Bigfatbillsfan Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 The choice of where I live has little to do with anything you clowns are whining about. Actually, I have huge problems with both the amount of money that Alaska gets and how it's spent. Go ahead and give me some examples of things I've said to the contrary. You know, since it "Seems like I don't have a problem". What tax? Alaska would still be ridiculously wealthy without federal largess. The indigenous population would suffer greatly. If I'm not mistaken Alaska taxes companies that drill in their state. I pointed this out in the post before. Do you have a problem with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 But you live in a wealthy state that makes out like a bandit by taxing corporations that drill in your state. Seems like you don't have a problem "taking" other peoples money when it benefits you. Get rid of that tax and see how wealthy you state becomes. It's called "royalties" dickweed. The oils on state land. Or would you just give it away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 It's called "royalties" dickweed. The oils on state land. Or would you just give it away? Hey don't you know you can't tax business they just pass the cost on to the consumer, Alaska's just increasing the price of fuel for everyone else, you bastards! and not only did you tax (charge royalties to) the oil and gas companies but Palin (conservative sweetheart) substantially increased the amount. Is it calling it a royalty that makes it ok , is it ok for an area that has systematically built up it's primary, secondary, and University educational systems to charge companies a intellectual capital royalty, how about an infrastructure royalty, or state department royalty, or a military royalty, or a corporate spying and mechanism to remove foreign leaders they might interfere with your business model royalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Hey don't you know you can't tax business they just pass the cost on to the consumer, Alaska's just increasing the price of fuel for everyone else, you bastards! and not only did you tax (charge royalties to) the oil and gas companies but Palin (conservative sweetheart) substantially increased the amount. Is it calling it a royalty that makes it ok , is it ok for an area that has systematically built up it's primary, secondary, and University educational systems to charge companies a intellectual capital royalty, how about an infrastructure royalty, or state department royalty, or a military royalty, or a corporate spying and mechanism to remove foreign leaders they might interfere with your business model royalty. Bah Bah Bah. Again, do you think Alaska should just give it's oil away? To BP no less? In your piss poor example[natural resources vs infrastructure, military, etc, etc] all those things WERE paid for by taxes. There may not be a user fee, but taxs paid for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Bah Bah Bah. Again, do you think Alaska should just give it's oil away? To BP no less? In your piss poor example[natural resources vs infrastructure, military, etc, etc] all those things WERE paid for by taxes. There may not be a user fee, but taxs paid for them. No I don't think Alaska should give it's oil away- but I also think corporations should pay taxes because of the resources they have access to by being American companies, that is called being not being a hypocrite, try it you may like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 No I don't think Alaska should give it's oil away- but I also think corporations should pay taxes because of the resources they have access to by being American companies, that is called being not being a hypocrite, try it you may like it. Corporations don't pay tax's? I had no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Bah Bah Bah. Again, do you think Alaska should just give it's oil away? To BP no less? In your piss poor example[natural resources vs infrastructure, military, etc, etc] all those things WERE paid for by taxes. There may not be a user fee, but taxs paid for them. I'm pretty sure lybob just gave you permission to excavate his yard in search of fossil fuels, precious metals, minerals, etc. free of charge or permission. I would stop asking questions and start planting some charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 (edited) I'm pretty sure lybob just gave you permission to excavate his yard in search of fossil fuels, precious metals, minerals, etc. free of charge or permission. I would stop asking questions and start planting some charges. Sure sounded that way. Not sure if he'd like a dirty hippie without all the peace and love hanging around though. Edited January 23, 2012 by Jim in Anchorage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Corporations don't pay tax's? I had no idea. and you support corporate tax? I had no idea. Face it, Alaskans are dirty freeloading socialist hippies- you tax rape the poor oil and gas companies and then redistribute the wealth - money the state could be using to buy a couple ice cutters or building geothermal power plant for Nome, or putting more cops on the beat and building more jails to alleviate your huge rape epidemic is instead redistributed to all the Alaskan dirty Hippies so they can build more hot tubes and have fancier bongs- of course you can't be surprised from a state who's Governor's daughter loses her virginity in a tent at 16 due to underage drinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 The State of Alaska is doing nothing different than what an individual property owner would do and what the Federal Government is doing also. As an individual I can lease my property's mineral rights and ask for a percentage of any production sold. Typically speaking the royalties run 12.5% but can go higher. I also would get paid a sum upfront giving the oil company the right to explore and drill, with the usual caveat that they must drill within a certain time frame or lose any mineral rights. The State of Alaska gives a share of the royalties to qualified residents. This seems like a win/win/win situation for the State, it's residents and the oil companies. Leave it to guys like lyrbob and Fatty to act like their vaginas are filled with sand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 ...of course you can't be surprised from a state who's Governor's daughter loses her virginity in a tent at 16 due to underage drinking. You should write for Newsweek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 and you support corporate tax? I had no idea. Face it, Alaskans are dirty freeloading socialist hippies- you tax rape the poor oil and gas companies and then redistribute the wealth - money the state could be using to buy a couple ice cutters or building geothermal power plant for Nome, or putting more cops on the beat and building more jails to alleviate your huge rape epidemic is instead redistributed to all the Alaskan dirty Hippies so they can build more hot tubes and have fancier bongs- of course you can't be surprised from a state who's Governor's daughter loses her virginity in a tent at 16 due to underage drinking. Palin's daughter was at OWS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 You should write for Newsweek. I'm sharping my skills Palin's daughter was at OWS? That's why Jim and Darrin are so pissed at OWS it infringes on their thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 The State of Alaska is doing nothing different than what an individual property owner would do and what the Federal Government is doing also. As an individual I can lease my property's mineral rights and ask for a percentage of any production sold. Typically speaking the royalties run 12.5% but can go higher. I also would get paid a sum upfront giving the oil company the right to explore and drill, with the usual caveat that they must drill within a certain time frame or lose any mineral rights. The State of Alaska gives a share of the royalties to qualified residents. This seems like a win/win/win situation for the State, it's residents and the oil companies. Leave it to guys like lyrbob and Fatty to act like their vaginas are filled with sand. I suspect lyboob would really prefer the state take 95%, or better yet nationalize the oil company's, but his blind Palin/Alaska hatred forces him to take the role of defending big oil. Wonder what his liberal buddy's would think of him if they knew he was arguing BP is over taxed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 (edited) Are there really just two losing sides, or is it easier for you to create them using generalizations like above so you can point at everyone and suggest you're above it all because you don't fit in with your own defined generalizations? And in casting such generalizations, aren't you, in fact, just like the two losing sides? When liberals say all conservatives are extreme islamophoic selfish gay haters who want grandma to die and children to starve, and conservatives say liberals are just socialists who want to take from the productive and give to the teet-suckers, and you simply find the comfortable middle road and call each of them the same thing...doesn't that just make you a part of a third losing side? The side that only extends the generalizations but offers no other options? There's no shortage of people willing to stand back and say the two-party system sucks, but there is a dire shortage of anyone offering real alternate answers, options or solutions. And please don't point to Ron Paul. Ron Paul is three parts conservative, one part batschitt looney. But hey...there are two losing sides, and you're not on either one of them, so you must be a winner! When the smoke clears, I am always on the winning side! lol Seriously, if the conservatives put down their red flag, the liberals put down their blue flag, and we all picked up the Red, White and Blue flag, maybe we could get something done. I don't care if it is capitalism, socialism (well, maybe I care a bit), martianism, plutonium, whatever. It is time that We the people demand the finger pointing stop and be replaced by action. I am tired of blaming Presidents Bush and Obama for what WE are doing wrong. Personally, I want spending cuts and tax hikes (with the revenue going to pay the deficit). Cuts need to be made on BOTH entitlements and the military- we can't afford what we are spending on either. People won't want to tighten their belts, but it is better to tighten them not, than it will be later. Heck, all anybody on either "side" wants is for all the problems to go away- but we need to stop demonizing each other and reducing the other side to sound bites in a mad power grab. Playing politics won't fix problems, it only makes them worse. Edited January 23, 2012 by Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 I suspect lyboob would really prefer the state take 95%, or better yet nationalize the oil company's, but his blind Palin/Alaska hatred forces him to take the role of defending big oil. Wonder what his liberal buddy's would think of him if they knew he was arguing BP is over taxed? No what I would prefer is not having some freeloading, handout taking, drunk, toked up, sex offending, dirty, hippies from America's Ice box calling good moral people in the lower 48 socialists. It's a great scam you have but stop pushing it or people will look into it and find all that independent conservative rhetoric is just Moose dung. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 I can only laugh. Ladies and Gent's I give you the left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 No what I would prefer is not having some freeloading, handout taking, drunk, toked up, sex offending, dirty, hippies from America's Ice box calling good moral people in the lower 48 socialists. It's a great scam you have but stop pushing it or people will look into it and find all that independent conservative rhetoric is just Moose dung. Another example of that intellectual liberal tolerance for all to see. There isn't any great scam here, other than smarter people taking advantage of the liberal system. Welcome to history, because it's happened every single time you idiots allow government to expand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Another example of that intellectual liberal tolerance for all to see. There isn't any great scam here, other than smarter people taking advantage of the liberal system. Welcome to history, because it's happened every single time you idiots allow government to expand. Yes when Alaskan's take advantage of the system it's because they're smart but if a mother on welfare in DC takes full advantage of the system it's a moral outrage. If the people of Alaska want to take more of the oil and gas profits for themselves it's ok, if anyone else who wants a larger cut of corporate profits earned in their state to cover externalities then it's an assault on capitalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Yes when Alaskan's take advantage of the system it's because they're smart but if a mother on welfare in DC takes full advantage of the system it's a moral outrage. If the people of Alaska want to take more of the oil and gas profits for themselves it's ok, if anyone else who wants a larger cut of corporate profits earned in their state to cover externalities then it's an assault on capitalism. Keep digging comrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts