Analysis of total state debt shows Alaska, New Jersey, and Hawaii among states in worst fiscal situations

[웃 910]

NOV 17, 2011

Analysis of total state debt shows Alaska, New Jersey, and Hawaii among states in worst fiscal situations

State Budget Solutions' (SBS) latest study reveals total state debt averages $13,754 for every American and $38,721 for each of the private sector workers in this country. The research examines how total state debt is affected by state size factors, including population, private sector labor force, and private sector output. The resulting figures tell more about how states are doing fiscally compared to one another than raw debt estimates alone.

How the states compare

This study looks at state debt as more than just a lump sum number. Aggregate state debt numbers are a coarse measure of a state's true fiscal burden because they fail to consider each state's size. Viewed relative to state-specific population, private sector workforce, and private industry output in current dollars, state debt numbers reveal the actual fiscal burden on each person, on private industry workers and the state's private sector production. This study explains exactly how much this burden is. Several states make multiple appearances at the bottom of the three categories in this study, meaning they rank worst. These states include: Alaska, New Jersey, Hawaii, Connecticut,New Mexico, and Illinois. Alaska ranks worst in two categories: total state debt per capita at $39,373 per person and total state debt per private sector worker at $102,389 per private worker.

This paints a different picture than when absolute debt is considered only. The three states that possess the largest state debts, compiled in this year's annual state deficit report, California, New York, and Texas, have the largest populations, number of private sector workers, and private sector outputs, but none break the bottom rankings in any category in this report.

Nebraska, Tennessee, Indiana, and South Dakota frequently make the top of these new rankings. Nebraska maintains the number one position in all three categories.

New Jersey and Illinois are the only states that rank near the bottom for both absolute total state debt and the lists in this report. However, New Jersey makes an appearance at the bottom in all categories, while Illinois only appears once. Illinois ranks fourth largest among the states in two size categories - population and private sector outputs.

Methodology

Total state debt as calculated by SBS includes outstanding debt as well as future liabilities, including pension and other post-employment benefits liabilities, Unemployment Trust Fund loans, and current projected budget gaps. Total state debt is broken down per person to show the burden of debt on each person in a state.

Moreover, total debt is divided by the number of private sector workers in each state. This value takes the labor force into account and gauges the amount of debt each non-public sector worker carries. Each private worker carries the weight of paying back the state's outstanding debt obligations and all liabilities, including pension and health benefits promised to public sector workers. Undoubtedly, this leads to financial strains on private workers from heavier taxes and private employers who have to manage higher associated costs to run their businesses.

Economic activity in each state is also considered in this report. Total debt is taken as a percentage of each state's gross state product for private industries. The larger a state's portion of debt is to its private sector output signifies more resources necessary to pay off public debt in the future than to add to future economic growth.

The numbers

SBS ranked states in three distinct categories: total state debt per capita, total state debt per private sector worker, and total state debt as a percentage of gross state product (GSP) for private industries.

Alaska finished with the highest total debt per capita and per private sector worker with $39,373 per person and $102,389 per private worker. Finally, Hawaii's debt is 71.39 percent of its total private output, putting it last in the total debt as a percentage of GSP for private industries category.

Nebraska ranked best in all three categories: $4,274 per person in total debt per capita, $9,787 per worker in total debt per private sector worker, and only 10.05 percent of its debt is its total state output.

The bottom five states in the total debt as a percentage of GSP for private industries category were the only states to break the 50 percent margin.

Sources

Total state debt figure are found in SBS' 2011 annual state deficit report. The state debt number combines states' major debt and future liabilities, including pension and other post-employment benefits liabilities, Unemployment Trust Fund loans, and current projected budget gaps. Outstanding debt sources are from each state's most recent Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), which can lag current data by one to three years. Unfunded pension liability numbers are from AEI's "The Market Value of Public-Sector Pension Deficits" and post-employment opportunities figures are from Pew's "The Widening Gap: The Great Recession's Impact on State Pension and Retiree Health Care Costs" report on pension funds as of 2009. Unemployment Trust Fund Loans are from the National Council of State Legislators, and current budget shortfalls are from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Population figures are taken from the 2010 U.S. Census Population figures, and private sector worker numbers are from the most recent figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Gross state products for each state are from 2010 figures from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

View the data in its entirety here.

Edited January 9, 2012 by ☠

[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.

Edited January 9, 2012 by Why_Me

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

There's your problem right there: Alaskans can't do simple math.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

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

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

There's your problem right there: Alaskans can't do simple math.

See that post of mine up above? Ya... you and LI were owned. LI doesn't really have much to his game...but you? I expected better than that amateur play out of you. Usually your on top of it when you post on here...you do your homework first. You disappointed me this time.

When it comes to state $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$; Alaska > California, Michigan or any other state for that matter.

[Dan J 277]

The point has nothing to do with Alaska's ability to pay, but how much public debt the state has. If they are being smart, most of the surplus should be dedicated to paying off debt. There is no guarntee that all the money that they are getting from oil companies will be around in 10-20 years. If they loose that oil revenue and the debt levels continue to stay as high as they are, state taxes in Alaska will get hiked quite a bit to pay off that debt.

There are so many people who make decisions on the future based on the good times and find themselves stuck with a lot more debt than they expected when things get worse.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

The point has nothing to do with Alaska's ability to pay, but how much public debt the state has. If they are being smart, most of the surplus should be dedicated to paying off debt. There is no guarntee that all the money that they are getting from oil companies will be around in 10-20 years. If they loose that oil revenue and the debt levels continue to stay as high as they are, state taxes in Alaska will get hiked quite a bit to pay off that debt.

There are so many people who make decisions on the future based on the good times and find themselves stuck with a lot more debt than they expected when things get worse.

http://dor.alaska.gov/treasury/ <----- We could pay any and all public debt off tomorrow. Again Alaska is ####### of the block in terms of state income to debt ratio. And as far as looking out for the future...that's why our state has a Alaska Permanent Fund. It just makes money...more and more and more $$$$$$ every year. It's like a pig that doesn't stop growing. It's at $40+ billion and growing. We might even consider purchasing California for a vacation spot for Alaskans if it didn't have so many illegals.

Edited January 9, 2012 by Why_Me

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The point has nothing to do with Alaska's ability to pay, but how much public debt the state has. If they are being smart, most of the surplus should be dedicated to paying off debt. There is no guarntee that all the money that they are getting from oil companies will be around in 10-20 years. If they loose that oil revenue and the debt levels continue to stay as high as they are, state taxes in Alaska will get hiked quite a bit to pay off that debt.

There are so many people who make decisions on the future based on the good times and find themselves stuck with a lot more debt than they expected when things get worse.

I suppose California could be like Alaska and ignore all their pension liabilities. Then we could have a $3 trillion "permanent" fund as well. If ANWAR does not open, or doesn't produce, either one of which is more likely than not, then the state is in a world of hurt, in about a decade or so.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

I suppose California could be like Alaska and ignore all their pension liabilities. Then we could have a $3 trillion "permanent" fund as well. If ANWAR does not open, or doesn't produce, either one of which is more likely than not, then the state is in a world of hurt, in about a decade or so.

Why oh why do you keep sticking tongue in the light socket?

Obama gave the go ahead last month to drill west of Kaparuk along with the Army Corps of Engineers giving the go ahead on the Colville River bridge. That field is close to equal in size to Prudhoe Bay. That's not even taking in the fact Obama and his gestapo gave the go ahead for off shore drilling in the Beaufort Sea...which btw will transport it's oil via the Alaska Pipeline...more $$$ for Alaska (oil tax).

The state has already put the gears in motion to start building it's own state owned and operated natural gas line from Prudhoe Bay to Valdez and Kenai. We have a gas liquefying plant in Kenai where we export liquefied gas to Asian nations such as Japan and South Korea.

Does ANWR have oil? LOL. Every test drill near ANWR (which was diagonal drilling btw so it was ANWR) has been a hit. ANWR has a ####### load of oil. When the scrubs in the lower 48 start crying about gas prices that's when Congress and the Prez give the go ahead. Better for us...higher crude oil prices mean more $$$$$ for Alaska. We can wait on ANWR. We have plenty of money in our kitty now...and it's only going to get bigger.

Now figure in our gold and nickel resources and it really has us pimping. We have gold up the ####### up here that we haven't even really tapped into yet. We can afford to wait for rainy days for that.

Edited January 9, 2012 by Why_Me

[kytwell 179]

If Why_Me numbers are correct, it seems New Joisey aka The Armpit of America has bigger problems, than Alaska. They used to have a monopoly on degenerate Pennsylvania gamblers going to AC to piss away their money, plus get half of the toll $$$ from those travelers. Now what do they have a lock on? Camden? Newark? Patterson? Jersey City? The disgusting area that starts @ 4 blocks outside the gambling area in AC? Even the "shore" towns are ####### now. Most of my friends and our families used to go to Sea Isle City, but in the past 10 years or so started going to Ocean City, Maryland or Virginia Beach instead.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Alaska had a AAA rating for years. California is the only state that has a A- rating hence the reason California pays so much towards interest.