ARS on Twitter
RSS
Thinking Meat – It’s meat… and it stinks!!
Posted by Duncan on October 25th, 2008
UPDATE:
Meaty responds, as only Meaty can:
The fact remains that the Alaska Permanent Fund takes money from those who develop the mineral resources of Alaska and gives it to citizens of Alaska who have done nothing to earn it. That’s the wingnut definition of socialism, and by that definition, Sarah Palin is guilty of supporting a socialist scheme for wealth redistribution.
That Duncan denies this is simply another example of the blatant dishonesty practiced by wingnuts.
UPDATE 10/25/08 7:33 PM EDT: And still more nonsense from Duncan:
One thing I forgot to mention above. This is not a “redistribution of wealth”. There is no tax on people or the profits of corporations that funds this program.
The Alaska Permanent Fund isn’t a “redistribution of wealth”? Really? Where does the money for the fund come from? Duncan tells us that it is derived from:
…mineral lease rentals, royalties, royalty sales proceeds, federal mineral revenue-sharing payments and bonuses received by the state…
This money represents some fraction of the wealth of the companies that have actually developed the mineral resources of the state of Alaska. If money is not “wealth”, then what would Duncan call it?
And what happens to this money? Duncan tells us that:
Most spending from the Fund has been for dividends to qualified Alaska residents…
Hmmmm. It seems this wealth is sent to other people. If this action is not a “redistribution”, then what is it?
I’d love to ask Duncan these questions directly. Unfortunately, he and his cohorts have arranged matters so as to make it impossible for me to post any comments on their site. Guess they simply aren’t up to an actual discussion of their most peculiar — and blatantly inconsistent — definition of “socialism”.
What Meaty fails to realize, as Civil Truth pointed out in the comments, is that the income that the State of Alaska is bringing in are the fees and royalties due the state through leases, etc as opposed to a tax. The money is then invested in a fund, and the DIVIDENDS from these investments in the private sector are given out to the citizen’s of Alaska. In Meaty’s little mind, this “fraction of wealth” that the oil and mineral companies are paying the state can not be in used any way, in any form, or its socialism through the redistribution of wealth. If you use that money to build a highway, then the contractors building said highway are getting the “fraction of wealth” and benefitting from a “redistribution of wealth”. A pretty good argument he has set up, any use of government funds, however dervived, is socialism. Hell, my tax “refund” every April 15th is socialism apparently too.
ORIGINAL POST:
Yep. Meaty made a call out for someone to explain why Sarah Palin is a socialist, and why we’re giving her a pass. Sorry for taking so long to get back to ya bud, we’ve had some difficulties around here for the past few days. Anyways :
Somebody care to explain why this isn’t socialism? Cao? Big Dog? Raven? Jim Hoft? Anybody?
This all has to do with the Alaskan Permanent Fund, which :
is a constitutionally established fund, managed by a semi-independent corporation, established by Alaska in 1976. Shortly after the oil from Alaska’s North Slope began flowing to market through the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, the Permanent Fund was created by an amendment to the constitution of the U.S. state of Alaska to be an investment for at least 25% of proceeds from some minerals [such as oil and gas] sale or royalties. The Fund does not include either property taxes on oil company property nor income tax from oil corporations, so the minimum 25% deposit is closer to 11% if those sources were also considered. The Alaska Permanent Fund sets aside a certain share of oil revenues to continue benefiting current and all future generations of Alaskans. Many citizens also believed that the legislature too quickly and too inefficiently spent the $900 million bonus the state got in 1969 after leasing out the oil fields. This belief spurred a desire to put some oil revenues out of direct political control.
The Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation manages the assets of both the Permanent Fund and other state investments, but spending Fund income is up to the Legislature. The Corporation is to manage for maximum prudent return, and not–as some Alaskans at first wanted–as a development bank for in-state projects. The Fund grew from an initial investment of $734,000 in 1977 to the current sum of approximately forty billion dollars as of July 13, 2007. Some growth was due to good management, some to inflationary re-investment, and some via legislative decisions to deposit extra income during boom years. Each year, the fund’s realized earnings are split between inflation-proofing, operating expenses, and the annual Permanent Fund Dividend.
Here is the quote Meaty uses from SFGate:
Welcome to the Peoples Republic of Alaska, where every resident this year will get a $3,200 payout, thanks in no small measure to the efforts of Sarah Palin, the states Republican governor. Thats $22,400 for a family of seven, like Palins. Since 1982, the Alaska Permanent Fund, which invests oil revenues from state lands, has paid out a dividend on invested oil loot to everyone who has been in the state for a year. But Palin upped the ante by joining with Democrats and some recalcitrant Republican state legislators to share in oil company windfall profits, further fattening state tax revenue and permitting an additional payout in tax funds to residents.
So let me get this straight, this is a constitutionally mandated program (by the Alaskan State Constitution) created back in 1976. The fund itself does not:
include either property taxes on oil company property nor income tax from oil corporations…
25 percent of all mineral lease rentals, royalties, royalty sales proceeds, federal mineral revenue-sharing payments and bonuses received by the state be placed in a permanent fund, the principal of which may only be used for income-producing investments.
OHHHH SNAP!!! Looks like Meaty and his socialist friends don’t get to point fingers at Sarah Palin. This isn’t a “windfall profits tax” like Barack and the Democrats Socialists want, this is taking the royalties, lease rentals, and other fees being paid to the State of Alaska, putting them in a fund that
is fully invested in the capital markets, diversified among various asset classes. It generates income from these investments
and then DARES to give that money back to the citizens of Alaska. And it gives it back to them equally to, unlike the progressive income tax that Barack and the Socialists want to make more oppressive, all in the name of fairness. From the richest to the poorest Alaskan, they all get their fair share, an equal amount. Man, this must BURN Meaty and his socialist ilk that there isn’t a progressive amount being given to the “less fortunate”.
As Robert Sheer, the brilliant man who wrote this SFGate hit piece, writes :
Not that I blame Palin for wrangling for her state a bigger cut of oil company windfall profits; it’s just not an option that will work wonders for states without oil. Of course we can remedy that by having a federal windfall profits tax of the sort that Barack Obama dared propose, and which McCain and his fellow congressional Republicans have managed to quash. Their argument, rejected quite pointedly by Palin for Alaska, is that it would discourage oil companies from investing in increasing oil field yields.
WAHHH! WAAAHH! Only Alaska gets to enjoy the fruits of their state! WAAAAAAAAH! Barack Obama and Co. will give us a cut!!! Ofcourse, like I noted above, this Fund is not funded by a windfall profits tax at all and that is a point that Mr. Sheer, and Meaty, do not seem capable to wrap their pea brains around. All they have to go on is Palin Derangement Syndrome, where they see what they want to see, and don’t actually dig to find out. The fund pays out
realized earnings [which] consist of stock dividends, bond interest, real estate rent and the income made or lost by the sale of any of these investment assets. Unrealized earnings – those resulting from the change in market value of assets that are held – cannot be spent. Most spending from the Fund has been for dividends to qualified Alaska residents
I am sure that these funds would be better spent by the state on some sort of social welfare programs that are inefficient and instead create a class of people dependent on it, as opposed to giving that money directly to the citizens. I find it quite laughable that Meaty and his type are trying to use this as an example “socialism”, try to cry “GOTCHA!” and then rub our faces in it.
I am sure that Meaty will have witty comeback that Sarah Palin spent 150,000 smackaroos on her wardrobe, or ask why she hasn’t released her medical records, or if she’s actually the love child of Elvis Presley and Marilyn Monroe, or some other such nonsense. Or perhaps he’ll just say, “Well, she’s still a SOCIALIST! YEEEARRRRRGGH!”
October 25th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
One thing I forgot to mention above. This is not a “redistribution of wealth”. There is no tax on people or the profits of corporations that funds this program. This program also only affects the people of the State of Alaska. Such a program would not work other places, as Sheer pointed out. What works in Alaska doesn’t work in Pennsylvania doesn’t work in Lousiana does not work in Nevada. Which is what makes the federalist system work, as opposed to a national system that the Socialist-Democrats and Big Government Republicans can’t get through their thick skulls either…
October 25th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Duncan m’ boy, you’ve done a terrific job considering you were only bored and wanted to play with meaty. I’d hate to see what happens when you put some thought into it. Poor meaty… he’ll not understand you anyway and will end up calling you a liar and say you haven’t answered the question, but, that’s our meaty for you. Unintelligent and unaware.
October 25th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Awesom Duncan. When Meaty screws up he does so big time. Oh wait- he screws up all the time…but this one was an astronomical dungy for him. As always the leftards don’t research their own sources and vet out their stuff. I guess in this sense it wasn’t Meaty who screwed up, but the idiOt he quoted.
And GM is right: Meaty will fight back by pulling your hair and calling you a liar. As he runs away to hide and suck his thumb.
October 25th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Excellent analysis.
I see this as the key point you made: unlike Democratic legislators in Washington who spend faster than they acquire in revenue, Alaska is taking their fair royalty income and instead of spending it all on pork barrel and patronage for their big donors, they’re investing at least 25% via private markets in the future of the state and its citizen .
This is the opposite of a socialist program. Socialism would be when the state takes the revenue and spends it all in competition with the private sector. Instead, Alaska is investing, not spending. This money will come in useful if a “rainy day” comes, unlike states like California which spend every bump in their revenue and even more than their revenue, never saving anything and relying on accounting tricks to evade the statuatory requirement of a balanced budget.
And this year, the CA budget was in deficit even before the ink dried – after nearly 90 days or wrangling. beyond the budget deadline. That’s the socialist instinct in operation, not Alaska.
October 25th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
Here’s some more Meaty logic for ya :
Brilliant.
October 25th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Perhaps Meaty needs a lesson on what socialism is:
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
Source
If Meaty can show me, how Alaska’s plan is at all truly a socialist “program” then I might stop laughing at him and his
playground buddiesJergens buddies. The “State” here has an interest in the production of oils and other natural products; a private company manages the production; people are not taxed on this just to see everyone else gain from this. The interest from the 25% investment is what the people GET.This is, government working with private sector AND the people. It is not socialism. It is, at it’s best, capitalism at work. All those who have a vested interest here get something. Not all those get taxed to give everyone something. Big difference Meat Ball.
October 26th, 2008 at 1:13 am
…and I love Meaty’s comment on this at his Butt-ugly site…in response to yours. He says….nothing…but he links back to my Socialism post.
What a dork. He cannot offer a better argument than this. I wonder if he knows the worlds’ largest charitable organization happens to be the US Government? He can’t know. He’s too stupid. And close minded. And no matter what we try to educate him on, he won’t learn.
He is a leftard. A true bleu leftard.
October 26th, 2008 at 7:15 am
“This is not a “redistribution of wealth”.”
Let’s examine this claim.
1) Is the money that is used to create to Alaska Permanent Fund taken from companies that develop Alaska’s mineral resources?
2) Do the recipients of the money disbursed from the Alaska Permanent Fund include individuals who have done nothing to earn the money used to create to Alaska Permanent Fund?
“In Meaty’s little mind, this “fraction of wealth” that the oil and mineral companies are paying the state can not be in used any way, in any form, or its socialism through the redistribution of wealth… A pretty good argument he has set up, any use of government funds, however dervived, is socialism.”
I have made no such argument. Duncan’s decision to employ a straw man fallacy is unsurprising.
October 26th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
SO Meaty, you do advocate then for the sharing of money? The cash you earn should be taxed, and the taxes should go to people who don’t work and who don’t do anything to increase you’re pay? Are you for this? Doesn’t matter- it is how is is right now. You’re working (I assume) and your taxes are paying others who don’t work. Socialism isn’t about redistributing wealth so much as it’s about the government having ownership in businesses and services; people don’t get BACK money- to buy and purchase the things THEY want to own. Like their own insurances and what not. Under socialism, the government owns much and forces all to pay for it. Even if ALL doesn’t and won’t use it.
A great many of the peoples of Alaska have a vested interest in that Pipeline; the communities most populated surround it; many worked on building it and now work to maintain it. That, or they work in factories that build the supplies and parts replacements needed. Not all of the citizens, but most. THEY all voted to approve the line being built…everyone had a say. To give back some money, out of the dividends earned, is good. It’s a return of investment.You did indeed make the argument. And as usual, you try to change your intent when you lose the fight. :!:
October 26th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Note that Raven refuses to answer the questions posed above:
1) Is the money that is used to create to Alaska Permanent Fund taken from companies that develop Alaska’s mineral resources?
2) Do the recipients of the money disbursed from the Alaska Permanent Fund include individuals who have done nothing to earn the money used to create to Alaska Permanent Fund?
Open discussion of the claims made in Duncan’s post is terrifying to Raven and her fellow wingnuts.
“You did indeed make the argument.”
Then Raven will have no problem whatsoever citing the post or comment in which I make the argument that “any use of government funds, however dervived [sic], is socialism”. I challenge Raven to do so.
October 26th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Meaty does have quite a racket on logic here.
For instance he says :
Did Meaty actually say those words, directly. No, he didn’t say that. However, here is Meaty’s position:
1. Money is being taken by the State of Alaska from the private companies interested in developing and harvesting the natural resources of Alaska. This is their “fraction of wealth” that Meaty describes.
2. That money is being taken by the State and then given to ALL of the citizens of Alaska. (We’ll ignore the fact that the money actually given to the citizen comes from the dividends that the State of Alaska recieves after investing that money.)
3. Therefore, this is a redistribution of wealth, or socialism.
Meaty also makes the claim that non-profits are beneficiaries of socialism :
Once again, someone is benefitting from tax dollars paid by others. Or in Meaty’s little mind, socialism.
The logic here is that unless you paid directly into those taxes, you should recieve no benefit from them. And by Meaty’s self-serving definition to prove his hypothesis, you are left with no where to go but accept that any form of government money can only be spent on taxpayers, lest you support socialism.
The federal government spends tax dollars on defense and the us postal service, two Constitutionally mandated programs. According to Meaty, unless you paid taxes, you are not allowed to enjoy the protection of one or the use of the other, even if someone sends YOU a letter. After all, you didn’t pay taxes. I have never said that taxes are all bad.
After all, if we all paid our fair share, as opposed to the progressive income tax we currently have (and is a supporting plank of Marxism as written in the Communist Manifesto), then there would be no argument of socialism, as every one pays, everyone can benefit. Our very income tax structure NOW is socialism, we just happen to tolerate it.
But back to the APF and Meaty’s argument that Sarah Palin is a closet socialist. These fees and funds are taken and invested, as opposed to given directly to the people. These fees and funds, I guess, could be blown on some state program that benefits only the extremely poor, lazy, or a combination of both. Instead they are invested, and then the dividends are paid to all Alaskans.
But its socialism silly. Atleast according to Meaty.
October 26th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
1) Is the money that is used to create to Alaska Permanent Fund taken from companies that develop Alaska’s mineral resources?
2) Do the recipients of the money disbursed from the Alaska Permanent Fund include individuals who have done nothing to earn the money used to create to Alaska Permanent Fund?
October 26th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
Folks, I’m restarting this discussion with a drop ball (i.e. a fresh post).
I’m thus closing comments here.