Posted on 08/30/2008 9:10:30 PM PDT by RushingWater
Oh, wait. You said Fed. Now you argue State. So we now agree on ownership.
Regardless of your viewpoint or opinion, or mine, the State can disperse funds in any way the Legislature directs.
You could make the same argument for ownership of many other kinds of property. There is often uncertainty about the condition of a property. The auction price will factor in the uncertainty.
The problem with leasing mineral rights is state control. Politicians assert ownership without any risk of ownership. The result is less production or more production depending on the pricing of leases. Since there is no market for leases, the price will not reflect full information about the mineral rights.
There’s oil workers working and the the supply is getting into the system.
I’ve never heard the democrats claim that, and if they did, they’re wrong because the US Constitution provides no such provision. I’ve only heard the democrats blather on about “punishing” the oil companies for making profit. Alaska is essentially run from oil money, that’s why there’s no income tax. Washington doesn’t depend on oil like Alaska does.
I do not doubt that the state can legally steal royalties. State control of any asset is the opposite of property rights. Property rights have been replaced by political whims. This situation works well for Alaska because these mineral rights are nothing more than a tax on the rest of the country. The rest of the country pays higher energy prices so that each Alaska resident can receive a fake royalty check.
The rats are carefully studying the Alaska model. The rats are going to use the same idea to steal royalties. The result nationally will be disasterous. Domestic energy production will fall and energy prices will rise.
You have not been listening very carefully. The rats are planning the same thing. The rats will pass a law providing royalty checks for selected rat constituents. There is no conceptual difference between a federal law and a part of a state constitution. Both accomplish the same thing: legalized theft of private property.
Those who defend this Alaska law should also agree with the rat plans for a windfall profits tax. If you disagree, I suspect it may be self interest. Perhaps you are a recipient of the Alaska royalty scam.
Giving the checks directly to the citizens of Alaska is better than giving it away to illegal aliens like we do out here in California.
I object to you using the word steal. But that’s ok, I just want it noted.
“The rats are going to use the same idea to steal royalties”
I really don’t think so. I think a very strong case against using it can be made. Alaska is unique in many ways. That being so, the issues they have to deal with are unlike the issues we have to deal with, and therefore, also require unique solutions.
The solution Alaska came up with works for them, but , more than likely, would not work for us. You’re the business professor, I’m sure you can see that.
peace.
See the following link please:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/1596.html
Seems this was in the works when Governor Palin was sworn in.
Alaskan Legislatures voted 15-4 in May 2006 for this “Windfall Profits Tax”. Governor was Murkowsky at the time.
I’d need to read the links at the article for further understanding of what Governor Palin’s involvement was, but I am up beyond my bedtime now.
Seems that in more than a dozen articles I’ve been researching, there isn’t any explanation of the tax better than the one at the link above, but still no explanation of how Gov. Palin is involved other than perhaps (a personal assumption) signing the hangover legislation from the previous Administration.
I DON’T KNOW.
If I have time tomorrow to persue this more, I will. I want to know all about this as I disagree with “Windfall Profits Taxes”.
I don’t necessarily agree with the policy; however, the Governor of a state is obliged to follow the Constitution of that state. And after the VECO scandal (see above), the state had to restructure it’s tax system.
And no I am not a recipient.
Actually, I don’t have a problem with what she did. We just did something similar in this country when we got our rebate checks of $600 or more from our Fed. Gov’t for the same reason, high gas prices and a bad economy. Actually, I don’t have a problem with rebates to our citizens (as long as it is fairly and equally done and it’s to those that actually pay taxes). Heck, the Fed Gov’t has no problem taking our money, so anytime we get it back is fine by me. It’s money that I can choose how to spend rather than being in the hands of the Feds who will spend or squander it in ways I don’t like. To me this is a plus. It’s like we paid less taxes, because part of what we did have to pay comes back to us directly.
Now, a windfall profit tax is a horse of a different feather, because then the money goes to the gov’t to spend, rather than back to the people. I think what Palin did here was fine. As I understand it, Alaska has the highest gas prices of any state in the U.S. I find this ironic, as they are sitting on a pile of oil, but of course, the environmental whackos and the leftist Dems won’t let anyone drill for it. What a joke.
I agree that the governor should follow state law. I disagree about her support for the new law. I think that rats will use the Alaska law as a guideline for their windfall profits tax.
The US Constitution has a takings clause that is a protection for private property rights. The issue of mineral rights on government property is a loophole around the takings clause. I do not doubt that individual states can claim public control of mineral rights.
Public control of mineral rights is bad policy. It is essentially nationalization. Nationalization of energy industries has led to under investment, low production, and higher energy prices.
The residents of Alaska should be aware that other states can play the same game. For example, if our idiot rat legislators ever let us develop oil shale, Colorado can claim state control and tax the rest of the country for energy extracted in Colorado. I bet that the residents of Colorado would be happy to receive royalty checks funded by energy users in other states. The companies actually extracting the energy will not be happy to send royalty checks to people who have not ownership risk. If energy companies can find an alternative, they will produce oil elsewhere. Otherwise they will raise energy prices for everyone.
I should have said "legally steal", not "steal". Property theft is a criminal violation. Legalized theft is not a criminal violation. Morally, I think that legalized theft is wrong. Unfortunately, many recipients of legalized theft support it so the practice is becoming common. The income tax structure is legalized theft especially the rat proposals for huge tax increases on a select group of citizens. The rats have convinced many voters that they are entitled to the property of others. The rats have also convinced voters that there will not be negative consequences from legalized theft.
“Hey, leave him alone. He’s a business professor. /humor”
thanks, I’ll try - but it’s hard to resist, ya’know? :-)))
So, would it be alright with you if the taxpayers of Colorado vote to cut off the taxpayer dollars wasted on Business Professors in your state?
You have some sharp argumentative skills. Please tell me how your comment has anything to do with the points under discussion. Your comment is just a personal attack without relevance to the discussion.
Nobody that I know likes taxes, certainly not me, and obviously not you. LOL But I do realize the need for them, so I’m happy to pay a reasonable amount. I do expect a “return” though. And that’s where I get my back up. But, that’s a subject for a different thread.
The reason I object to using the word steal, is because it’s not stealing. We vote on these things, and voting is tantamount to signing a contract. That is your “transaction”. If you sell me something at an enormously high price, more than it’s real value, but I agree to it, did you steal from me?
Nobody is entitled to anything that they didn’t pay for. But Alaskans do pay more for everything because of where they live. Most of them live there because our Government enticed them, or their earlier Families, to move up there and settle the land. We needed that to happen to make Alaska viable, and Alaska is a very important State to us. Resource and National security wise. There is a price tag on all of that, and revenue sharing is a part of it. It’s part of the unique solution to some of their unique issues.
Now, if you really want a cause to rant against regarding taxes and handouts, let’s jump on Amtrak and the railroads! LOL
Kondracke’s performance really surprised me too. Normally he is pretty even-keeled but he really seems to have lost his equilibrium when it comes to Palin. Hope he can regain some measure of detachment as he is one of the more moderate voices out there.
You are right. I do not object to taxation. I object to tyrrany of the majority in which a majority votes high taxes on the minority. The taxation burden should be shared with equal rates on all groups.
I see no need for the residents of Alaska to receive royalty checks. Residents of Alaska are free to live elsewhere. Any state can vote itself royalty checks in the same way. The results will be higher energy prices and less production. The residents of Alaska have gotten away with this scheme because there are relatively few residents and lots of energy in Alaska.
The state of Alaska has set a precedent for the rats to demand a windfall profits tax. I am not sure that McCain will be able to stop this bad law.
“I object to tyrrany of the majority in which a majority votes high taxes on the minority.”
Bingo! That’s it, right there. That is where the effort needs to go, and nip it at it’s roots.
One of these days a device will be created an implanted in all politicians and public servants. It will be a lie detector. Then, we will stand a chance.
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.