California's Only Elected Tea Party Member Fails in Hijack Attempt

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

I didn't make a statement, I asked a question. Yous aid that the natives are the federal teat suckers. You're currently a federal teat sucker. Fair question, then, isn't it?

The employer pays unemployment in Alaska not to mention the employee pays into it along with being taxed on it. Google it.

If we nuked California our economy would shrink immediately by $2 trillion!

California's gross domestic product ticked up 1.8% in 2010 to $1.9 trillion, a sign that the state's fragile recovery took hold last year.

If California were an independent country, it would have the ninth-highest GDP in the world, with higher output than Canada's but lower than Italy's, according to data from the

International Monetary Fund. It has the highest GDP in the U.S., topping Texas, which saw its GDP grow 2.8% in 2010, to $1.2 trillion.

California's per capita GDP in 2010, at $46,488, was one of the higher in the nation. Alaska topped the nation in per capita GDP, at $63,424, while Mississippi had the lowest GDP in the country, at $29,345.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/06/california-gdp.html

You can go ahead and sue whatever school you went to. And I'l explain why...although it's pretty obvious to most of us.

A state can have an economy of $80 billion a year, but it you spend $81 billion a year and you have to borrow $1 billion at super high interest rates for the fact your state has the worst credit rating of all states then what does that tell you?

Let me put it in easier terms that you might understand.

Let's say little Johnny makes $10 a day with his lemonade stand, but after little Johnny gets done paying $3 tax to the state in order to support all the illegals in said state, and after paying for supplies, little Johnny end up owing $2.

So it doesn't matter how much money little Johnny makes each day at his lemonade stand if he's paying more than he takes in. Get it now?

Edited January 9, 2012 by Why_Me

[웃 910]

You can go ahead and sue whatever school you went to. And I'l explain why...although it's pretty obvious to most of us.

A state can have an economy of $80 billion a year, but it you spend $81 billion a year and you have to borrow $1 billion at super high interest rates for the fact your state has the worst credit rating of all states then what does that tell you?

Let me put it in easier terms that you might understand.

Let's say little Johnny makes $10 a day with his lemonade stand, but after little Johnny gets done paying $3 tax to the state in order to support all the illegals in said state, and after paying for supplies, little Johnny end up owing $2.

So it doesn't matter how much money little Johnny makes each day at his lemonade stand if he's paying more than he takes in. Get it now?

Alaska:

California:

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The employer pays unemployment in Alaska not to mention the employee pays into it along with being taxed on it. Google it.

That's for 26 weeks. And that's in good times. UI has run out of funds in most places and is supplemented with federal dollars. That said, aren't you a 99er? In that case, you're entirely on Uncle Sam's teat.

Edited January 9, 2012 by Mr. Big Dog

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Alaska:

California:

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Alaska:

California:

Why do you even post with the big kids on here? Alaska is over $40 billion to the good. In fact this state is so rich that we give money in the form of a check to every resident of Alaska once year called a "Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund <------ Alaska Permanent Fund

http://www.pfd.state.ak.us/ApplyOnline.aspx <----- It took me less than five minutes to click that link the other day and apply. Come October money will be direct deposited into my checking account. Feds tax that money, but it's money in the bank. Does any other state do that? And no, we do not have a state income tax for the fact this state is filthy rich. Were pimps and we know it.

As for food stamps, welfare, HUD housing, etc... Alaska Natives account for well over 85% of that ####### up here. They get free HUD houses, something called a "Quest Card" that's like food stamps, free medical, dental, optical...you name it they get it. And the state doesn't give them jack ####### other than that dividend check that all of us up here get. The Feds (Obama) asked us to help contribute to them to ease some of the Federal spending on them and we just laughed. Let the Feds give them everything for free, because we sure aren't. A$$, gas, and grass....nobody rides for free...unless the Feds say so. Your tax dollars are paying for the Alaska Natives up here.

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=565812 <----- Add another $3.4 billion to that total.

California on the other hand has the worst credit rating of all states in this country for the fact that state is a loser state. It owes billions of dollars and instead of trying to fix the problem, they just made new "Dream Act" laws so that all the legal tax payers left in that state can pay even more money for the illegals living there "illegally". Smart on their part eh? Now they want to raise the taxes to help pay off that enormous debt that state owes.

Oh and btw, California has a unemployment rate of around 12% ...which is way above the national average yet illegals make up 10% of California's work force. And no, those illegals do not pay taxes nor do the bossiness that hire them.

With Alaska's unemployment rate..we are way lower when you don't factor in the Alaska Native population. Alaska natives for the most part don't work for the fact they get everything for free thanks to the Feds on top of their Alaska Native dividend checks which have totaled in the hundreds of thousands per tribal member in some years depending on what native corporation you belong to.

Edited January 9, 2012 by Why_Me

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

[웃 910]

Sarah Palin has long sold herself as a fiscal conservative, arguing against the Democrats’ health overhaul on the grounds that the nation simply can’t afford it.

But when the former vice presidential candidate resigned as governor of Alaska in the summer of 2009, she left the state with a 70 percent debt-to-GDP ratio — the highest state debt burden in the United States.

That’s according to data compiled by the Washington Independent’s Megan Carpentier, who notes that Alaska has a debt burden similar to “that of Jordan and Palin's favorite health care resource, Canada, and a higher ratio than Ghana, Cote d'Ivoire, India, the Philippines or Uruguay.”

By comparison, crisis-stricken California has a debt ratio of less than 40 percent. All the more confounding about Alaska’s debt is the fact that it is an oil-producing region with a small population to share in that wealth. Oil-rich Alberta, Canada, for example, collects no sales tax and still managed to retire its debt entirely in 2004.

While Alaska’s massive debt burden can’t be blamed entirely on Palin’s two-and-a-half-year stint as governor, she did face similar debt problems while mayor of Wasilla, and those appear to be of her own making.

Wasilla’s municipal debt went from around $1 million when she came in to office, to around $22 million when she left, mostly as a result of the construction of a sports arena and public works projects championed by Palin.

While Alaska’s debt load is high by the standards of US states, it’s worth noting some nations have considerably higher debt loads. Japan, for example, is carrying a debt load of more than 190 percent of GDP; Greece, recently hit by a debt crisis, has a 108 percent debt-to-GDP ratio.

The debt load for the US federal government clocked in at around 53 percent in 2009; the debt is expected to increase to 68.5 percent by 2014.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/03/31/postpalin-alaska-largest-debt-burden/

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2010/03/30/business/economy/30statesGraphicA.html?ref=economy

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund <------ Alaska Permanent Fund

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=565812 <----- $3.4 billion state budget surplus for just last year alone. Alaska is the richest state in the union..bar none.

http://dor.alaska.gov/treasury/ <----- State of Alaska Treasury. Yes, we are pimps.

Now go read a book or something productive and when you think your ready to come back here and post with the big boys then give it a shot. But for now...your out of your league.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

COMMENTS (1)

Add a comment

Most Recent Comments

The real irony here...

By Mike Farris on Apr 7, 2011 12:21:34 PM

is that Alaska is the largest welfare state in the union.

[The_Dude 1,142]

I think the whiners from welfare states, that take in more money from the federal government than they pay should mind their own business, and focus on their own lives and jobs and let California govern itself.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I think the whiners from welfare states, that take in more money from the federal government than they pay should mind their own business, and focus on their own lives and jobs and let California govern itself.

Coincidentally, these whiners are also usually those arguing that the states should have more authority over their own affairs. Just as long as Uncle Sam pays them bills, of course.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Coincidentally, these whiners are also usually those arguing that the states should have more authority over their own affairs. Just as long as Uncle Sam pays them bills, of course.

Alaskan Natives (Eskimos, Aleuts,Indians) make up for over 90% of government handouts to Alaskans ...mainly via BIA, HUD, etc... The rest of us could give a ####### less if the Feds cut out the welfare up here.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Coincidentally, these whiners are also usually those arguing that the states should have more authority over their own affairs. Just as long as Uncle Sam pays them bills, of course.

They also love to blame everyone except themselves.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

They also love to blame everyone except themselves.

Naturally. When in doubt, blame the eighth largest economy in the world. No, that certainly ain't Alaska and it ain't Texas either.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Naturally. When in doubt, blame the eighth largest economy in the world. No, that certainly ain't Alaska and it ain't Texas either.

It doesn't matter how big your economy is when you spend more than you receive. California has the worst credit rating (A-) of all the states in the US. It's a loser state. It can't bend over enough for it's illegals while expecting legal citizens in California to foot the tab hence the reason California has had an exodus in recent years of business owners and the more well to do people leaving that sinking ship of a state for greener pastures.

Alaska in the meantime is counting it's money. Alaska is so rich it gives money to it's residents every year in the form of a Alaska Permanent Fund check aka dividend..

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=565812

Surging oil prices deliver huge surplus to Alaska

THURSDAY, APRIL 07, 2011

Budget-troubled states could be forgiven for envying Alaska, where surging oil prices are producing a cash windfall so huge that lawmakers and the governor don't know what to do with it.

Revenue estimators on Wednesday (April 6) delivered the news that the state will have a $3.4 billion budget surplus — on top of more than $11 billion it already has in savings and another $1 billion that lawmakers were considering socking away this year, according to the Anchorage Daily News.

Oil prices are responsible for the eye-popping budget surplus in Alaska, which ranks 47th in the United States in population.

While Alaska charges its residents no statewide sales or income taxes, it relies far more heavily than other states on excise taxes levied on natural resources. Fully 90 percent of its general fund revenue comes from oil.

While other states debate which programs to cut or which taxes to hike because of budget shortfalls, the question in Alaska now becomes how to spend the money. The Daily News notes that lawmakers already were planning a bigger-than-usual budget before Wednesday's revenue numbers came in, and now some of them are debating with the governor over whether the excess money should be devoted to new construction projects, more savings or tax cuts.

"Really, how much (money) is enough?" says Governor Sean Parnell, who prefers cutting oil taxes and building up savings for a potentially less-gilded time in the future.

http://www.apfc.org/home/Content/pressroom/pressStory2009.cfm?story=Permanent%20Fund%20at%20%2440%20billion%2C%20gains%2020.6%20percent%20in%20FY11&s=1

FUND NEWS

Aug 02, 2011

Permanent Fund at $40 billion, gains 20.6 percent in FY11

AUG 2 - The Alaska Permanent Fund returned 20.6 percent for fiscal year 2011 according to unaudited figures released on Tuesday. This is the third highest return in the Fund’s history, and the first time the return has been over 20 percent since 1986. The Permanent Fund ended June 30 with a value of $40.1 billion, the first year-end close over $40 billion in its history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund

Alaska Permanent Fund

Though the payouts have varied from the smallest ($331.29 per person in 1984) and the largest ($3,269.00 per person in 2008 when a one-time $1,200 Alaska Resource Rebate was added to the dividend amount),[4] they usually vary between $600 and $1,500 ($900 and $1,800 when adjusted for 2005 dollars). Although the principal or corpus of the Fund is constitutionally protected, income earned by the Fund, like nearly all State income, is constitutionally defined as general fund money (subject to legislative appropriation for any purpose ... but, in practical political terms, the public tolerates spending Fund income mostly only for 'inflation-proofing' and for paying dividends).

Annual individual payout (in nominal dollars):

Year Amount

2011 $1,174.00

2010 $1,281.00

2009 $1,305.00

2008 $2,069.00 + $1,200 Alaska Resource Rebate

2007 $1,654.00

2006 $1,106.96

2005 $845.76

2004 $919.84

2003 $1,107.56

2002 $1,540.76

2001 $1,850.28

2000 $1,963.86

1999 $1,769.84

1998 $1,540.88

1997 $1,296.54

1996 $1,130.68

1995 $990.30

1994 $983.90

1993 $949.46

1992 $915.84

1991 $931.34

1990 $952.63

1989 $873.16

1988 $826.93

1987 $708.19

1986 $556.26

1985 $404.00

1984 $331.29

1983 $386.15

1982 $1,000.00

Edited January 9, 2012 by Why_Me