Alaska Permanent Fund (Socialism at its finest)

[oneighty]

I have been doing a bit of research re-'The Fund'. It is a grand scheme which should be adopted by the lower forty-eight states and of course Hawaii.

It is very socialistic and it is a wonder the Feds have not put a stop to it. How does this scheme influence thinking on more oil drilling in Alaska? How does it influence politics in Alaska?

What do Alaska's DUers think?

180

[Blue_In_AK]

1. We love our Permanent Fund...

...and whenever those guys down in Juneau start talking about getting into it, we all go NUTZ.

[Broken_Hero]

20. yeah no doubt...

but i miss mine nowadays, since i'm in missouri...damn!!!...:)

[DenaliDemocrat]

2. It's not socialist....

it's smart. The oil is drilled on PUBLIC (state) lands. Why should the citizens of the state not reap some benefit from the use of their lands??????


It is a great concept. The public actually reaping the benefits of public lands instead of the bureacrats.

[cleofus1]

3. it's really capitalism at it's finest!

It's a dividend...just like when you own stock in a company...at the end of the year you get a dividend...

the state owns the subsurface rights to the land. we are the state...the state leases those sub surface rights to companies that develop the land...the profits are put into state coffers and the permanent fund...each year a portion of the profits are used as a payout to the shareholders, who are the citizens of the state...

a great idea....don't you think?

I think most Alaskans support responsible development of natural resources...and the profits pay for education and medical and roads and you name it...it helps the poor and the natives and really everyone who lives here...

[oneighty]

4. Yes. It is a great idea

AS I said I am surprised the Federal Government puts up with it. It is almost communistic in its simplicity.

I am in New York State. I do not own the area beneath the surface of my property. (Mineral rights) I am not sure who does own them. I do know that there are plenty of gas wells in the area. When a gas well is on ones property they get free gas and nothing more.

I also notice at the APF site that the highest dividend ($1,963) was in the year 2000 and in the year 2004 it fell down to ($919.84). This difference in the dividend is a reflection of the function of the stock markets and other investments made by the APF. It is a cautionary tale for those that are selling the personal investment accounts to supplement (Or replace) social security.

Anyway thank for your inputs. And I hope for the best for our Alaska citizens. One of my favorites was Robert Service. (The Cremation of Sam McGee).

180

[DenaliDemocrat]

5. The Cremation of Sam McGee

I read that story last year on a caribou hunt in the Brooks range. I was up high on a rige and was eating my dehydrated dinner. I was sore from packing a bull back to camp over two miles. It it a good story.

[oneighty]

6. Robert Service poems

are a hard read!

180

[Bandit]

7. You are right about the rest of America should adopt same

principle of this being our land. You are wrong about it being socialistic or communistic. It is Capitalistic and really no longer has much to do with oil at all. It is a Bank Account that shares the interest earned with the owners of the account (Alaskans).

[Emperor Bob]

8. Yes, it's socialism.

The 'State' owns the land. As citizens of the 'State' we receive a dividend. We are not the owners, the State is. If citizens were the owners, then we could take our share to Florida or Arizona when we retire. No matter how you shake it, that's socialism. Now, I'm not saying that is bad necessarily, but you can't deny what it is.

I understand the theory behind the Permanent Fund, but I've never been comfortable with the implementation. I think it is wrong for government at any level to take money that is not necessary for the good of the citizens. The fact that the State has a billion dollar savings account is fundamentally wrong.

[cleofus1]

9. damn bob

the state does not own the land...
your whole thesis is based on a false premise...

[Emperor Bob]

10. Then who does?

The oil companies don't own the land. They are just lease holders. Unless you want to quibble over the difference between owning the land and owning the sub-surface mineral and oil rights. However you want to classify it, the 'State' owns the asset that produces the income. Not the citizens of the state.

[cleofus1]

11. details are come to by research

people shouldn't just talk out of ignorance...and the legalities of owning sub surface rights is not quibbling...it is written and contractual capitalist business modeling...

the northslope burough "owns" the land...at least that part...you seem to want to simplifiy things until they suit your argument...

and then you make statements that you expect people to accept prima facie...

as far as i'm concerned the ciizens are the state...

[Emperor Bob]

12. Ignorance?

Wow! Pretty harsh response without providing anything of substance to refute my opinion. The best you can come up with is "as far as I'm concerned the citizens are the state..." And you think I simplify things to suite my argument? I don't think you can get more simple minded than that.

[cleofus1]

13. sorry bobby

but i'm not alone in that politcial philosophy that the people are the state...it is written into the U.S. constitution and the Alaskan constitution...it is also put forth in greek political writings and in the writings of our founding fathers...

i know this type of thinking is hard to remember and sometimes hard to find...they hide it in books...

[Emperor Bob]

14. Do you get out much?

Seems like you have a fairly active fantasy life, if you actually believe that ideal you reference is anything close to the reality of our world today.

You're mixing economic and political terms, ideas, and theory, as if they were interchangeable. They are not. But of course you know that since you are so well read and informed.

[cleofus1]

15. sorry bobby

i thought you wanted references...butif the constitution does not hold water with you then you are not of this earth...

talking about fantasy life...just what exactly are you emperor of?

[Emperor Bob]

16. Reading Comprehension

cleofus1 where did I say your references didn't 'hold water'. I said you were mixing terminology and applying it inappropriately in my opinion. The US constitution lays out in general terms the political relationship the citizens and states of the country have with the government of the country. The State Constitution says that the states natural resources should be managed to benefit the citizens of the states. Now please don't get nit picky with me, I'm talking in VERY general terms here and not trying to quote verbatim and I'm really not interested in investing the time to look it up.

If you believe that the collective people of Alaska own the natural resources of this state then tell me how that is substantially different than socialism?

[cleofus1]

17. geez bob

in a socialist state the oil company would be also owned by the state...and the land would not be owned by private hands (native corporations)...these are a group of private concerns earning capital and issuing dividends to the shareholders at the end of the year...sounds a little like wall street to me...

[Emperor Bob]

18. Socialist state

It may sound like wall street, but it is far from it. Can you sell your stock in Alaska? Can you buy stock. Can you give it to your children or can they inherit it? Other than living in Alaska for more than a year is there any consideration given in exchange for this 'stock dividend'?

What if Florida were to institute the same thing for Orange industry? The good people of Florida decide that since the Oranges are a product of the natural nutrients found in their soil, that they should receive a royalty payment for each Orange sold. Or why not extend it the fishing industry here, or the timber industry, or mining or... plug in any industry in any state.

I'm sorry you don't like the label socialism for the PFD program, but that is exactly what it is. That would be what it is for any other industry and any other state.

You can make the argument that socialism isn't bad in this case, but I think it's silly to pretend that it's not socialism at all.

[cleofus1]

19. ignorance is bliss eh

yes there are certain types of stock you can't sell...and believe it or not there are types of stock you can't buy...and there can be stocks that have limitations on inheritance issues...and if Florida voters decided to do the same thing for the orange industry that would be laughable...because anyone anywhere given the right conditions can grow oranges...sorry if you think I'm silly but really, i think you are wrong on this issue...