Have any cons explained why Palin's redistribution of oil wealth to all Alaskans was not socialism?

Why are the oil companies in Alaska being punished for their success to provide money for lazy people who did not work for it? Why would any company want to work hard at extracting oil and make a profit if they knew Big Government was just going to take it from them?

Update:

Dont Drink The Kool Aid: Sorry, I forgot cons do not keep up on current events even when they involve their Messiah, here's your link:

http://swfinstitute.org/fund/alaska.php

Update 2:

All of you are insisting that the public of Alaska has ownership over resources but none have stated why that isn't socialism. In fact it is quite a lot like socialism.

24 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    If you knew any HISTORY to the long-promised development of resources (that NEVER took place until Palin took over).....

    If you knew any HISTORY to the land-leases that Exxon Mobil was SITTING ON that didn't provide any resources, oil, work, or economic benefit (until Palin took over).....

    If you knew that ALASKAN LAW states that all resources BELONG to the citizens of Alaska.....and therefore the benefit of using/selling the resources has to back to the RIGHTFUL OWNERS of the resources.....

    Then maybe you could post something besides a shallow attempt to criticize Sarah Palin and demonstrate how LITTLE you know of facts, History, and Law. How's the Kool Aid?

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

    Sarah Palin did not seize oil company land. The oil was being pumped from Alaskan state property. The state of Alaska is entitled to payment for its oil just like any other property owner. That's not socialism. In fact, Alaska has been collecting oil revenues since well before Palin was governor. What Sarah Palin did differently was to negotiate a better deal with the oil companies than her predecessors. That makes her a great leader, not a socialist.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Actually, it is very much NOT like socialism. In a socialist state, as you surely know, the government limits the freedoms that americans and alaskans have by rite of citizenship. free movement from city to city without permission, for example,free enterprise, individual freedom of expression, ad infintum, ad nauseum. The state of alaske takes IT"S share of the oil revenue ( all states that produce petrochemicals recieve a portion of the proceeds through taxation, permitting, etc.,) and distributes it among it's beleaguered residents, who, by the way, have a tough exsistence there, with most trades being seasonal, and enriches thier quality of living in the process. Other states simply keep the proceeds and do with them as they wish, which usually translates into the government officials giving themselves a raise every year, and bigger expense accounts. The oil companies are not being robbed of anything, by any means, nor are they any more heavily taxed in alaska than they are than in , say, texas, where I live AND work in the petrochemical industry. Alaska isn't some burdensome robin hood, stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, nor is it a socialist act to redistribute wealth to citizens. think of it as a tax refund. and, try doing a little research on the subject, you might be surprised how non-socialistic it is to be an alaskan.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I believe Palin wants to drill for Alaskan oil to help the lower 48 states and Hawaii to be less dependent on foreign oil. Buying foreign oil puts us in risk for the money being used funding of terrorists. She is not a governor or anything right now. Although, I do believe she has some great ideas for our country's future. She is certainly something that this country has not seen for some time. She is for fiscal responsibility, free markets, and limited government which is what made our country great.

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

    You see in Alaska the profits made by an oil company are funneled through the state government (which takes a cut) then distributed to the residents of the state.

    But Obama is a Democrat - see the difference?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Not to be picky, but I think the money was royalty income, not taxes. In any case, the state of Alaska was merely leasing resources. It could have used the money to run the state, but the income was so large that it distributed a portion back to residents as a reverse income tax. There was no government ownership or control of private enterprise here.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    It is socialism, no questions asked. So is Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and State Rehabilitation Services. How about Welfare....would you be willing to lose your welfare money if you were to be fired from your job in the next 5 min.? Should we also give up these? If we gave up Social Security, 90% of the retired workforce would have to go back to work and they would be to far behind knowledge wise, and equipment wise to be useful, making them unemployed, and possibly become homeless because they won't have the money to keep their homes.

    Also, the people receiving the money are not lazy. I work my *** off for $10 an hour...Sometimes a 60 hour workweek with 21 of those hours unpaid. If it weren't for Social Services...I would not have my job because 1) I have hearing problems, my hearing aids cost $1500 per ear. With out these, I would not be able to work at all. Imagine people who have worse problems or mental problems or those who have to pay for child care and are also working low income jobs, we should just let them clutter our streets? 2)I am not earning enough to pay for my own rent, or pay for a decent car. Section 8 housing (also a socialist program) helps make the rent somewhat affordable (average apartment in this area is $700 a month) 3) My current job does not allow me to have another job. To keep my current job I am supposed to have 100% availability 100% of the time.

    Why do I not quit and find another job? None available that provides health insurance or retirement plans in this area that I am able to work without compensation such as an extra person. I know plenty of people who are in the same relative boat. These people are not lazy, but they do have a lot of needs they cannot live without, socialism just allows them just enough to live off of.

    Source(s): I am one of those people who has to rely on socialist programs just to live.
    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    The Alaskan state government has always charged extraction fees for oil taken from their territory. The fee collected that was in excess of the cost of government was then refunded to the people of Alaska, since it is the peoples' money, not the government's.

    To call it "socialism" is a ridiculous claim, but about what one could expect from a left-winger.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    A) that isn't "Palin's", it existed before her

    B) the oil companies are buying the natural resources that belong to the state of Alaska, which is owned by the people OF Alaska (i.e. the oil companies are buying the people's oil from under their state). Alaska chose to share the profits with the people, partly to maintain a strong population, because seriously...who wants to live in a place with no sun in the winter!

    C) Why isn't it socialism? Because no one is having their wealth re-distributed!

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Yes, this question was answered before. If memory serves, it was not considered "socialism", because all the residents of Alaska were considered share holders of the land, and thus entitled to their share of the profits from the use of that land. Perhaps it would be more clear to you, if you were able to comprehend exactly what socialism was...as opposed to just trying to score some Liberal agitation points for the premise of your question.

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