It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Alaskans get $1,174 checks from state's oil wealth

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by coldfiremx
 



Yep, mine will be direct deposited on October 6th along with my wifes and my daughters. You know, most of you on here ranting obviously do not know how the fund works. Go to school before I school you... Hmmm Alaska profits from oil and mind you a politician actually thought hey maybe we can give some of the profits to the residents of the state instead of keeping it for ourselves. If they didn't invest and distribute the fund as they do now, I would like to know your thoughts on where the $40 billion dollar fund would be today.


I would imagine that the cost of living is a little more expensive up there than in the lower states. I know with Canada's northern areas, food costs a lot more due to shipping into the cold north, dealing with the weather in the winter.

Those cheques help offset the cost a tiny bit.
I think it's a good thing that the state shares in the profits.




posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by David9176
 


what i find hilarious is your anti corporate rants

and then make a thread defending government subsidies

the most funny part here is if those evil big oil companies werent profiting

they wouldnt be paying out that check.................hmmm
edit on 20-9-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


You should do a little looking around, Alaskan politicians are being (insert creative word here) and not fighting for our share of the profits. Shell is basically saying they won't pay to explore oil, they just want to go and take it and sell it to us. I'm OK with that but, not when I am paying $4.09 a gallon for gas at the pump.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 08:58 PM
link   
I hear the great state of Texas would all receive those checks too ,, But the gov gets them instead..
Alaska was the only state able to hold out and not give the gov the money ..?? .



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by hbarker
 

And we are told that Western Pennsylvania is the new gold rush via a natural gas bonanza. Where are our checks? Even better, where are the promised jobs? Neither are present.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 10:04 PM
link   
The state of Alaska has ownership of all it's commodities. The capitalist then lease the ability to produce the oil and pay the state in royalties which is then distributed to the owners, the people of the state. This is a completely hybrid system of socialism and capitalism which we should be repeating nationwide. Why do most people think that rich capiotalists should have ownership of the state's and country's resources. It boggles the mind. Socialism means that the people own the resources and the means of production of a country. Nothing more than that.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by hbarker
I hear the great state of Texas would all receive those checks too ,, But the gov gets them instead..
Alaska was the only state able to hold out and not give the gov the money ..?? .


the Permanent Fund was created by an amendment to the Alaska Constitution to be an investment for at least 25% of proceeds from some mineral (such as oil and gas) sales or royalties.

also believed that the legislature too quickly and too inefficiently spent the $900 million bonus the state got in 1969 after leasing out the oil fields. This belief spurred a desire to put some oil revenues out of direct political control.


that was from Wikipedia. I know of atleast one politician that tried to take away the permanent fund and pretty sure he was blackballed and didn't win re election.


post by snowfire


I would imagine that the cost of living is a little more expensive up there than in the lower states. I know with Canada's northern areas, food costs a lot more due to shipping into the cold north, dealing with the weather in the winter.

Those cheques help offset the cost a tiny bit.
I think it's a good thing that the state shares in the profits.



It is, you have to be very careful of where you order online, I was looking at ordering something off the internet. and it was about $20 but shipping was I believe about $35. That happens pretty frequently. Food and everything else is a little more expensive too.
edit on 20-9-2011 by sandman441 because: (no reason given)


I'm using mine to go to Vegas.
edit on 20-9-2011 by sandman441 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by sligtlyskeptical
 

Very well put.Right now I wish they would build an all Alaska gas line but politicians politics are holding it up. They want to make money, the residents just want more affordable resources. It is more expensive to live here. Right off the bat, everyone has to have 2 sets of tires. Summer and Winter studded or non studded. Winter tires are not cheap. My car was $1000 bucks my wife's car about the same. Heating a house in sub-zero temperatures is not cheap. Cold weather apparel that holds up to Alaska's rough winters is not cheap. Car repairs due to the extreme climate are not cheap. Food is waaaaay overpriced due to transportation costs. We don't have a dollar menu like all the other McDonalds or other fast food, it's the $1.50 menu. Everything costs more up here. I personally shop on Amazon a lot because of the free super saver shipping. Whenever I shop on eBay I cant get the products that are priced decently because the sellers will not deal with Alaska whatsoever. It's not a normal life up here. As for the state, I love how Alaska is so much different than any other state.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by coldfiremx
I personally shop on Amazon a lot because of the free super saver shipping. Whenever I shop on eBay I cant get the products that are priced decently because the sellers will not deal with Alaska whatsoever. It's not a normal life up here. As for the state, I love how Alaska is so much different than any other state.


amazon is awesome but I've had some good luck getting books off of ebay for pretty decent shipping, But alot of them (even on amazon) will not ship up here at all.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by coldfiremx
 



Yep, mine will be direct deposited on October 6th along with my wifes and my daughters. You know, most of you on here ranting obviously do not know how the fund works. Go to school before I school you... Hmmm Alaska profits from oil and mind you a politician actually thought hey maybe we can give some of the profits to the residents of the state instead of keeping it for ourselves. If they didn't invest and distribute the fund as they do now, I would like to know your thoughts on where the $40 billion dollar fund would be today.


Good for you and your family
It just struck me that every resident gets a check, not just every family. And as far as socialism, how is that socialism? The way I see it, it is a fee levied on the oilcos for doing business in AK. And at the end of the year, there are excess funds in the fee pool.

So what should a state govt do with excess funds? Disperse them among the residents is one option, and that is the option that AK chose. States rights, nobody else's business, I say.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 



Well, if Alaska ever wants more people, this would be all they need to say. No pictures of wildlife or pristine wilderness and waterways. No glacier shots. Just a dividend check on the screen. When a job fair brings thousands and McDonalds hiring draws 50,000 apps in a short period, I think Alaska would need do nothing more than run a couple commercials. Word of mouth would do the rest. I really doubt many people in the lower 48 have any clue about the dividends and how they are distributed. Well they didn't until reading this anyway.


It would be the cheapest commercial ever made.... just a picture of a check, and a catchy slogan.


Btw, you do know that that 50,000 hiring by McD's was a quid pro quo with Obama, don't you? Obama got better unemployment numbers for a month and McD's go a waiver from Obamacare.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by coldfiremx
 




You should do a little looking around, Alaskan politicians are being (insert creative word here) and not fighting for our share of the profits. Shell is basically saying they won't pay to explore oil, they just want to go and take it and sell it to us. I'm OK with that but, not when I am paying $4.09 a gallon for gas at the pump.


I had heard that Gov. Palin fought the oilcos for the good of the residents. True?



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 02:28 AM
link   
I dig it. As the federals suck at, well, anything, and a one size fits all type of thing doesn't work, I wouldn't want it on that level, but it's their state and I do believe that was the intention of the Constitution, states rights. Sort of led to the Civil War.

That issue never got solved, legally, but I digress.....

I don't pay state tax because the casinos pay it for me, have at it. Get ticked off. Different states, different laws.

If you guys wanna argue what kind of -ism it is, have at it. I'm too stupid for that argument. Seems like that's where the thread is going and I will respectfully decline that portion of the show.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 02:40 AM
link   
reply to post by mishigas
 


Yes, Palin was pro alaska in the respect that she did not want the oil companies running rampant and rolling over the citizens of the state. We're talking about land leases that people like exxon would let sit for decades and not develop which was the condition for the leases to begin with.

Also take into consideration that less than 2% of alaska is actually developed with any kind of real infastructure so yes, getting around the state if your rural is a pain in the butt. The cost of living rural is up to 400% greater than living in say......South Carolina. I could easily take the money I make here in Alaska and live in Carolina and not have to work in Carolina. We make more dollars, but the cost of living offsets that. Not to mention that the winters aren't for the timid.

The economy is stable here for now, yet if you plan to move here I recommend having a plan before you do. Lots of people get stuck here and are unable to go home, and then become homeless. Still I wouldn't want to live anywhere else, and I've been many places in my travels.

BTW, Alaskans are not socialists, or otherwise....in fact they are mostly conservative capitolists and primarily libertarian or alternative.....communism really wouldn't work here considering the unique set up of the Alaskan Constitution as it's more geared for liberty than anything else. More so I'd say than anywhere else for sure.

They collect a dividend from the state because they saw what happened to other states and didn't want to wind up with the sticky end of the lolipop. Alaska makes the oil company come out the pocket to develop the resources and the cost of oil exploration here is much higher for them. SO if they want it, they gotta work for it.

Thats my take.....



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 03:07 AM
link   
reply to post by BooKrackers


reply to post by mishigas

Yes, Palin was pro alaska in the respect that she did not want the oil companies running rampant and rolling over the citizens of the state. We're talking about land leases that people like exxon would let sit for decades and not develop which was the condition for the leases to begin with.

Also take into consideration that less than 2% of alaska is actually developed with any kind of real infastructure so yes, getting around the state if your rural is a pain in the butt. The cost of living rural is up to 400% greater than living in say......South Carolina. I could easily take the money I make here in Alaska and live in Carolina and not have to work in Carolina. We make more dollars, but the cost of living offsets that. Not to mention that the winters aren't for the timid.

The economy is stable here for now, yet if you plan to move here I recommend having a plan before you do. Lots of people get stuck here and are unable to go home, and then become homeless. Still I wouldn't want to live anywhere else, and I've been many places in my travels.


Ahh, maybe a younger me would consider the move; these old bones wouldn't survive an AK winter... So I'll just live my AK life vicariously by watching Ice Road Truckers.



BTW, Alaskans are not socialists, or otherwise....in fact they are mostly conservative capitolists and primarily libertarian or alternative.....communism really wouldn't work here considering the unique set up of the Alaskan Constitution as it's more geared for liberty than anything else. More so I'd say than anywhere else for sure.


That's encouraging to hear. The opposite of much of the east coast. And left coast, also.


They collect a dividend from the state because they saw what happened to other states and didn't want to wind up with the sticky end of the lolipop. Alaska makes the oil company come out the pocket to develop the resources and the cost of oil exploration here is much higher for them. SO if they want it, they gotta work for it.

Thats my take.....


That's a topic unto itself. There was an oilco that was stopped because of CO2 from an icebreaker might affect a small village. That seems unlikely, with all that wide open air up there, but AK gets the last word on that, seeing as it's their state.

What's the people's feeling on developing ANWR?

edit on 21-9-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 03:27 AM
link   
They care about their citizens in Alaska. They want to be sure that everybody is able to pay their heating/ electricity bill and will not ever get stuck with his car in the middle of nowhere.

Anyways...some rich countries charge close to nothing import, income or whatever taxes. The unlucky ones got born in the wrong country.......or wrong family.

edit on 21/9/2011 by zatara because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by mishigas
And as far as socialism, how is that socialism? The way I see it, it is a fee levied on the oilcos for doing business in AK. And at the end of the year, there are excess funds in the fee pool.


That's got socialism written all over it, the government forcing the private corporation to share their profit with the citizens of the state. Primarily for using the natural resources that, get this, belong to the citizens of the state!

Imagine if the coal companies were forced to share 25% of their profits with the citizens of West Virginia...or if the natural gas companies were forced to share 25% of their profits with the citizens of Pennsylvania.

Farmers are some of the most conservative voters in the country, a lot of them are members of local co-ops, sharing equipment, profits and labor with their neighbors...one of the most socialist practices imaginable!

The benefits of socialism are all around America and we're blind to them, blind because of the 20th century red scare. Grow up America.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 04:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by hypr2011
its the same with Alberta, they get so much money from their oil that they pay each resident for living there. They are an area where they are a have province vs Ontario which isn't


Really? Where do I sign up? Because I live in Alberta and neither me nor anybody I have ever met gets this. When I was a teenager, the government did mail out two $150 rebates, which we half-jokingly termed 'vote-buying', but other than that, this statement is absolutely false. Alberta practically gives its oil away to the energy companies with the tiny royalties we charge.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


Socialism? Yes and no....while that may be an example of such...I assure you the citizens themselves are quite robust and savor their personal freedom. Alaska's gun laws and their lax stance with marijuanna is a fine example of that as its not based on those two issues specifically, it's based on privacy which is highly valued up here.

The rule generally is, if you aint buggin no one, no one is gonna bug you and thats the way they like it. That and the unique challenges of living within the state set a precedant for a different approach to laws and civil rights within the state.

Many do not even see their free money as it can be garnished rather easily by the state for whatever reason if the applicant is in the rears on child support or any other owed state fine or debt. We have an abundance of resources, but barely the ability to apply its use locally. Hence the cost of natural gas and otherwise tends to be well above the national average.

Still, if the SHTF, this is definatly the state you want to live in. The independance here alone is good reason for that.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by BooKrackers
 


Are you suggesting you can't have personal freedom and socialism at the same time?

If you'd like to ask me, directly, on the views of various topics that socialists may have just send me a message, no need to discuss some of those topics here.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 05:15 AM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


All I'm saying is they do things differently here is all, the goverment generally does not interfere with personal freedom within the state is what Im saying. The dividend program wasn't meant to be a socialist type entitlement program orginally....Yet I can see how it may be taken as such.

If you want a real doozy, some of the native corps here pay out much bigger annual dividends from the oil companies that most don't hear about. One in paticular pays out roughly 4000.- a person every winter and then about 1-2000.- every spring....based on per 100 shares of the native corp as they also lease the land to the oil companies (the land not owned by the state). Not to mention the Gov contracts and stock market returns (based on oil revenue and oil prices)

Not trying to brow beat anyone, just stating a perception is all. It's complicated I guess.




top topics



 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join