Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk » Alaska the welfare state

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Alaska the welfare state
bond006
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bond006     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Central
Shotgun Wedding: Another ******* for the Welfare State
By Ghost Who Walks - September 3, 2008, 10:39AM
In 2003, federal spending for each Alaskan resident was $12,200. So for a typical family of 7 (snark), that means roughly $85K in government largesse. Now it's possible our new VP candidate can use her state governor's experience of our largest state and biggest welfare problem to solve one of America's more intransigent problems - the high rate of fatherless birth to minority mothers - by simply handing over what they get in Alaska, $36K per year to every new family with an additional $12K to each new unexpected child. As long as we don't call these payments "welfare", but instead call them say "incentive to deforest huge swaths of pristine Alaskan forest" or "a reckless effort to despoil long coastlines through inefficient drilling in hazardous climes", we can effectively end the welfare state as we know it (and re-introduce it as only the non-continental states know how to do). I know it's hard to imagine someone being more adapt at this kind of ripoff than our sparsely populated Republican agriculture states, but it's true. Alaska is our future, if it's motto is to be believed, so Go North, young family, and you'll be shooting moose and trapping beaver to your heart's content, presuming it doesn't freeze to a halt at -45 degrees. And you'll be part of God's great plan, the great giveaway whose name shall not be named except to call them "patriots".

So now that we have that little social issue out of the way, we can move on to a second ramification of our little Alaskan soap opera, the rate of shotgun weddings among backwoods white people. While I'm sure this homeschooled lad was fully versed in all sorts of good reasons to do the honorable thing by this young lady, and considering he's in Alaska where his minimum wage job prospects being 17 years of age and likely white mean $14/hour rather than the national level of $6.55, there is a part of me that questions, "Whither India?" Okay, it's not really a pre-arranged marriage, and I haven't heard of Alaskans building funeral pyres for living widows of fallen men, but it is likely that getting married at a very young age to someone you barely know has a high likelihood of failure. In fact, more fundamentalist Christians seem to have a bigger knack for this failure due to various reasons, due to younger marriages, less pre-marital co-habitation/getting acquainted, less flexibility in thinking about marriage, and so on. Not so surprisingly, devil-worshiping liberal Massachussetts has the lowest divorce rate in the country - likely because devil-worshipers have no reason to get married unless they actually want to live together, which kind of improves the chances of success, provided they happen to survive the satanic rituals. And while I can't speak for the child, I imagine a pair of grumpy parents that didn't want to be there in the first place really make charming examples to wake up to for the first 18 years or so of your life, perhaps driving the tot to drink or a self-destructive habit of voting Republican out of spite despite the obvious repeated failures and the inability to take responsibility for one's actions.

So now to finish up what probably lost its point some time ago, it's possible even that Palin quit that gas commission over moral dilemmas, rather than just that someone else's crook or crooked issue got chosen over her crook or crooked issue. Stranger things have happened. But let's not confuse naivete with wizened principles either. The world has lots of examples of once-principled actors like Mugabe or Marion Berry or Joe Lieberman who once served a useful, enlightened purpose and then turned into a cheap parody of themselves once drawn within the limelight. And it's not like Palin missed the chance to be greedy the 2nd time around, pushing through a quick profits tax on petrol companies to buy her state a few more snowmobiles. As George Bernard Shaw stated, "Virtue is insufficient temptation", and once Palin makes her way to Washington or perhaps as she's already discovered in Juneau, she'll find no shortages. But don't look for Republicans - they've made an institution of stealing as a means to smaller government and morals as a covering for their absence.


print share PERMALINK | Recommend this! (27)

Posts: 6008 | From: phoenix az | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bdgee
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for bdgee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Any funds or service going to anyone but me(or us) is socialism.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bond006
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bond006     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Welfare State


Ahhhh, Alaska, the North to the Future state. Where many love to tell us how tough they are and how much disdain they have for the lower 48 and the federal government. That is until it comes to sucking money north to the future from the federal teat in the way of earmarks.

Alaska, which ranks 47th in population is number 1 in acquiring federal earmarks. In 2008, while the average state received approximately $50 per capita in federal earmarks, Alaska citizens received $506. This was thanks to indicted Alaska Senator Ted Stevens aptly named the earmarker in chief. It amounts to 10 times the national average. This makes Alaska the biggest welfare state in the nation.

This year Alaska has requested 31 earmarks worth $197.8 million for next years federal budget. In fiscal year 2008 Alaska received $379,669,715! That is nearly $100 million more than any other state received.

Many earmarks are viewed as positive for voters, but particularly in Alaska. They are important for some community functions and even some analysts agree that earmarks, in the long run, ending up saving taxpayers money. While there is truth in that one must look closely at what those earmarks really fund and whether is was really necessary at the time.

While Sarah Palin is hoodwinking the nation as a reformer and denier of earmarks - her claims of telling the federal government "thanks but no thanks..." on the money for the bridge to nowhere - the truth tells another story. She took the money earmarked for that bridge and Alaska is now using it to build access ramps to a bridge that doesn't exist and transportation access to Steven's hometown. During her tenure as mayor of small town Wasilla (pop. approximately 6700 during her time as mayor), She managed to secure over $27 million in federal earmarks from 2000 to 2003. That equates to nearly $6.7 million a year for a town that of only 6700 people. Below is an analysis from Taxpayers for Common Sense by Center for American Progress Action Fund Senior Fellow Scott Lilly.


During her reign as mayor Sarah Palin loved sucking in federal money. She was proud of it as evidenced by her remarks, in her own handwriting.


Needless to say this amounted to over $1000 per person in Wasilla which was twice the Alaska state average. Yes, Sarah, "we did well!!!", you surely did.

Sucking funds from the federal coffers is not atypical for Alaska despite it being the only state with no income or sales tax. Instead of Alaska handing out rebate checks to every citizen ( money garnered from oil revenue which was nearly $3200 this year alone), it would behoove Alaska to take some of that money to fund the projects it wants accomplished. With Alaska poised to rack up billions of dollars in surplus this year I find it objectionable that Alaska continues to acquire federal earmark monies.

Sarah Palin needs to stop the lies about rejecting earmarks when the evidence is overwhelming that her statements are false. Country first? No, for Sarah Palin it's always been Alaska first at the expense of the rest of the nation. Alaska truly is the welfare state.


Tags: federal earmarks, Alaska, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin lies

Posts: 6008 | From: phoenix az | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share