Skip to comments.Prosperity Palin Style
Posted on 08/09/2011 4:46:55 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
While I was doing research for another blog post, I happened upon a lamestream media (LA Times) story from 2008 about the massive budget surplus that accumulated under Sarah Palins bountiful watch as governor of Alaska.
Try to imagine waking up one morning and reading a newspaper article in which the experts quoted had something like this to say about our nations federal budget:...
(Excerpt) Read more at californians4palin.blogspot.com ...
According to the Alaska Dept. of Revenue the state received an estimated $12.1 Billion in oil production revenue in FY 2008.
That's right - $12.1 BILLION for a state with a population of under 700,000.
And, they still functioned as a welfare state, receiving $1.84 from the rest of us for every $1.00 of federal tax collected within the state.
How hard do you think it is to have a clean balance sheet with those numbers?
I want don't agree is that all the Federal Money that is generated because of Alaska is reported in that number.
Washington State has a large amount of barge traffic and airline flights to Alaska. Alaska is the reason that business continues, but the federal tax dollars collected due to that Alaska business is reported under Washington State. Same with Cruise lines, Texas Oil companies, etc.
Also, Alaska is forced by Federal Ownership of most of the land within the state to be non-producing. Do this to any other state and see how productive they can be. How productive would New York be if the Feds took over most of the State?
I'm not suggesting that Alaska deserves to be a “welfare state”. I saying that most of the state is held hostage by the Feds and not allowed to be productive. The problem lies with the Feds and not with Alaska.
For example, the National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska is 23.5 million acres. That is bigger than the entire state of Indiana. It was specifically set aside back in 1923 for the production of resources. For years ConocoPhillips, Anadarko and others having been trying to get permission to produce the oil on that property. Year after year the feds deny permits and otherwise delay. They have changed designation of areas previously set aside for resource development into yet more protected land. Isn't 100 million acres enough of Alaska to be parks and wildlife? How much is really needed?
Given the fact that Alaska received $12.1 Billion in oil tax revenues and received $1.84 in federal money for every dollar of federal tax it collected, my point is that the proposition is ludicrous.
I understand what you are saying about federal corporate tax not being included in the calculation but I am saying that, whether or not that is true, it is irrelevent to the topic.
I hope not. Part of the massive budget was a massive tax. It drove business out of the state. I was one of the ones that left partly because of it. At a time when the oil business was booming in Texas and other areas, Alaska was falling. The feds contribute to this problem but just as the foothills of the Brooks Range was starting exploration, new taxes shut most of it down.
Alaska has shale as well as the booming areas in the lower 48. But state taxes along with the federally controlled areas keep it from being developed.
it is irrelevent to the topic
When you look at inflow versus outflow, but only count a portion of one side of the equation, it becomes very relevant.
It would be like looking at the federal dollars in and out of a military base or Washington D.C. Of course they are in the red and not balanced. Unfortunately, the feds operate Alaska the same way. Release the land for production, even if kept in federal ownership, and the books could easily be balanced.
We are essentially on the same page. Have a good day....gotta get to work now.
You have more than one now? Then all of them!
Titus, Titus, the blogs, the blogs.
All the best—GGG
Hi GGG - I think you have me confused with somebody else. I don’t have any blogs, except an old nearly-defunct devotional one that I haven’t posted to for months.
The associated blog died after about two weeks once I realised I just didn't have time to keep up with it.
Why not just turn the whole thing into a blog? You guys really put out excellent stuff that deserves a much wider audience.
Because people respect the copyright to a "real" website a lot more than they do a blog. According to some even here on FR, it's okay to steal content from blogs.
Do you guys charge for your newsletter?
I retract the question. I just went back to your link and found out your newsletter is indeed free. So if it’s free, why not make it available to everyone via a blog or a website?
It is - issues can be accessed from the CU archive page...
Has any other prominent Republican, whether in the race or not, said anything like that yet?
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.