Post by: Drgong on August 29, 2008, 07:54:10 AM
Need I say more
Post by: Manedwolf on August 29, 2008, 07:57:34 AM
Post by: PTK on August 29, 2008, 08:14:54 AM
Post by: HankB on August 29, 2008, 08:46:29 AM
I hope that AR is hers.
Encouraging photo, but without context, not as useful as it could be. Post by: Manedwolf on August 29, 2008, 08:49:42 AM
I hope that AR is hers.
Encouraging photo, but without context, not as useful as it could be. It's from a video where she was shooting with troops on a visit to Iraq. At a range, of course.
Post by: Rovi on August 29, 2008, 08:51:24 AM
), "She hunts, eats moose hamburger, ice fishes, rides snowmobiles, and owns a float plane. Palin holds a lifetime membership with the National Rifle Association."Looks pretty good to me.
Post by: Scout26 on August 29, 2008, 08:56:05 AM
Post by: Jamisjockey on August 29, 2008, 09:19:12 AM
Good cheek to stock weld, nice grip on the fore arm. Looks like she needs to get her right elbow up. Can't tell whether she has hearing protection in or not.
Meh. I shoot M16 with my right elbow relaxed a fair bit, too.
Post by: taurusowner on August 29, 2008, 09:37:11 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on August 29, 2008, 09:38:02 AM
Post by: The Annoyed Man on August 29, 2008, 09:39:09 AM
Post by: MrRezister on August 29, 2008, 10:15:49 AM
Post by: Josh Aston on August 29, 2008, 10:25:18 AM
Post by: Waitone on August 29, 2008, 10:57:47 AM
Oh Puleez!
Post by: Frank Castle on August 29, 2008, 11:15:39 AM
Post by: Scout26 on August 29, 2008, 11:19:49 AM
Post by: MrRezister on August 29, 2008, 11:29:27 AM
Post by: Frank Castle on August 29, 2008, 11:35:26 AM
Quote
^^^^Not Moose, Caribou........
I know that,this was the only hunting picture of her i can find.
Post by: El Tejon on August 29, 2008, 11:50:02 AM
I think her past in that politically inbreed culture will bite her.
Post by: Tallpine on August 29, 2008, 11:55:33 AM
Quote
She is a nutjob Westerner and I do not trust her.
Gee, thanks a lot. I don't trust you either
Palin is a reformer in Alaska. But then you should have known that already.
Post by: Scout26 on August 29, 2008, 12:04:04 PM
Wait and see. She is a nutjob Westerner and I do not trust her. Always remember that she is from a culture of corruption, sloth and the Welfare State. Hell, the government out there gives people a check outright.
I think her past in that politically inbreed culture will bite her.
I think her past in that politically inbreed culture will bite her.
I think you missed quite a few smilies in there. From what I've read (even prior to today's announcement) She's been going through Alaska's .gov corruption like Carrie Nation through a saloon.
Post by: sumpnz on August 29, 2008, 01:07:53 PM
Wait and see. She is a nutjob Westerner and I do not trust her. Always remember that she is from a culture of corruption, sloth and the Welfare State. Hell, the government out there gives people a check outright.
I think her past in that politically inbreed culture will bite her.
Ha-Ha you fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is "Never get involved in a land war in Asia". But only slightly less well known is this: Never go in against an Alaska Governor who you haven't researched when elections are on the line! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA-(breath)-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.I think her past in that politically inbreed culture will bite her.
(Oh, wait, both cups were poisoned. Damn).
Seriously though El T, she's not a nutjob (nor are most Westerners, particularly here on APS), and she's well known for fighting against the corruption and cronyism that permeates AK politics. We'll see how she stacks up against welfare-statism, but her record of solid conservatism on just about everything else is rather promising.
Post by: silliman89 on August 29, 2008, 03:41:01 PM
As for "welfare state", that's not a very good description. Welfare implies money for the worthless, deadbeat, drains on society so that they will vote for your party.
As I understand Alaska, they have a state full of natural resources but such lousy weather that very few people want to live there. So the state government pays everyone, man woman and child, equally to live there. That's not welfare, that's kickback. They get the money out of the ground, what better than to give it to The People.
Post by: Boomhauer on August 29, 2008, 03:47:53 PM
Quote
She is a nutjob Westerner and I do not trust her.
Gee, thanks a lot. I don't trust you either
Palin is a reformer in Alaska. But then you should have known that already.
He doesn't like Southerners, either.
Post by: Tallpine on August 29, 2008, 04:09:48 PM
Quote
She is a nutjob Westerner and I do not trust her.
Gee, thanks a lot. I don't trust you either
Palin is a reformer in Alaska. But then you should have known that already.
He doesn't like Southerners, either.
The feeling is mutual, I'm sure
Post by: xavier fremboe on August 29, 2008, 04:14:36 PM
Quote
She is a nutjob Westerner and I do not trust her.
Gee, thanks a lot. I don't trust you either
Palin is a reformer in Alaska. But then you should have known that already.
He doesn't like Southerners, either.
Post by: Boomhauer on August 29, 2008, 04:17:01 PM
Post by: Scout26 on August 29, 2008, 06:39:40 PM
Quote
She is a nutjob Westerner and I do not trust her.
Gee, thanks a lot. I don't trust you either
Palin is a reformer in Alaska. But then you should have known that already.
He doesn't like Southerners, either.
I'm down with that....
Post by: Scout26 on August 29, 2008, 07:21:43 PM
She is a nutjob Westerner and I do not trust her.
Uncle Billy Sherman's boys from Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin were considered "Westerners" when they took their little detour through Georgia and then on up into the Carolina's.
Post by: lacoochee on August 29, 2008, 07:38:30 PM
Quote
little detour
That's an odd way of describing a murderous rampage through a largely unarmed and defenseless civilian population.
But hey whatever, Palin is a good choice I still have to hold my nose to vote for McCain so it only makes me feel a little better.
Post by: ArfinGreebly on August 29, 2008, 07:39:52 PM
Don't you mean "Northerner?"
Or is that "Arcticer?"
Don't they have badgers up there?
Heck, they actually have a TOWN called Badger, Alaska.
Post by: MicroBalrog on August 29, 2008, 07:41:27 PM
I hope that AR is hers.
It turns out it's not even a real gun.
Post by: Perd Hapley on August 29, 2008, 09:51:51 PM
As I understand Alaska, they have a state full of natural resources but such lousy weather that very few people want to live there.
If you have to pay people to live in a state with lousy weather, how much do they you boys in Virginia?
And where's my money from the state of MO and TX? Weather-wise, I think I'd choose Alaska.
Post by: The Annoyed Man on August 29, 2008, 11:09:45 PM
"Westerner"? Did you mean West-Coaster? As far as I'm concerned, from here in Virginia, everyone in Indiana is a Westerner too.
As for "welfare state", that's not a very good description. Welfare implies money for the worthless, deadbeat, drains on society so that they will vote for your party.
As I understand Alaska, they have a state full of natural resources but such lousy weather that very few people want to live there. So the state government pays everyone, man woman and child, equally to live there. That's not welfare, that's kickback. They get the money out of the ground, what better than to give it to The People.
If they need people to live there, I'd give it a shot! Just send me a green card, plzkthnx. I'll swim over the Atlantic and trek across the North American continent if I have to!
As for "welfare state", that's not a very good description. Welfare implies money for the worthless, deadbeat, drains on society so that they will vote for your party.
As I understand Alaska, they have a state full of natural resources but such lousy weather that very few people want to live there. So the state government pays everyone, man woman and child, equally to live there. That's not welfare, that's kickback. They get the money out of the ground, what better than to give it to The People.
Post by: Regolith on August 30, 2008, 01:36:32 AM
"Westerner"? Did you mean West-Coaster? As far as I'm concerned, from here in Virginia, everyone in Indiana is a Westerner too.
As for "welfare state", that's not a very good description. Welfare implies money for the worthless, deadbeat, drains on society so that they will vote for your party.
As I understand Alaska, they have a state full of natural resources but such lousy weather that very few people want to live there. So the state government pays everyone, man woman and child, equally to live there. That's not welfare, that's kickback. They get the money out of the ground, what better than to give it to The People.
If they need people to live there, I'd give it a shot! Just send me a green card, plzkthnx. I'll swim over the Atlantic and trek across the North American continent if I have to!As for "welfare state", that's not a very good description. Welfare implies money for the worthless, deadbeat, drains on society so that they will vote for your party.
As I understand Alaska, they have a state full of natural resources but such lousy weather that very few people want to live there. So the state government pays everyone, man woman and child, equally to live there. That's not welfare, that's kickback. They get the money out of the ground, what better than to give it to The People.
Alaska's weather is about comparable to that of Sweden, Finland and Norway.
Perfect place for a Viking.
The "kickback" is only a thousand dollars a year, though, IIRC. My college dorm roommate was from Alaska, and mentioned something about that...
Post by: The Annoyed Man on August 30, 2008, 12:55:28 PM
Viking, It would be faster if you dog sledded over the pole. Or maybe you could snag a reindeer with a sleigh from some dude. I know a guy and he only uses his once a year.
Post by: stevelyn on August 30, 2008, 02:50:49 PM
How could the governor of Alaska possibly be anything but pro gun.
You obviously have no idea who Steve Cowper or Tony Knowles are. :BLECH: :GAG:
Post by: El Tejon on August 31, 2008, 11:50:52 AM
Isn't that like being called "honest" in Chicago, you just tell fewer lies than the rest of the politicians?Call it a "kickback", a "bribe to live in that hellhole", a "incentive plan", it's still a check for nothing and is improper on its face. The handout fosters a culture of corruption and sloth. I do not trust them, whether Republicans or Democrats they are all on the take out there. Right, Senator Stevens?
She's not a nutjob? WTF? How is she not? She is a thumper and is against abortion.
I have reservations about her which may be proven incorrect. Maybe she renounces her check, I don't know. Wait and see.
Post by: El Tejon on August 31, 2008, 12:02:01 PM
The guy in my neighborhood who has a shark in his window and treats his yard like something out of Close Encounters is a Yankee and I hate him too.
Post by: agricola on August 31, 2008, 12:15:45 PM
Palin is a "reformer" in Alaska? Isn't that like being called "honest" in Chicago, you just tell fewer lies than the rest of the politicians?
Call it a "kickback", a "bribe to live in that hellhole", a "incentive plan", it's still a check for nothing and is improper on its face. The handout fosters a culture of corruption and sloth. I do not trust them, whether Republicans or Democrats they are all on the take out there. Right, Senator Stevens?
She's not a nutjob? WTF? How is she not? She is a thumper and is against abortion.
I have reservations about her which may be proven incorrect. Maybe she renounces her check, I don't know. Wait and see.
Isn't that like being called "honest" in Chicago, you just tell fewer lies than the rest of the politicians?Call it a "kickback", a "bribe to live in that hellhole", a "incentive plan", it's still a check for nothing and is improper on its face. The handout fosters a culture of corruption and sloth. I do not trust them, whether Republicans or Democrats they are all on the take out there. Right, Senator Stevens?
She's not a nutjob? WTF? How is she not? She is a thumper and is against abortion.
I have reservations about her which may be proven incorrect. Maybe she renounces her check, I don't know. Wait and see.
Would you rather the state government kept the money?
Post by: freedom lover on August 31, 2008, 12:29:14 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn7UzxXv8p4
Post by: Matthew Carberry on August 31, 2008, 12:51:00 PM
Read Alaska's Constitution sometimes, it is the very model of doing it right.
One of the major precepts is that the resources of the State of Alaska are held in Trust by the State for its citizens.
The Permanent Fund dividend was set up in the heady days when the pipeline was built and oil extraction took off. The state owned lands with oil and sold leases to drill there. They also tax part of the value of the extracted crude (as it belongs to the state).
Rather than blow all of that windfall money from the lease sales, a bunch of forward thinkers on both sides of the aisle (which is a narrow asle in AK for the most part) developed a way that that money could be invested for the future costs of government rather than just handed out.
The Permanent Fund is now big enough that it is approaching the point of being able to fund state government in its entirety (which is why we have no state income or sales tax). To sell the wisdom of "locking up" that money to the citizenry, the Dividend program was developed.
Basically after reinvestment and inflation proofing of the Fund's investment earnings, a portion is distributed to the citizenry. It's not a "kickback", it is shareholder dividends from the earnings generated by the investment proceeds of our resources.
The Dividend is based on the market performance of the Fund, not tied to the price of oil. The yearly tax income goes to the state budget with only a small amount of overage going to the Fund. That yearly addition is small nowadays when compared to the earnings on the actual investments the fund is made up of.
Because of the booming stock market until recently, and how well the Fund is managed, our checks this year will be the highest ever, around $2,100.
Also, because of the increased earnings this year caused by higher oil prices, the Governor and State legislature are giving back additional refunds to help folks cope with the higher fuel prices this winter, that will be $1,200.
So on Sept. 12th I and every other qualified Alaskan are getting $3,300. Because Alaska is an "owner-state" and we are its citizens.
Post by: xavier fremboe on August 31, 2008, 01:01:25 PM
Post by: De Selby on August 31, 2008, 01:04:05 PM
El T,
Read Alaska's Constituion sometimes, it is the very model of doing it right.
One of the major precepts is that the resources of the State of Alaska are held in Trust by the State for its citizens.
The Permanent Fund dividend was set up in the heady days when the pipeline was built and oil extraction took off. The state owned lands with oil and sold leases to drill there. They also tax part of the value of the extracted crude (as it belongs to the state).
Rather than blow all of that windfall money from the lease sales, a bunch of forward thinkers on both sides of the aisle (which is a narrow asle in AK for the most part) developed a way that that money could be invested for the future costs of government rather than just handed out.
The Permanent Fund is now big enough that it is approaching the point of being able to fund state government in its entirety (which is why we have no state income or sales tax). To sell the wisdom of "locking up" that money to the citizenry, the Dividend program was developed.
Basically after reinvestment and inflation proofing of the Fund's investment earnings, a portion is distributed to the citizenry. It's not a "kickback", it is shareholder dividends from the earnings generated by the investment proceeds of our resources.
The Dividend is based on the market performance of the Fund, not tied to the price of oil. The yearly tax income goes to the state budget with only a small amount of overage going to the Fund. That yearly addition is small nowadays when compared to the earnings on the actual investments the fund is made up of.
Because of the booming stock market until recently, and how well the Fund is managed, our checks this year will be the highest ever, around $2,100.
Also, because of the increased earnings this year caused by higher oil prices, the Governor and State legislature are giving back additional refunds to help folks cope with the higher fuel prices this winter, that will be $1,200.
So on Sept. 12th I and every other qualified Alaskan are getting $3,300. Because Alaska is an "owner-state" and we are its citizens.
Read Alaska's Constituion sometimes, it is the very model of doing it right.
One of the major precepts is that the resources of the State of Alaska are held in Trust by the State for its citizens.
The Permanent Fund dividend was set up in the heady days when the pipeline was built and oil extraction took off. The state owned lands with oil and sold leases to drill there. They also tax part of the value of the extracted crude (as it belongs to the state).
Rather than blow all of that windfall money from the lease sales, a bunch of forward thinkers on both sides of the aisle (which is a narrow asle in AK for the most part) developed a way that that money could be invested for the future costs of government rather than just handed out.
The Permanent Fund is now big enough that it is approaching the point of being able to fund state government in its entirety (which is why we have no state income or sales tax). To sell the wisdom of "locking up" that money to the citizenry, the Dividend program was developed.
Basically after reinvestment and inflation proofing of the Fund's investment earnings, a portion is distributed to the citizenry. It's not a "kickback", it is shareholder dividends from the earnings generated by the investment proceeds of our resources.
The Dividend is based on the market performance of the Fund, not tied to the price of oil. The yearly tax income goes to the state budget with only a small amount of overage going to the Fund. That yearly addition is small nowadays when compared to the earnings on the actual investments the fund is made up of.
Because of the booming stock market until recently, and how well the Fund is managed, our checks this year will be the highest ever, around $2,100.
Also, because of the increased earnings this year caused by higher oil prices, the Governor and State legislature are giving back additional refunds to help folks cope with the higher fuel prices this winter, that will be $1,200.
So on Sept. 12th I and every other qualified Alaskan are getting $3,300. Because Alaska is an "owner-state" and we are its citizens.
That is a brilliant system, really. I have read your comments on the natives in Alaska previously, and it looks like they did a much better job with setting up native governance than we did down here in the sunny lower 48.
Good government all around-now how did you get it, and how can the rest of us copy?
Post by: Matthew Carberry on August 31, 2008, 01:24:59 PM
Most of the important work was done by real statesmen, not sure if we have their type around anymore.
Xavier,
I like Sarah, I think she's done a good job here and will do a good job as VP.
Post by: Tallpine on August 31, 2008, 04:52:16 PM
Post by: Matthew Carberry on August 31, 2008, 05:00:40 PM
Of course, I left Alaska the year before they starting handing out the dividend checks
They would have been bigger sooner, but a carpet-bagger strip mall developer sued (on stupid, valid Constitutional grounds) to remove the 10 (5?) year residency requirement that had been selected to reward "real" Alaskans and keep away check-chasers.
The lawsuit took 3 years and ended with just a one year residency requirement to become eligible.
The first check was $1,500, basically 3 years worth, then the amount dropped to $500-ish and has been growing ever since due to the twin miracles of compounding interest and market growth.
Post by: alan2 on August 31, 2008, 06:23:41 PM
I hope that AR is hers.
Encouraging photo, but without context, not as useful as it could be. Possibly off point, but re Schumer and an "assault pistol" I note the lack of eye protection. Not really smart. Another point is or might be the following. If he had his way, how long does anyone think he would allow others the right some would find explicit in the photo?
Post by: Matthew Carberry on August 31, 2008, 06:29:25 PM
If you avoid actually poking yourself in the eye, it doesn't get any safer.
-edit-
Oh, sorry, you meant Schumer.
Post by: Manedwolf on August 31, 2008, 07:00:08 PM
I hope that AR is hers.
Encouraging photo, but without context, not as useful as it could be. Possibly off point, but re Schumer and an "assault pistol" I note the lack of eye protection. Not really smart. Another point is or might be the following. If he had his way, how long does anyone think he would allow others the right some would find explicit in the photo?
He wouldn't. Except for himself and others like him. Because he's an Elite.
Post by: stevelyn on August 31, 2008, 07:20:24 PM
Quote
Hell, the government out there gives people a check outright.
Let me explain to some of you DSMFs who don't get it.
The Alaska Permanent Fund was set up by Gov Jay Hammond as a way to give back some of the oil wealth to the people who actually own it rather than having govt piss it away. It's a constitutionally protected fund that has a board of directors.
Every year when the state receives revenue from oil production, a portion of it is deposited into the fund. The priniciple of the fund itself is invested. What we get back from it in the form of the PFD is what's earned from the interest earned and anything left is reinvested back into the fund for inflation proofing. None of the principle is ever or will ever be paid out as PFDs. As it is right now, withthe interest the PF earns is enough to run the state govt adn pay out a PFD to the citizens. In other words we're shareholders in our own state. Capitalism at its best.
Secondly, they just don't give it away. You have to qualify for it by applying every year and meeting the residency requirements.
Yeah..........there's some fraudulent applications where people are trying to get over on the system. A friend whose daughter works as a fraud investigator tells me the vast majority of cases are DSMFs coming up here in the military or for temporary jobs and trying to keep themselves in the system after they leave without being or intending to remain a resident.
Post by: Josh Aston on August 31, 2008, 07:49:59 PM
I like Sarah, I think she's done a good job here and will do a good job as VP.
But how do you think she'll do as President?
Post by: Matthew Carberry on August 31, 2008, 08:01:33 PM
I like Sarah, I think she's done a good job here and will do a good job as VP.
But how do you think she'll do as President?
I have seen nothing to indicate to me she wouldn't do a good job at that as well.
It isn't rocket science, it's leadership and organization, which she has solid experience in. She has tended to pick good subordinates and has accomplished her various administration's goals, I'm not sure how else you'd judge.
The whole "foreign affairs experience" issue is, in my opinion, yet more sound and fury over very little.
I'm reasonably intelligent and reasonably well-read. Name a foregn policy issue and if I don't have a well-thought out position off the cuff, after a bit of review I will. Certainly one as sound as any current candidate for any party.
Anyone who can read a book and talk to subject matter experts can get a solid working knowledge of anything in a short period of time.
The key for me is to start out with a realistic worldview and philosophy so you are looking at good background information and consulting the right people. In that, I am confident in Palin and McCain and less so in Obama and Biden.
Post by: agricola on September 01, 2008, 01:05:19 AM
Post by: El Tejon on September 01, 2008, 04:55:29 AM
Quote
Secondly, they just don't give it away. You have to qualify for it by applying every year and meeting the residency requirements.
(emphasis added).So, to "earn" this check you have to stay breathing for a year?
Is this not giving it away?How does this not lead to corruption of the entitlement mentality? Palin comes from this culture. It is like expecting a libertarian champion to come from cultures like New Orleans or Chicago.
Post by: mtnbkr on September 01, 2008, 05:32:03 AM
Quote
Secondly, they just don't give it away. You have to qualify for it by applying every year and meeting the residency requirements.
(emphasis added).So, to "earn" this check you have to stay breathing for a year?
Is this not giving it away?How does this not lead to corruption of the entitlement mentality? Palin comes from this culture. It is like expecting a libertarian champion to come from cultures like New Orleans or Chicago.
I don't understand the problem. The residents are being paid the interest earned by revenues associated with the use of their natural resources. Instead of the Alaskan govt saying "this is ours" and spending it on more govt, they're sharing the wealth that actually belongs to all Alaskans.
Chris
Post by: Manedwolf on September 01, 2008, 05:51:37 AM
Quote
Secondly, they just don't give it away. You have to qualify for it by applying every year and meeting the residency requirements.
(emphasis added).So, to "earn" this check you have to stay breathing for a year?
Is this not giving it away?How does this not lead to corruption of the entitlement mentality? Palin comes from this culture. It is like expecting a libertarian champion to come from cultures like New Orleans or Chicago.
I don't understand the problem. The residents are being paid the interest earned by revenues associated with the use of their natural resources. Instead of the Alaskan govt saying "this is ours" and spending it on more govt, they're sharing the wealth that actually belongs to all Alaskans.
Chris
Yes. If it wasn't given to the residents for selling the stuff beneath their feet, it'd be wasted on actual entitlement programs.
I know which I would prefer!
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 01, 2008, 10:22:12 AM
Quote
Secondly, they just don't give it away. You have to qualify for it by applying every year and meeting the residency requirements.
(emphasis added).So, to "earn" this check you have to stay breathing for a year?
Is this not giving it away?How does this not lead to corruption of the entitlement mentality? Palin comes from this culture. It is like expecting a libertarian champion to come from cultures like New Orleans or Chicago.
And to "earn" stock dividends you merely buy one share of stock. To "earn" the interest on money in an investment account you merely leave it in that interest-bearing account.
You remain a citizen of the state (which bears unique difficulties and coststhat living in, say, CA doesn't) and you receive your share of the invested value of the natural resources you own by being a citizen. It is a contractual relationship based on the Constitution of the state, not an entitlement.
It isn't "free money", if you leave the state for long enough in a year, you lose the dividend because you aren't up here contributing.
It doesn't go to felons while their rights are restricted because they are no longer contributing members of society. If you are a deadbeat dad or owe other moneys it can be seized. It is taxable income.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 01, 2008, 10:29:06 AM
back to the guns:
This is what the red x covers...
Post by: El Tejon on September 01, 2008, 10:46:15 AM
Quote
It is a contractual relationship based on the Constitution of the state, not an entitlement.
Entitlement: right to benefits, income or property which may not be abridged without due process
How is the Alaskan check not an entitlement? How do Alaskans not have a Constitutional right to something for nothing?
I is confused (obviously).
Post by: Manedwolf on September 01, 2008, 10:47:19 AM
Quote
It is a contractual relationship based on the Constitution of the state, not an entitlement.
Entitlement: right to benefits, income or property which may not be abridged without due process
How is the Alaskan check not an entitlement? How do Alaskans not have a Constitutional right to something for nothing?
I is confused (obviously).
Because they are stakeholders in their state, as if it were a company. They live there. They voted to give the state permission to use the resources of the place they live if they get to share in the profits from doing so.
It's how things SHOULD be.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 01, 2008, 11:01:49 AM
You're "entitled" to it only in the sense that the holder of the investment is obligated by contract to pay it to you.
Alaska's Constitution states explicitly that all of the resources of the State of Alaska are owned by its citizens, not by the state government. Citizenship in the state has been determined by the state Supreme Court to be equivalent to being a legal resident, which requires 1 calendar year of residency, having a driver's license, etc.
If you meet that standard of becoming a citizen, which by definition means you have made a real investment in the future of the state by living and working here, then you have earned your share of the resources of the state.
With the influx of money from lease sales and oil production, the people of the state determined that one way of achieving that Constitutional imperative, in addition to removing state income and sales taxes, was to invest the money to run state government and pay dividends from part of the investment earnings.
So, you apply and you get the benefit you've earned by being a citizen of a state with ownership enshrined in its Constitution. That share is paid out in two ways. You don't pay taxes to the state AND you get a Dividend.
Additionally, the Dividend program requires that the residency not be just on paper. If you are out of the state for greater than, I believe six months, in any application year you lose the right to the dividend as you are no longer a "real" contributing member of the community up here (there are medical and military/public service exemptions to a point).
As Maned says, how is getting a dividend on your investment earnings of resources you own an "entitlement". You "buy the stock" by choosing to commit your life to living in Alaska, you "sell" the stock when you do any number of things to remve yourself from legal residency or the terms of the contract.
Post by: El Tejon on September 02, 2008, 11:03:47 AM
I earn the dividend. I receive an entitlement with the Alaskan check.
Writing an entitlement into the state constitution does not magically convert an entitlement into something else. It is still a handout and indicative of the culture where she was raised.
I may be pleasantly surprised, but I'm not going to get all giddy about a politician from out here, or anywhere.
Post by: Tallpine on September 02, 2008, 11:31:21 AM
You're just jealous, ET
Post by: El Tejon on September 02, 2008, 11:39:32 AM
Just pointing out that we should not be getting schoolgirl crushes on someone who comes from there. Although time may prove me wrong.
Post by: Tallpine on September 02, 2008, 11:43:07 AM
Now, now, I am not blaming her.
Just pointing out that we should not be getting schoolgirl crushes on someone who comes from there. Although time may prove me wrong.
Just pointing out that we should not be getting schoolgirl crushes on someone who comes from there. Although time may prove me wrong.
Hey, I can get crushes on any girl I want - at least until my wife finds out
Post by: Scout26 on September 02, 2008, 11:47:51 AM
A dividend I pay for by getting off the couch, getting a job and buying the stock.
Right and in this case the Permenant Fund is not the .gov, it's a seperate company. It seems to me operate more like a credit union then a hand out. They sell the company's product (the natural resources of the state as owned by all the shareholders) and use the proceeds to cover the state .gov's budget and distribute the remainder to the shareholders. Sounds like a great system as the shareholders have a vested interest in holding down the portion of the $$$'s that the .gov takes for operations. A much better operation then PEMEX or other nationalized companies that are only beholden to the .gov and not the poeple.
The investment that you have to make to get the dividend check is to be a resident of Alaska for >1 year and not a convicted felon or otherwise DQ'd. From my understanding of the Cost of Living up there, $1200-$3500 is not nearly enough to live on, even if you're homeless.
Almost like privatizing Social Security, but without the taking of your money out of your pocket.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 02, 2008, 12:04:04 PM
A dividend I pay for by getting off the couch, getting a job and buying the stock. A free check from Mommy Alaska I get by sitting on the couch and breathing through my mouth is a handout.
I earn the dividend. I receive an entitlement with the Alaskan check.
Writing an entitlement into the state constitution does not magically convert an entitlement into something else. It is still a handout and indicative of the culture where she was raised.
I may be pleasantly surprised, but I'm not going to get all giddy about a politician from out here, or anywhere.
I earn the dividend. I receive an entitlement with the Alaskan check.
Writing an entitlement into the state constitution does not magically convert an entitlement into something else. It is still a handout and indicative of the culture where she was raised.
I may be pleasantly surprised, but I'm not going to get all giddy about a politician from out here, or anywhere.
She has a lot more qualifications than just "being from Alaska".
After all, she didn't have anything to do with the creation of the Dividend program and I'm not sure how the money could be better spent than making state government support itself and the rest being distributed per the tenets of the Constitution. Constitutional originalism (state of Federal) is part of my libertarian take in any event.
I would challenge your narrow definition of how one earns a share of a corporation (the State in this case)
which pays a dividend.
You don't have to just buy them with cash from other labor. You can earn stock options simply for being part of the "company", where your membership within the organization earns you certain rights.
Living in AK is more expensive than in the Lower 48 and the Dividend doesn't nearly compensate for that. People do a hell of a lot more up here everyday than just "roll off the couch". As a state is only as viable an organization as its citizens, stock options seem a just reward for contributing to the state year after year.
Post by: El Tejon on September 02, 2008, 12:40:59 PM
Quote
You can earn stock options simply for being part of the "company", where your membership within the organization earns you certain rights.
That would be correct. I blame my self-employment and having to write checks (for everything and all flippin' day) for neglecting that.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 02, 2008, 12:52:44 PM
Quote
You can earn stock options simply for being part of the "company", where your membership within the organization earns you certain rights.
That would be correct. I blame my self-employment and having to write checks (for everything and all flippin' day) for neglecting that.
Self-employment? How dare you not kowtow to an employer. Must remember to vote for higher self-employment taxes.
Post by: seeker_two on September 02, 2008, 01:10:02 PM
Wait and see. She is a nutjob Westerner and I do not trust her. Always remember that she is from a culture of corruption, sloth and the Welfare State. Hell, the government out there gives people a check outright.
The "check" is profits from the oil industry that are paid to Alaska and distributed to the people. I wish Texas did that...
BTW, I consider El T a Yankee and Yankees should be watched closely by persons in authority....
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 02, 2008, 01:23:27 PM
Post by: seeker_two on September 02, 2008, 01:24:45 PM
Where does the State of Alaska get the money that goes into the fund that pays the dividends? It's oil money, they say. But what is it, exactly, that the oil companies buying from the State of Alaska? And why does the State own any of it in the first place?
Good purchases with state money and good negotiators....
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 02, 2008, 01:33:37 PM
Alaska thus owned land that had resource potential. They leased prospecting rights (not ownership of the land) to private companies. Those lease payments are income that went into the State's coffers.
Note that the Federal government does the same thing on land it retains at statehood.
When minerals and such were found, they also taxed some of the profit from the extraction and sale of those minerals. That yearly production income also goes to the State.
The State Constitution explicitly says anything owned by the state, including its fungible resources, belongs to the citizens of the state, not the government. In order to abide by that Constitutional stricture, and to provide for long-term income for the state (someday the oil will run out and the leases will end) wise men decided to invest the windfall in a "Permanent Fund" managed by an independent board.
The reason we had a huge chunk to start with was after the massive oil deposits were discovered in the '70s the Trans-Alaska pipeline was built to bring it to market. We had all sorts of private investment in all sectors of the economy. Naturally, we started building infrastructure and public works. Seeing all that moolah flow in and out is what got Gov. Hammond and others thinking about the future, and thus the Permanent Fund.
The earnings of that Fund are reinvested into it, some to inflation proof, some earnings are earmarked for potential use on a "rainy day", but so far have also just been put back in so it just keeps growing.
Right now we make enough from yearly excise taxes to pay for state government (and not have to have a sales or income tax) and haven't had to tap the Fund or its earnings.
To sell the people of Alaska on the wisdom of the plan, a portion of the earnings were set aside to be paid out as dividends, thus demonstrating the "ownership" by the citizenry.
The Dividend program is the cream, it is the Permanent Fund that was genius. As was said, think about how Texas or any other producer state would look with a reliable income stream for state government, removing the ability and need for politicos to play games with taxes and such.
Post by: Stand_watie on September 03, 2008, 05:05:56 AM
...How does this not lead to corruption of the entitlement mentality? Palin comes from this culture. It is like expecting a libertarian champion to come from cultures like New Orleans or Chicago.
It's like expecting a hoosier to remember to knock the cowshit off of his milking boots before he tracks it through your kitchen.
Post by: El Tejon on September 03, 2008, 06:18:12 AM
Post by: El Tejon on September 03, 2008, 06:30:20 AM
Post by: mtnbkr on September 03, 2008, 06:34:41 AM
Milk cows are in California, don't you watch the commericals?
Only the happy ones. Sad and depressed cows are from Indiana.
Chris
Post by: El Tejon on September 03, 2008, 06:38:17 AM
Post by: mtnbkr on September 03, 2008, 06:41:12 AM
Chris
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 03, 2008, 07:33:43 AM
Post by: El Tejon on September 03, 2008, 07:36:48 AM
Post by: mtnbkr on September 03, 2008, 07:49:21 AM
Seriously, what are you referring to?
Chris
Post by: roo_ster on September 03, 2008, 09:34:05 AM
She is a nutjob Westerner and I do not trust her.
Uncle Billy Sherman's boys from Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin were considered "Westerners" when they took their little detour through Georgia and then on up into the Carolina's.
I have wanted to own three large breed dogs (mastiff, dane, or some such) and name them William, Tecumseh, and Sherman.
Post by: roo_ster on September 03, 2008, 09:48:36 AM
I wish Texas had done it in a similar manner.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 03, 2008, 10:01:25 AM
Meidcated or not, at least we can have milk cows up here even though we don't have as many as California and no one is being prosecuted for kickbacks or not declaring them on the Senate disclosure forms. In Virginia holsteins are illegal, I say, I say.
Senator Stevens is being investigated for not declaring the full cost of a home remodel. There are real questions as to how aware he was of what was being paid on his behalf as he did pay all the bills actually presented to him.
He didn't take cash and there's no evidence that the work influenced any votes.
Post by: Scout26 on September 04, 2008, 10:35:19 AM
She is a nutjob Westerner and I do not trust her.
Uncle Billy Sherman's boys from Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin were considered "Westerners" when they took their little detour through Georgia and then on up into the Carolina's.
I have wanted to own three large breed dogs (mastiff, dane, or some such) and name them William, Tecumseh, and Sherman.
My college roommate's last name was Schermann. On a trip to Florida during Spring Break one year we stopped in a greasy spoon in Georgia to grab a bite. "Flo" came by to take our order and detected our lack of accent and ask where we were from (Illinois) and then our names.
"I'm Mr. Schermann" said my roommate with a smile.
"Flo" blanched... I mean she was visibly shaken.....she looked at me.
"I'm Mr. Grant" I stated with a huge grin.
Needless to say, the quality of service deteriorated after that.
And in regards to Sherman's "Murderous Rampage"; compared to the continuous bloodletting that Grant and Lee were engaged in in Virginia, The March to the Sea was almost casuality free, on both sides. Victor Davis Hanson's Book The Soul of Battle: From Ancient Times to the Present Day, How Three Great Liberators Vanquished Tyranny is an excellent read not only on Sherman's March to the Sea, but also how Epaminondas of Thebes and George S. Patton lead armies that delivered decisive and mortal blows to their enemies, not by killing vast numbers of them, but using speed and maneuver to destroy the morale and fighting ability of their enemies.
Post by: El Tejon on September 04, 2008, 11:52:26 AM
Quote
Being a dumb redneck, I have no clue what you are prattling on about.
Seriously, what are you referring to?
Seriously, what are you referring to?
Holsteins are milk cows that are black and white. I say, I say, the mixing, suhr, it's against our beloved heritage, I say, I say.
We can have your fellow Virginian to say how the 14th Amendment and Holsteins are unconstitutional.
Post by: mtnbkr on September 04, 2008, 12:03:50 PM
Quote
Being a dumb redneck, I have no clue what you are prattling on about.
Seriously, what are you referring to?
Seriously, what are you referring to?
Holsteins are milk cows that are black and white. I say, I say, the mixing, suhr, it's against our beloved heritage, I say, I say.
We can have your fellow Virginian to say how the 14th Amendment and Holsteins are unconstitutional.
Oh yeah, I forgot we were racists in addition to be ignorant.
I'll have to remember to tell my cousin, who married a Mexican (great guy, our even more racist and ignorant NC relatives welcomed him with open hearts) or my brother who is dating a black (I mean African American) girl.
True to my racist heritage, I married a good ol' white girl. Even though she's a native Virginian and I'm not, I'm sure you'll find we're related somehow since that's how we roll down here in the dirty South.
Chris
Post by: wmenorr67 on September 05, 2008, 07:51:10 AM
Post by: mtnbkr on September 05, 2008, 08:08:55 AM
Chris
Post by: K Frame on September 05, 2008, 08:11:35 AM
Now it's not even close, and the 'tard factor is spiking.
Guess what happens next...