markets fell by 9%. I'd say it's fairly conservatively managed as it is. The article doesn't highlight the Fund's gains over the past year, which I suspect more than offset any of Monday's losses.
I'm sure they will someday, but we sure are having alot of fun keeping it away from them so far. No joke, our politicians in Alaska are even more crooked than the ones back east; REPUBLICANS included. Less people, more money.
Bottomline is that it is always better to let public spend the money than let politicals to spend it for the public.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.