Sarah Palin Shares the Wealth with Alaskans

How is income tax differant from socialism? Seems about the same imo

This "OBAMA is a socialist" is a bunch of crap. AND yes if one wants to stoop down to the Mccain Palin level you can use the Alaska oil share the wealth argument. I ,however think its all Bull. Palin aint stupid, she just says stupid things.

If the question is "is nationalizing natural resources and providing the profits to the taxpayers socialism" then the answer is a resounding "YES". That is one of the main tenets of socialism, and what we are ostracizing Venezuela and Bolivia for. I also agree that it is integral to the health of communities as well, and a practice we should enact all around the country. The people own the resources just as much as the corporations do, and if the corporations are allowed to profit from reaping nonrenewable materials from the land, they owe a debt to the people who pay taxes in that state.

Many in Alaska work out in the Oil Fields, and the ONLY Major revenue source in Alaska aside from Fishing, is in fact Oil. Much of the employment is seasonal as well, since you need hard-packed Winter Permafrost to move the Platforms. Due to this, I know quite a few folks up there who are left to their own resources during the Off-Season, and they make money through whatever means they may encounter. Some of them Trap for Fur, others run Tours, and the lucky ones manage to find room on a Fishing Vessel. Offering such a payment in this environment, is in effect issuing Government Stimulus Cheques.

BTW, the Socialism issue with Senator Obama is not just about his "Wealth Redistribution" plan, it also has to do with his efforts to Nationalize Health Care, and Nationalize Education.

Also, reintroducing leftover revenue into the Market is not "Spreading the Wealth", as you are not penalizing Citizens through the increased Taxes of one Income Level, while decreasing the Taxes and increasing the Payments to another Income Level. Everyone who paid Federal Income Taxes received a Government Stimulus Cheque Last year, which essentially represents a Tax Rebate. This is not Socialism, it is a fund reimbursement.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


That wealth didn't rightfully belong to an individual in the Palin case. It Belonged to a company.. and I beleive its called profit sharing, sort of like dividends for a stock. What Obama wants to do is take out of my pocket that I worked for. When you dig directly into my pocket to give money to someone else I have a problem with that. Government should not mandate charity.

while nationalizing healthcare and education are both great ideas, Obama has no serious plans to do either. Regardless, taxing the top 5% more and the rest less is a form of nationalization of resources, because most of the top 5% are getting their income from american resources, so its really taking the profit from these resources and returning it to some of the people it belongs to, the american taxpayers.

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
BTW, the Socialism issue with Senator Obama is not just about his "Wealth Redistribution" plan, it also has to do with his efforts to Nationalize Health Care, and Nationalize Education..

Hmmm..... maybe I should vote for Obama instead of Ron Paul after all.

Thanks for the remind

Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic

The hypocrisy here is delicious... Palin is absolutely no more and no less a Socialist than is Obama...

Those are my thoughts. Neither of them are Socialists. One is a Democrat and the other is a Republican.

[edit on 30-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

Originally posted by daddyroo45
It's not like they are taking money away from some people and giving it to others.

Sorry, but yes they are!

Share holders and Stake holders in those companies are losing a revenue percentage because of this.

Therefore it is total hypocrisy that she labels Obama a socialist when she is implementing policies that take money from the wealthy oil companies and distribute that wealth to the residents of Alaska.

I am for Obamas policies and to be honest I think what Palin has done here is a good idea, however, unfortunately my friend, this is a case of the kettle calling the pot black!

Originally posted by Doom and Gloom
The "spread the wealth" from the Obama campaign is more of YOUR tax dollars and give them to more social programs for people that in MOST cases do not work.

This is a DIFFERENT type of share the wealth. I guess it is hard to understand I don't know...

Nice play on "distribution of wealth" by the way. Twist more please...

[edit on 29-10-2008 by Doom and Gloom]

This ISN'T a different kind of "share the wealth", this is a MORE "socialist/commie/marxist" policy than Obama's version that would see tax dollars being spent IN America on social programs that WORK! Rather than taking a companies profits and sharing it amongst residents, simply because they live in the proximity of the companies.

I would RATHER my tax dollars go to supporting fellow American families and communities than to building bridges and bases in the Middle East.

Do you know what would be possible with the billions of dollars that we spend in Middle East, if it were spent at home?

The fact of the matter is tax dollars being spent on Americans ISN'T a socialist thing to do, it's the RIGHT thing to do and believe me it is way overdue.

I would prefer the fruits of my labour going to Americans than towards bullets in innocent peoples heads, like the 8 innocent civilians that were MURDERED by US troops under the command of Bush/Cheney just the other day in Syria. This is a war crime, and unfortunately, as usual, no one is held accountable as this current regime literally does whatever it wants wherever it wants, without any consequence.

Now just imagine what John McCain's explosive temper would be like behind the red button? This guy will single handedly destroy the international image of the nation, America is already thought of as the "tyrant" by other nations, we need to restore the good image of the nation. We live in a global community, it's the year 2008, let's move forward and evolve... SOCIALLY!

[edit on 30-10-2008 by IceColdPro]

You understand that there is a difference between federal and state, right? Right?

Moot point. Drum up something else, comrade.

reply to post by SolarSeaman


...and may I ask where you THINK I have confused the difference between state government and federal government?

It's debatable as to whether what Palin is doing in Alaska is 'socialist' or not.

However, I'm pretty sure that at least some of the people arguing that it isn't would be adamant that it typified the most vile Marxist, socialist, communistic practice imaginable if it was Obama who was the Governor of Alaska and not Palin.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Can someone explain... why is Obama a Socialist Communist Marxist when he wants to share the wealth, but Palin, who has put it into practice in her state, criticizes Obama for it?

It's simple. She oversees a state that brings in wealth due to their energy resources.

She gives the money back to the citizens.

Unlike Obama, who asks us to empty our wallets to redistribute.

Simple. Understand now?

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

But he won't be taking more of my tax dollars as I don't make over $250,000 per year.

Oh sweetie, I love you but....

Call me when your taxes get oppressive and you need a few bucks.

Originally posted by jsobecky

It's simple. She oversees a state that brings in wealth due to their energy resources.

She gives the money back to the citizens.

Unlike Obama, who asks us to empty our wallets to redistribute.

Simple. Understand now?

I understand that you are trying to be reasonable when you explain Palin and absolutely outlandish when you explain Obama

Empty our wallets???

If you want to be taken seriously then speak seriously. Realistically.

Originally posted by spacedoubt
Nevada is trying to get a similar deal.
Many mining companies are pulling gold from our state.
A high percentage of them are not even American companies.
They pay little or no royalties to Nevada. They say they are creating jobs in the industry, however, few locals are employed. The only real boost is from these non-locals throwing a little cash around the nearby Wal-marts.

Wow! You need a better governor.

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Can someone explain... why is Obama a Socialist Communist Marxist when he wants to share the wealth, but Palin, who has put it into practice in her state, criticizes Obama for it?

It's simple. She oversees a state that brings in wealth due to their energy resources.

She gives the money back to the citizens.

Unlike Obama, who asks us to empty our wallets to redistribute.

Simple. Understand now?

If you think that you are going to have to empty your wallets when Obama becomes president then you CLEARLY haven't read his tax or economic policies. It's a shame that you haven't fully evaluated each candidate, I wonder if there is another, more face value reason to which you aren't voting for Obama in the "RACE for the white house"

reply to post by Open_Minded Skeptic


Just stop.

Palin increased the taxes because the oilcos were raping Alaska...

The oilcos are big boys. If it wasn't worth their effort, they would pack up and go home. Obama would make them stay "for the good of the needy".

State Sen. Hollis French, an Anchorage Democrat who supported the windfall tax, said the oil companies " ... were literally printing money on the North Slope. We decided to strike the balance a little bit more on our side."

Read that? A DEM said that...

There's a difference between a dividend and a robbery.

reply to post by IceColdPro


I don't think it's a race thing.

I think it's a party loyalist thing.

This program is not unlike the royalties that private land owners receive from natural gas wells and cell phone towers.

The money in Alaska is not being drawn from a targeted group of tax paying citizens. The money is also equally distributed regardless of ones personal wealth.