$DEITY bless Texas

[MechAg94]

Those sorts of royalties and export style taxes are probably the kind we should have.  It is the income tax we should get rid of.

Also, a chunk of higher education funding in Texas comes from oil income from state owned land. 

[Jamisjockey]

So you think Alaska should just give it's oil to BP? No charge?

Oh I didn't say that.  Just not agreeing that the lack of direct taxes you pay isn't the same as taxation.

[RoadKingLarry]

All I got was a tax free day at a pet supply store. 
But I did appreciate it. 

We can buy guns at our pet supply stores here.

[wmenorr67]

All I got was a tax free day at a pet supply store. 
But I did appreciate it. 

I can imagine California missed out on a lot of taxes from you that day.

Oklahoma laws on firearms are middle of the road, need to change to constitutional carry, only reason I would like the permit/license to stay put is if they tied it into the NICS.

One place where Oklahoma is backwards is the damn liquor laws.  You can buy 3.2 beer on Sundays but can't buy liquor anywhere other than liquor stores which are closed on Sundays and you want more than water you have to buy it in a liquor store and it isn't going to be cold.

[jim in anchorage]

Oh I didn't say that.  Just not agreeing that the lack of direct taxes you pay isn't the same as taxation.

I am not sure what you are getting at. I pay Federal taxes at the same rate as any one. Alaska doesn't have a state tax because of oil royalties. They are not "taxing" anyone simply selling a natural resource they own.

[roo_ster]

I am not sure what you are getting at. I pay Federal taxes at the same rate as any one. Alaska doesn't have a state tax because of oil royalties. They are not "taxing" anyone simply selling a natural resource they own.

It is a fee.  If Alaska wanted to sell the land and/or mineral rights it would do so and get paid lump sum or over time like a mortgage.  If it wanted to lease the mineral rights it would do so.  Instead, it collects its cream off the top and calls it "royalties."  Like a king or God, the state gov't of Alaska claims the first fruits.  Call it what you will, shareholders and customers still pay for those "royalties."  And just because the state gov't of Alaska then transfers the "royalties" to Alaska citizens, it does not change the fundamental nature of it.
1. Take the $$$ from those who produce useful products and services.
2. Give the $$ to those who did nothing (but show up with a pulse, a mouth, and an anus).

In the lower 48 we call that "welfare."  But, things are different in Alaska and obviously words change meaning when they change latitude.

[jim in anchorage]

It is a fee.  If Alaska wanted to sell the land and/or mineral rights it would do so and get paid lump sum or over time like a mortgage.  If it wanted to lease the mineral rights it would do so.  Instead, it collects its cream off the top and calls it "royalties."  Like a king or God, the state gov't of Alaska claims the first fruits.  Call it what you will, shareholders and customers still pay for those "royalties."  And just because the state gov't of Alaska then transfers the "royalties" to Alaska citizens, it does not change the fundamental nature of it.
1. Take the $$$ from those who produce useful products and services.
2. Give the $$ to those who did nothing (but show up with a pulse, a mouth, and an anus).

In the lower 48 we call that "welfare."  But, things are different in Alaska and obviously words change meaning when they change latitude.

You feel Alaska should just sell off it's oil producing land to BP? Tell me who that would benefit and why.

[dogmush]

It is a fee.  If Alaska wanted to sell the land and/or mineral rights it would do so and get paid lump sum or over time like a mortgage.  If it wanted to lease the mineral rights it would do so.  Instead, it collects its cream off the top and calls it "royalties."  Like a king or God, the state gov't of Alaska claims the first fruits.  Call it what you will, shareholders and customers still pay for those "royalties."  And just because the state gov't of Alaska then transfers the "royalties" to Alaska citizens, it does not change the fundamental nature of it.
1. Take the $$$ from those who produce useful products and services.
2. Give the $$ to those who did nothing (but show up with a pulse, a mouth, and an anus).

In the lower 48 we call that "welfare."  But, things are different in Alaska and obviously words change meaning when they change latitude.

In point of fact Alaska both leases land to the oil companies (along with fed.gov and some native entities) AND taxes the revenues from that oil.  It must not be that bad, because the market bears it.

As far as what you are calling wellfare, not so much.  It is sharing of the profits of community owwned land.  When I get a dividend payment from BP that's not wellfare, it's my share of the componies profits as part owner.  Well the state owned lands in AK make a (large) profit, and each part owner of that land gets a dividend from that profit.

Alaska does have some wellfare programs, mostly native programs and some rural stuff, but they come from the general fund.

FWIW, AK is not unique in not having sales tax.  FL doesn't either.  We also leverage our natural resources (rich tourists and old people) to pay for our state gov.

[dogmush]

You feel Alaska should just sell off it's oil producing land to BP? Tell me who that would benefit and why.

It would benefit me.  I'm a BP stock holder.

[jim in anchorage]

It would benefit me.  I'm a BP stock holder.

You must have enjoyed the oil spill This whole Alaska is a welfare state by people like Roo kills me.

[Ben]

Yeah, I'm not so sure people from states like Texas and California should be calling the Alaskan kettle black. CA and TX take royalties from oil companies as well, except instead of giving it to "every anus", they just give it to the anuses they like, such as public schools and "the environment". At least AK is treating every oil company and anus somewhat equally.

[jim in anchorage]

Yeah, I'm not so sure people from states like Texas and California should be calling the Alaskan kettle black. CA and TX take royalties from oil companies as well, except instead of giving it to "every anus", they just give it to the anuses they like, such as public schools and "the environment". At least AK is treating every oil company and anus somewhat equally.

 
Good post. Not real happy over all the "anus" reference's however regards to Alaska .

[Ben]

 
Good post. Not real happy over all the "anus" reference's however regards to Alaska .

Nothing to be unhappy about - everybody has one. :)

[jim in anchorage]

Nothing to be unhappy about - everybody has one. :)

True but I don't know how that would work out if I called every one "butthead"