Stonewalling
Published Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!Aug. 2, 2008
To the editor:
It seems the Legislature is better at stonewalling about the energy rebate proposed by Gov. Palin than they are about most everything else. It will soon be Permanent Fund time, and they can pat themselves on the backs and say “See the energy rebate wasn’t needed after all.” (I predicted the Legislature would drag its feet through the summer to avoid giving Alaska residents a penny of its windfall profits.)
These are the people who have been voted into office to look after the well-being of the state, which includes its residents. Not acting on the real needs of energy assistance in the most direct and expedient manner is nothing short of dereliction of duty.
Now, everyone seems to have a plan for energy assistance, each one even more complicated than the last. The bickering continues, and the residents suffer. Enough already. More foot dragging is not needed.
The argument that a rebate is too expensive is ludicrous beyond belief. Alaskans need to remember this sorry episode of inaction by the Legislature and the finance committee in particular on election day. The finance committee can’t seem to get past the idea that oil revenue belongs to the residents of Alaska and not the state Legislature. Perhaps a ballot measure on sharing the windfall profits is required.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Well said. The oil belongs to Alaska residents (per our state constitution), not the government. Therefore, sharing oil revenue is not a handout. It is simply a return to us of what is rightfully ours. I'd rather have the $36,000 the state made off my share this year and pay income tax on it than be thrown the scraps.
What I'd rather the Legislature do during a special session is figure out why we're being gouged at the pumps. With oil at $118 a barrell, we should be paying about $3.50 a gallon. What gives??????
ACES = Alaska Coffers Exceeding Spending... Another Congressional Earmark Spree... Alaska Congressional Expense Surcharge. Everything stays in Juneau until they can figure out how it can be wasted.
Don't you know they have to ship the oil to California to be refined and then ship it back so it cost more to transport it. A ship captain can't justify coming back up here empty. It would be worth the money to get the State Justice department to investigate this though.
ONAPA has a great idea that I personally would not have a problem spending some money to investigate. Not with my finances of course, the states, my hundred thousand would go to the mortgage....
"...my hundred thousand would go to the mortgage...."
That's the reason the state manages "your" money for you.
i don't know what the problem with this legislature is. whether it is the gas pipeline or the energy rebate, this body seems to have an astonishingly difficult time getting anything done yeah or nay. what are they afraid of? i was in valdez this summer. such an irony pumping gas that was 4.50 (about .50 cents more than in fairbanks) while being able to look out at the oil terminal across the water.
We the people need to get rid of a number of our legislators. Those that feel that we should not share in the income from the sale of our property should not be voted back into office. We have been saving for a rainy day for over twenty years now. It's raining. Time to give some of it back. Also time to make some in state investments so our collective lives are better and cheaper. Buy the North Pole Refinery and get gas to it would be a start. Then use royalty oil to make and sell heating oil at cost.
Why do people have the idea that they should profit off the state? This has long since ceased being an energy assistance issue and has become about "how much can we get out of this?". When details of alternate plans came to light, how many thought;
"Five hundred what happened to the twelve hundred guess we are not worth it."
or "Just a thought what is 1 billion divided by 620 thousand? Roughly 16 thousand? Just cut the check."
or "Frankly, a $1200.00 subsidy is a slap in the face."
http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/aug/0...
These comments stand alone and I don't think I've taken them too far out of context. Do they sound greedy to anyone else?
No.
We are all equal shareholders in the resources.
I want way more of my share than what's being discussed.
Cut the check. The one that reflects my real share.
How disappointing to read and hear Rep. Mike Kelly's comments on the rebate. Basically,"the people wouldn't manage it properly and it should be used for the STATE to develop hydroelectricty and a road to Nome" A great answer to his comments by another Representative was "why build a road to Nome when there won't be anybody left in the state to use it!" Well said!
Anyway, I have always supported Mike, but this comment is evidance that he has lost touch with his roots.
No.
We are all equal shareholders in the resources.
I want way more of my equal share than what's being discussed.
Cut the check. The one that reflects my real share.
Sorry. First time that's happened to me.
imusuallyright, are you a home owner?
Yes, I am, rose. Being responsible for all the bills that go along with that is tough sometimes. I try very hard to live within my means to make it possible.
Corinne- We'll never agree on this one. I am honestly trying to see your POV because you often present some pretty logical arguments.
imusuallyright, Define the State. The constitution says it is the People and the Government of the people. Without the people there is no State Government. What I see as the context is people fighting for what the State has taken as a tax on a resource that was taken from the people in the form of mineral rights. It's not greed but a disagreement that the Government knows better than the People how to spend the profits from that resource. If the state government were dissolved right now all of the resources would go to the people equally. 1/10th of 1 percent of the revenue is a slap in the face when you consider that the profits from the other 99.9% of the resource is taken without a whimper. So Alaskans we all need to forget about getting a share of .1% of our resources from this Government because we are greedy and they need it in Juneau for .... something.
The State Gov. officials need the money to build projects for the special intrest groups that funded their run for office.
As long as special intrest groups are allowed to buy your elected officials they get the cheese notyou.
Special intrest groups have the keys to the bus, you're just along for the ride. You get to go where they was to take you. P.S. your ticket isn't free.
ONAPA-
The biggest problem I have with this is that opportunists like you have found a way to hijack this energy relief issue and to try to make it a "pay me and pay me more" issue. Let's get the energy relief hammered out, and then you can lobby your Legislature for what you want. Even if the funds would come from the same place, they are still two separate issues.
Everyone is still responsible for their energy bills. This program is being designed to offset your energy costs, not absolve you of them.
Well I'm so proud that your responsible for your bills, get with me in December when heating fuel is $7.00 a gallon. I myself have lived here for 30+ years my husband and I being home owners for the past 8. We've lived within our means for years, supporting a four person family, never putting our hands out for help. Living within our means, means something very different now. When we bought our home heating fuel was $1.09 a gallon. We don't drive fancy cars, my kids don't wear designer clothes and we don't take vacations. My "lifestyle" is not extravagant. The question I'm having a problem with is do I skip groceries because there is now an $85.00 fuel surcharge on our all ready expensive kwh. bill from GVEA? We looked into solar, it is outside of our means. Not to mention that heating fuel and gas prices that have quadrupled, causing surcharges on groceries.
AKman50 said it best, it's now a rainy day, the people of this state need help. I don't want to lose my home, my familys home in the state I love while someone in Juneau gets fat. I don't want a "profit", I don't want "what can I get out of this", I don't want a big bank account from the State I just want to make it thru another winter.
Again, my argument is not if there should be energy relief, it is with the "it's never enough" attutude. Sadly, for a lot of people, no matter what, it will NEVER be enough.
Watch time run out before they do anything.
Why,does Mike Kelly still attend the GVEA board meetings?That is so wrong.That's one switch that should be thrown!
I think most of our legislators are out of touch with the people. Many are arrogant; some are ignorant and some are pitifully inept.
How many of them skip necessary cancer screening because they need to pay the rent? How many of them are single parents? How many of them struggle to pay childcare or child support? How many of them have one iota of compassion for a person who is addicted? Homeless? Suicidal? Victimized? Hard working, but barely making ends meet? How many are actually listening to their constituents?
Hard working, honorable, and honest people are suffering, and one of our legislators has the nerve to say that Alaskans are irresponsible? Excuse me? Sadly, this simply demonstrates that Alaskans have voted some legislators into office because we've erroneously assumed that their personal success will equate to good government. These folks do not understand the issues our state is facing, nor do they appear to care to understand.
I'm fed up, discouraged and angry! Alaska is a very rich state, yet when you look at the welfare and living conditions of the people who live here, you'd never know it.
Sad, isn't it, that our legislators actually appeared to get more done back when they were all taking bribes.
Man, we must be doing something right. Our last electric bill was $68.68. Everything included. That's for about 1,000 square feet, right in Fairbanks. Something like 8kwH per day. Fuel surcharge and all. I wonder why some other folks have such outrageous bills... could it perhaps be because they don't... you know... turn the lights off enough?
I have to agree with I'musuallyright here. We the people ARE better off with the State managing this money for us. WE would send it to folks like GVEA, Sourdough Fuel, Chevron, and so forth. The State has the opportunity to eliminate our need to pay such high bills in the first place. A large-scale effort to build a dam, build windfarms, build a solar array, build a new coal plant, whatever, would be FAR MORE USEFUL to all of us than $500 or $1,200 or whatever they will end up sending out.
Think about it this way. You get your $1,200. You spend it on, apparently, three electric bills. Then what? You've still got the rest of the year to pay for. You've still got next year to pay for. And so on.
Alternatively, what if you don't get your $1,200. What if the Susitna Dam project is authorized and funded? What if the Healy and Delta wind farms are authorized and funded? After you put up with high electric bills for a couple years, guess what? Essentially free electricity! No more outrageous bills! Power costing something like $0.02 per kwH, like it does in much of the Pacific Northwest.
Teach a man to fish...
Mike Kelly, as noted in several posts above, is a classic example of a person who has his own agenda and believes HE is the STATE, THE authority, the parent of all the little peons, and only he knows what is best. It is time for CHANGE - total change.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS IN THE UPCOMING ELECTION CYCLE.
Then we need to to start reforming state government from grass roots up. There is no reason to PAY lovely salaries and perks to state legislators. If they want to be PUBLIC SERVANTS, LET THEM SERVE - volunteer with no financial incentive. Give them a room at state expense, staff paid, and a modest expense account to cover the usual costs of actually doing business. I lived in Juneau many years - I have seen the partying and extravagance of state politicians first-hand over and over. They get nothing done FOR THE PEOPLE because they are busy making their own deals and acting like royalty, above the common masses.
So let's reform the aristocracy: make it a sacrifice to SERVE. Move the legislative session to a place where it will be both easy to keep an eye on the PUBLIC SERVANTS and uncomfortable enough that they do not wish to tarry. Public service should not be about personal comfort, luxury and deals to line one's own pockets - it's about serving the people who elected the SERVANT. I've long believed that living/meeting in wall tents on the tundra up north, preferably in mid-winter, would cause legislative work to get done in a fraction of the time and with a lot less BS. That's an extreme concept but something close to it would sure shake things up. But since reform, and radical reform at that, doesn't seem to interest the voters of this state, the fine folks who are above us li'l peasants continue to take expensive trips to Juneau, reside in cushy quarters, eat fine meals in upscale restaurants, have their cozy little deal parties, and waste the state's money (and WE are the state, folks).
VOTE THEM OUT AND REFORM THE SYSTEM, or shut up and let the aristocratic intelligencia dictate what YOU will live with.
During last nights amendment votes [-pork-], one Anchorage rep stated of the $ 800 million payout to the people, that the money will just go up peoples noses.
Our illustrious Mike Kelly was reported to call the $1200 aid "morphine and welfare payments."
Zero intregrity
I guess all us lowly peasants working for living are all drug addicts...
Now here's another article from the Onion, one absolutely everyone who posts here should read:
"Local Idiot To Post Comment On Internet"
August 6, 2008
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/loc...
:) Imusually is actually accusing someone ELSE of hijacking an issue. Somewhere in Hades is freezing over right now.
What a jerk, I couldn’t believe what I was hearing coming out of his mouth. He doesn’t think his own kids should get anything, not the PFD, not a rebate. Feels Alaska is not teaching their children self reliance. Since when did it become the state of Alaska job to teach our children self reliance? I wonder if he paid or is paying for his kid’s college education. Or did he make them pay for it to teach self reliance, I bet not.
He is there to represent is continuants, I wonder how many are saying "I don’t need energy relief and I want a road to Nome" None I bet !!
I had to come to the Anchorage paper to read Kelly's comments because they are not in Fairbanks paper, go figure that!
The Anchorage Daily News has an article on this:
http://www.adn.com/legislature/story/485...
Mike Kelly says that the rebate "morphine and welfare payments."
Handouts don't build "self-reliance and character," Kelly said, they just let people sleep in and put off energy problems for another day."
I received a response from Senator Joe Thomas; thought I would share parts of it with you:
The Senate energy assistance bill is a package of three programs. All three parts must be taken into account to see which is better for your family and our community.
1. Help with the cost of home heating
The heating oil rebate to Fairbanks residents will be $1,700 per household, assuming oil costs $5.00/gallon this winter.
The price of heating oil will be reduced to $3.00/gallon for 850 gallons of oil used to heat a house, or 425 gallons per unit in an apartment building or other multi-family building. Alaskans will purchase the fuel at the market price and submit their receipts to receive a rebate of the amount they paid over $3.00/gallon. To qualify, the oil must be delivered between September 1 and March 31. Receipts may be mailed to the state immediately after each oil delivery. There is a similar rebate for those who heat with natural gas, propane or electricity.
2. Help with the cost of electric power
The electric savings to each Fairbanks household will be approximately $600 a year.
The price of electricity will be reduced to 10 cents per kilowatt hour for 500 Kwh each month. The current price of electricity in Fairbanks is 20 cents/Kwh.
The rate reduction will be made by expanding the existing Power Cost Equalization (PCE) program to include Fairbanks.
3. A $500 cash payment added to every 2008 PFD, to help with the increased cost of gasoline, food and other products.
An important aspect of the Senate energy assistance bill is that the heating fuel rebate and the electricity subsidy will continue for two years. The Governor’s $1,200 proposal and the bill currently under consideration in the House of Representatives do not provide any assistance for next winter.
The energy assistance package is under heavy debate in the legislature and our legislators need to hear from us. Please speak up.
yes, I turn the light's off and I run around after my kids all day telling them to turn them off too. Yes, I do teach my children to be resposible and hopefully they will grow and love and stay in Alaska. With no Solar, Wind or even alt. fuel source (I don't consider natural gas an option at this point since it has to be trucked to Fairbanks) they may not have that option in the future.
Nice catch, icarian.
To imusualyright your post at 8:36 if you want to qoute my post qoute all of it i also said keep your little five hundred dollars and give me fuel and gas and electric for the national average so add all of it next time. As far as what i posted sounding greedy as you call it does the constitution not say the oil and money from it belongs to the people of alaska not just the politicians. You want greed how about the politicians not wanting to give us the full 1200.00 and only 500.00 that sounds more like greed to me they just want the money to do with what they want.
Allright, Tony, which would you favor? Lower energy costs or a larger "payout"?
Oh, and Tony, maybe you could do some research into all of the versions of this plan being kicked around the Legislature before you get back to me.
Keep the 1200, and help with lowering energy costs.
Perhaps a hybrid of subsidy for energy, and a investment in "alternate" energy plans.
I understand that the $1200 payout is the simplest and easiest solution right now. And maybe be ok for this year due to time restraints, but we need to look further down the road also.
For myself the 1200 does absolutely nothing.
Tony: "to do with what they want"
You do recognize that, by definition, what you want is what they want.
Right?
Alaska Curmudgeon, thanks for the Onion piece. I laughed, I cried, I commented...
I think Joe Thomas' comment was reasonable. I still don't know if my husband and I will be able to get through another winter up here. He's a disabled vet; I have health issues but luckily can work at home. Because of illness and other issues, our income has decreased by a third over last year (and is only 1/3 of what it was when we arrived in Alaska years ago). We just got our prorated heating fuel amount for the next 10 months, and it has gone up more than $200 per month. Which is a third again as much as it was last year.
We own a home that is a bit too large for us because we expected family that didn't materialize. We have been unable to pay for regular maintenance except on the emergency stuff for quite a while, and neither of us can do it ourselves. We know about and are qualified for the weatherization program, thank goodness. But that's a long way away from happening.
We are also energy conscious and do what we can to lower our costs. We don't have a lot of luxuries anyway, and we combine every possible task for a single trip to town.
We've long since gone through our personal "savings for a rainy day" for emergencies. And they were true life-and-death emergencies, not tiny crises.
So, I can't afford to fix the house I have, which means I can't afford to sell it, either, without taking a sizeable loss. And I want to stay in Alaska but probably should move to the lower 48, not only for the cost of living but also to be closer to medical care. However, I can't move without fixing my house and selling it -- and I need at least a small profit on the house so we can start over somewhere else. Even to get there. Do you see the conundrum?
Though disabled, my husband does work a few hours a week. Those few hours work are critical to our buying groceries, but now the commute to FBKS takes up more and more of that money. We drive an ancient (small) pick-up but it still eats gas -- and see above: We can't afford to get a new(er) car.
We are not the only people in this fix, and it has nothing to do with welfare, meth, spending money on the "wrong" things, etc.
I need both immediate relief and a long-term solution to the problems. $1200 won't get me very far, but it will get me farther than I can go without it. Alternative energy supplies will help me stay there.
Directly subsidizing in-state fuel sales to ALL parties, to anyone filling a tank in Alaska, (whether it be propane, natural gas, diesel, or gasoline), without the complexities and book-keeping costs of each person being required to submit pieces of paper to the State, would likely be the least expensive, most direct method of relief, while not increasing anyone's federal tax debts. (Yes, that was a run-on sentence.)
I think it can be legitimately argued that Article VIII, Sections I & II of the State Constitution make the People of the State the owners of the profits resulting from the resources. But the fact remains that the State government needs to operate its BASIC BOILER-PLATE INFRASTRUCTURE somehow, AND have a safe-guard fund for emergencies..
If the Permanent Fund can ultimately be built to 150 to 200 Billion dollars, then everyone will profit; the State could continue to fund the limited services it needs to without a more direct State income tax, PFD checks would potentially soar, and future Alaskans, (many of whom will hopefully be our kids), would have it much better.
Getting to that point means ballancing the needs of the People, and the needs of that infrastructure.
We can tap it all now, kill the golden goose, scramble the golden eggs, and come away a few years from now with nothing. Or we can make the dream grow, practice some self-discipline, cash out only what we absolutely need, vote out the politicians who hope to get re-elected by spending our money on various forms of 'campaign year trinkets,' and grow that fund that might pave the path to a better future.
While the moment may be 'now,' there are more moments to come, down the road..
Learning to save money is important; not only for our immediate checking accounts, but for our permanent fund that belongs to all of us.
If we address both needs in a reasonable manner, both building the permanent fund AND easing our immediate crisis (within reason), then MAYBE we can have that future. If not, we kill that goose, scramble those eggs, and screw our children out of the benefits that the Kuwaitis' kids have enjoyed for many years now.
those are my thoughts. Yes, we could certainly use some of our profits right about now; my family included. But too much letting of that fund will thwart building the permanent funds to where I believe it needs to get to in order to achieve what it might.
Additionally, tide-driven turbines would be less negatively impactful than a hydro-dam on a river, many areas could produce wind-sourced energy, natural gas might be burned at the well-head to drive other turbines, sending electricity instead of gas down the line, and these projects needed to be underway a decade ago. If they had, we wouldn't likely be having this discussion now.
pawprint: Your situation sounds unfortunate. While I can understand that you feel "stuck" here, I've got a question that I hope you can answer without feeling as if I'm attacking you, becuase I'm not.
Knowing that winter in Fairbanks is cold, knowing that your financial situation is tight, what prevented you from planning on paying for fuel? Knowing that gasoline was more expensive, wouldn't you also assume that heating fuel would also be more expensive?
Even if one were to assume that you didn't realize fuel was going to be expensive, and also assuming that both you and your husband will receive PFD's, your household will have almost $4000.
Is that really not enough to buy fuel for the entire winter?
Again, I'm not attacking you, I simply don't understand.
Hey imusualyright like i said you should have read my whole post before you got on your high horse and mouthed off aboput my original post i said keep the rebate and lower the cost of all energy cant you understand that. You can do your own research on the plans i you have seem to have plenty of time.
......told ya.
I doubt that what i want and what the politicians want is the same kenwoods i think they want all the money to blow how they want when all i want is too buy gas and heating fuel and electric at a fair price
Dirk, that's a great idea. But you have to recognize that some people don't share your ability to think without their ego. They can only think of themselves. "...what can *I* get..." or "...I'd take the money and pay off my house payment for a couple of months..."
With that type of attitude, there's no way that people can understand the implications, the benefits, or the goal of what you're talking about.
That said, I think you're on the right track....
Tony: We should define some terms before moving on.
1. What is the source of "all the money" that you're referring to?
2. What do you think "they" want to "blow the money" on?
3. Who is the "they" you're talking about?
Tony, dear, the reason I "mouthed off" about your post was because you seem to have posted your opinion before you read up on the plans (I even think they were described in the article). That's fine, but if you had read the article, you may have been able to discuss the points more clearly and seen that the things you were "mouthing off" about were already part of one plan. That plan even seemed a little more generous than what you were proposing.
Regardless, there is really no way to misconstrue: "Five hundred what happened to the twelve hundred guess we are not worth it." No matter what the context.
" Getting to that point means balancing the needs of the People, and the needs of that infrastructure." ...don't forget things people don't "need", like world-class education, fair social services, and responsible development of our resources.
Dirk, I think I'm a fan of yours. Why can't I be so restrained and reasonable?
They need to decide if it is going to be $1200, $3600, $500 or whatever, tie it to the PFD and cut the check.
No subsidies for heating oil (rent will not be decreased, landlords will simply pocket the extra), no subsidies for electric bills (people will begin to waste it again), no subsidies at all (increased energy costs impact the cost of EVERYTHING).
Decide on an amount payable for this year only and pay it with the PFD. Decide on which alternative energy projects to push forward with and start writing checks to get it done.
Next year, see if it needs to be done again. Hopefully, with the impetus provided by a very, very expensive winter our state will begin to bring renewable, cheap energy to the people who live here.
They are the greedy politicians ken. The money i refer to is the huge amount in the bank from the oil i'm sure you have heard about the amount the state has in the bank. They want to blow the money on what they feal is best for us when in my opinion they dont always know what is best. Imusuallyright the point i wat trying to get to you was you asumed that i along with the other poster you refererd to was greedy and i stated if you want to repeat what i post then repeat it all that includes the part about they can keep the money just give me gas and fuel for a fair price like everyone in the states are getting. I think you assumed i just want a big check to go buy a big screen or toy as you have said many times in your other posts about people. As manmy different plans i have heard about i dont have time to waste researching you might but i dont like i stated keep the energy rebate and give us gas and heating fuel and electric for a fair price. Oh and the sentence you keep bringing up about are we not worth 1200 that is me being a smarta** you couldnt detect that.
No... I could not. Thanks for clarifying, finally.
I guess i should have said that sooner and i do apoligize for being a bit rude.
I think Icarian is following me around the internet. Is someone paying Imusuallyright a salary to post on the DNM forum? She must be a millionaire by now.
We have a good alternative for Mike Kelly, Schaeffer Cox in the Republican primary. Somebody that believes that you know how to handle your money better than the government.
Ken Woods, Thank you.
I think that it's a part of human nature (certainly a part of mine, anyway) to have the internal tug-of-war between immediate gratification (or sense of comfort), and moving toward a vision of preventative planning. That tug-of-war becomes even more pronounced when the proverbial alligators of the radically-increased costs of living, and the accompanying legitimate fears of winter's costs, are nipping at us.
Imusually right, Thank you as well. I'm flattered and embarassed to have anyone refer to themselves as a 'fan' of mine. I've got lots of flaws in real life.
My speaking of self-discipline is a topic that sometimes involves greater theorizing and pontificating than it does actual prioritization; especially when examining some of my past real-life choices; those have often added a sort of hind-sight accentuation to the importance of thoughtful actions..
I have, at times, been anything BUT 'reasoned' and 'restrained.' 'Self-destructively adamant,' 'angry,' and other adjectives come closer to some of my past (and present) personna's reality.
That said, (someone can correct me if I'm wrong), I believe that the Kuwaitis enjoy oil-revenue-sponsored education, medical care, and energy (electricity). That's what a PROPERLY managed permanent fund can do when a governing body's focus hasn't been mis-directed by corporate bribes, manipulative politicians, and those of us who are prone to being over-taken by urges for immediate gratification.
It's the metaphorical imagery involving the strength of many fish banding together as an investment group, vs. the lone investor with limited means.
Whether it be education, medical care, or what ever, I'd like to hope that when I'm headed toward the 6-foot-hole, kicking, screaming, and cussing at everyone I'd hesitated to do so toward doing my earlier life, I can look at my kids, and not be quite so worried for their futures.
I think that our permanent fund has that capacity if we can keep from letting it be abused by either the masses or the politicians. Take what we need (***equitably***) and leave the rest to earn interest... And perhaps, for philosophical purposes, leave a method for -individuals- to opt out.
But it's also an opportunity to prove to ourselves and others that we really can be REASONABLE in our self-regulating, as a group, and that we don't need Big Brother to define our every move; even in the context of the permanent fund. Easier said than done.
Eu Mesmo, I don't think that Mike Kelly is going to be better at managing your or my share of the revenues, and I think that he should be replaced... soon. But I do think that your and my keeping our funds invested in a larger (joint) portfolio, such as the permanent fund, gives us a much greater advantage, in terms of rates and returns.
Now it's time for more chores, as I've managed my time poorly today.. ;^>)
kletomax-- yeah, it's 10 bucks a post. You don't have the same contract!?
Dirk, no need to be embarassed. I'm also an Eddie Van Halen fan. (Or, should that embarass you more?) I do like your ideas, and when I don't, I appreciate the thought you've obviously put into posting. I'll want to read that last one again when I'm not quite so tired.
It looks like there's been an update while I've been out....
...and apology accepted, Tony. I honestly just quoted you to exemplify the way I see the majority of Alaskans are thinking. I apologize myself if it sounded like I was calling you out. I'm glad you had a chance to clarify your position.
I'm glad we cleared the air imusuallyright. If i can i would like to ask your stance on why we should not get the rebate. You dont believe the majority would use it to pay for heat and electric. Myself i have to believe the smart ones would do that and not waste it on a toy.
KenWoods, I don't feel attacked by your questions. Of course we knew our bills would be higher this year. Last winter's increases were enough to scare us. We managed last year; I hope we'll manage this year, too, somehow.
But how does one plan for a precipitous decline in health? A bankruptcy? Loss of a job? A devastating fire? And not just one of these, but all combined?
Of course not all of these things have happened to us this year, but they have happened to us over a period of 5-10 years. As soon as I think we can stand up after one blow, we're knocked to the ground again.
So, yes, we know Alaska's winters are cold and have been doing what we can to prepare. But the cost of fuel oil is only one factor in the picture. There's increased food costs and increased gasoline costs.
I own a business, but my (completely unanticipated) health issues cost money, prevented me working almost at all last year and have limited what I can do this year. And when on a very fixed budget, where do you find the extra and how do you divide it if you do find it? Should one have to choose between staying warm and being hungry?
Perhaps many of our choices were, in hindsight, wrong... But that's hindsight. We're intelligent people, and we based our decisions on the information and expectations we had at the time. Unfortunately, there are many things in life that one cannot plan for.
I didn't tell my story to get sympathy, but to illustrate that there truly are people who will not be able to afford to stay here -- and will be hurt badly by having to leave, too. I know more people like myself, mostly elderly but some (like me) not, who have the same dilemma: Stay and lose what you have or go and lose it.
Personally, I'd rather stay. And I know, in spite of what I've described our situation to be, that both my husband and I contribute a lot by being here. So do most of the others who find themselves contemplating leaving, I'm sure.
Again, I think we need a combination of short-term, limited relief, and long-term, systemic change. I hope that's what we'll get.
Oh, sorry: About the PFDs... Although initially we had them put immediately into savings and eventually transferred them to IRAs, that ended several years ago. Now they pay for what repairs we can make to the house and to taxes on our businesses. We don't have a 4-wheeler, snowmachine, or even a riding lawnmower. (That's a joke: husband drools over the mowers. Weird. Me, I'd like an energy efficient fridge. Not gonna happen.)
Yes, $4000 will help. But because the PFD (estimated) is already included in our budget, it won't help as much as you'd think.
Actually, Tony, I don't have a problem with the rebate. I like the idea of subsidies and energy relief. It is the attitude that so many have that they are entitled to "windfall" money. I see that any plan will still leave a lot of Alaskans asking for more... and more after that.
I believe that money would be best put to use making Alaska's people stronger... through education (how great would it be to say that AK's kids were the best educated in the nation--- world?)... through infrastructure (like Dirk said).... health care (wow.)... and by growing the Permanent Fund. I'd love to know that it was there in the future for all Alaskans' kids, not just mine.
You're right; the smart ones would use a rebate for energy costs. They would also know that a rebate is there to help them with costs, not cover costs completely.
Pavel, I don't agree with you on cut the check. I belive a portion of oil royalty could be used to off set the high cost of all fuel products in this state. I do agree about people being wateful. But the ones that are wasteful will be that way not matter what. I for one am not. I keep the heat turned down when I am not at home and when I am in bed at night. I have a very energy efficient home so it does not take long for it to heat up. I don't drive my truch any more than I have to in the winter. I plan my trips to town so that I get as much done as I can when I go. In the summer I ride my motorcycle (50 mpg) except for when I have to haul something like the trash or to get groceries. I even have a clothsline (remember those). I also hang things in my garage in the winter. I did all these things before the prices of fuel got crazy. I don't see the need to waste my money or resouces when I don't need to. So I do my part and I wish others would too.
If the gov did take some of the royalty oil and put it to work for the people, it would be felt by everyones budget. You would see it across the board everywhere you spend you money. If anyone did not lower their prices, don't do buisness with them. Trust me that will get them in line or they will be out of buisness.
handing a little check out to everyone is not the answer. By offsetting the cost of all oil products it will have a much greater effect.
There is also room for alternate energy development too with out cooking the golden goose. The big problem is to get our elected officials to stop looking at the coffers as their own source of money for their own pet projects and favors for special intrest.
Just the ramblings of a mad man.
Lets just say even if they send $1,200.00 dollars that will not pay the fuel bill your going to get through the winter time. I mean 600 hundred gallons is 1900.00 and that will get you through maybe to November and then another 1900.00 will get you through till March maybe. I am sure that this year we are looking at 60 below or more since it is cold now and we had to turn on our heat already.
Again, kgage, this program is not supposed to "pay the fuel bill". It is supposed to HELP YOU pay YOUR bill.
We'll all still pay more than we did last year (that's if you don't conserve), but we'll pay less than we would if there was no relief package.
Never enough. Never enough. Never enough.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.