Posted on 09/05/2011 9:32:08 PM PDT by Brices Crossroads
And when the Salmon Run!! Yum.
Still looking for that source. This appears to be a vanity. Too bad it’s so inaccurate.
There’s Fred Mertz’ site, Liberty’s with “rules for Palin Postings” could that be the source? Doesn’t look like it.
http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=20711
Found another possible source crediting “StaffWriter” - but it bounces back to FreeRepublic. So FR?
Starts here at Mike Pence for President 2012, http://pence4president.com/2011/09/palin-postings%E2%80%93the-phon/
Yeah. What you said. Fishing in Alaska is like fishing in Heaven.
As a resident of Alaska, knowing that everything has to be barged up here I can safely state that it would be impossible to “live of the funds that are taken from the oil companies”.
Things cost a lot less in the lower 48, yet could you live off of 1200 bucks for a year? I live in a fixed up one bedroom trailer out of town and its $1100 bucks a month for rent. Its pretty hard to eat for a year off of 100 bucks, specially when its 20 below zero and you have no place to live inside for the other 11 months a year.
As for the oil wealth, we pay a quarter more a gallon for gas here than down there. The oil companies get their cut just fine. They always do.
As for having it easy on the federal largess, they have not even built roads between all the towns up here. Most places you want to get to, you have to fly. Far as I know, there is a road from every town to everywhere down there. You want to argue what is fair, I would say, finish building the highways in Alaska so it can grow, before you fix up yours for the umpteenth time.
As an Alaskan, I would LOVE for the Feds to stop sending us money, and just go away. Heck, in a couple of years we would have a LOT more money than the Feds do. For that matter, we do right now.
This is the frontier, there is oil, and gold, and copper and fish and wood and land up here. You just can’t do anything with it because the Feds stole it all and won’t let you sneeze without an environmental report. I work in a mine, but unlike mining for the rest of history, now we have to mine without pumping the water out. Isn’t it amazing, that a hole in the ground that is 6 inches or less is a well and is good enough to drink, but a hole that is larger than six inches is a mine and is the water is “too poisonous” to put on the ground. Pretty hard to dig underwater ya know.
But then the government is not about helping America grow these days, its about shutting it down.
How about we do this calculation based on square miles serviced by those federal dollars? Suddenly Alaska is at the end of the list not the top. Lies, damned lies and statistics. In that order...
Alaska produces more money for the Feds and America per federal dollar at less cost per square mile than any other State in the union.
We only have 600,000 people up here! Its a pretty cheap shot to figure per capita. How many people in Texas? How much Oil and mineral production per capita there vs here? Hmmmm?
Now that is a bit more fair, not what we cost per capita, but what we produce.
The destiny that we see for Alaska is to support America, so get the Feds off of our back so we can balance the budget ok? We don’t need them to do their thing up here and spend their money on themselves and their projects. We need to do our thing and make money for us all. And the best half of alaska that they “manage”? Save them and you money, give it back to us. All they produce is poop on that land. We can produce something usable besides just poop and red tape.
Is this a two-year budget cycle? So the $31 billion is over two years?
-George
Yes though my main point was that the original poster quoted a figure from the current budget to rebut the thread starter’s facts about the new budget.
And yet the same article shows the thread starter was mostly correct about the new budget!
So what’s your issue, precisely? That Texas is facing a deficit?
So Texas will slash spending — because Texas won’t raise taxes.
If that’s the strategy, so what? Is there a problem with those two actions? Those both sound like GREAT decisions.
If you have a problem with cutting spending rather than raising taxes — mayhap you should also post this on DU? One might suspect you would have a greater comfort level with the DUmmies.
-George
Yes, here’s an article from March 2008 about her raising taxes, withdrawing a contract from Exxon, putting the contract out to bid - it eventually went to a Canadian oil company, which has since subcontracted with Exxon.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a13e84JyS2B8
“”Palin threatened to evict Exxon Mobil Corp., the world’s biggest oil company, and partners BP Plc, Chevron Corp. and ConocoPhillips from a state-owned gas field, winning their promise to increase Alaska’s natural-gas output 17 percent. She raised taxes on oil profits by $1.5 billion a year and rejected industry ownership of a $25 billion pipeline. “”
Here’s an article with all sorts of numbers and statistics:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008103325_alaskatax07.html
“”Alaska collected an estimated $6 billion from the new tax during the fiscal year that ended June 30, according to the Alaska Oil and Gas Association. That helped push the state’s total oil revenue — from new and existing taxes, as well as royalties — to more than $10 billion, double the amount received last year.””
I’m not saying she was wrong — it looked like the oil men were waiting for bigger profits.
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.