c.n.
Lv 4
c.n. asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

Are Alaskans Practicing Socialism?

Why do the Alaskans get to keep a portion of the state's oil revenues, but the rest of us (like here in Texas) do not? Isn't that like fossil based socialism? Shouldn't the rest of Americans get the same sort of deal Alaskans do, or should Obama look into taking away the prize that Alaska politicians dangle in front of voters--and out that money to work for ALL of America?

Update:

In 2008, each Alaskan got a check for (sit down) $3,269.00....not bad, for not even a hard days work. Here is the link.

http://www.aksuperstation.com/news/27917674.html

12 Answers

Relevance
  • tim d
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Maybe obama should learn a little something about managing a budget from Alaska.

    You ask "should obama look into taking away the prize that Alaska politicians dangle in front of voters?"

    I ask... why do obama and his supporters think everything in is theirs for the taking?

    This administration needs to be contained within the constraints of the Constitution, otherwise they will become extremely dangerous to liberty.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    It was set up that way under Alaska's constitution when first admitted to the US. A downside to that program is that there is very little privately owned land in Alaska. The state and federal government own the vast majority of land in Alaska. It would next to impossible to change in the rest of the US since oil companies and private ownership of the land is already in place and established. Plus understand that Alaska has no income tax so the money the state collects from the oil companies is one of the sole basis of revenue in order to finance state government.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    It's called states' rights. It was an agreement made between the state of Alaska and the oil companies drilling on their land. The money goes to EVERYONE regardless of income. That is NOT socialism. If it was divided according to income or other standard, then it would be.

    Any attempt to take away that legally and appropriately established contract away from the people of Alaska by Obama WOULD be socialism at it's worst.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I agree with Pastor or Muppets.

    After first hearing the Palin did this, I read the article, and she's basically driving the oil companies out of Alaska now. A spokesman for Exxon said it makes it more difficult to work/drill in Alaska, so they will just exlpore elsewhere.

    Funny, Palin got kudos for this, yet when Democrats proposed taxing big oil for excessive profits, the other side screamed and yelled.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • jehen
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Yes and no. The government collects the money from oil producers and gives it to the citizens. Very 'socialistic'. But the citizens own the oil in Alaska. (sort of socialistic) In Texas, the oil is almost all locked up in prviate mineral rights going back 100 years or more.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    If it were socialism, they would not get any cash back. Government would keep all of it and the people would get a hard loaf of molded bread to split among 5 families. Also, socialist countries, government owns all the business and would not split any of the profits with the people. Kind of like all the money the banks have paid back to American government, which no people got any of it back in their pockets. Hope this helps.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Janet
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    Alaska is a Republican state, so therefore it is not socialism. If Alaska was a Democratic state it would most definitely be socialism.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Alaska = biggest welfare state in the union.

    Must be real hard being governor there. give the people their 3k oil check, and they're happy.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • jz
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    no, it's due to the state constitution that provides alaskan citizens a portion of it's natural resources. i don't consider that socialism.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • It's socialism and regulation wrapped up into one.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.