Palin The Wealth Spreader: Gov. Imposed Oil Windfall Profits Tax To Allow Alaskans To ‘Share In The Wealth’ Props to Boutons for this info "Palin explained the windfall profits tax that she imposed on the oil industry in Alaska as a mechanism for ensuring that Alaskans “share in the wealth” generated by oil companies:"And Alaska—we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs. … It’s to maximize benefits for Alaskans, not an individual company, not some multinational somewhere, but for Alaskans." In fact, Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share (ACES) program, which manages the redistribution of oil wealth in Alaska, brings in so much money that the state needs no income or sales tax. In addition, this year ACES will provide every Alaskan with a check for an estimated $3,200." http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/27/palin-shares-wealth/ ===== So she supports confiscating windfall profits from the oilcos and communistically redistributing it to people who didn't earn it, including her 5 kids x $3200.\ ------------------------------------------------------------- Doesn't that sound like wealth redistribution to you? Not to mention the average price of gas in Anchorage is $3.50, while in the rest of the USA it is more than a dollar below that.... DD
This isn't about demonizing Sarah Palin. It just shows how ridiculous and hypocritical this recent "Obama is a socialist because he said 'spread the wealth'" campaign is. Every mainstream politician, whether they say it or not, believes in sharing the wealth. So everyone is a socialist? Why not make the conversation in this campaign actually relevant and discuss how best to share the wealth? Because if you do that you lend some legitimacy to the opposing candidate's views. McCain is running out of time and he can't afford to do that. He needs to make Obama into a caricature. So instead, he says you either (a) believe in the American Dream, or (b) believe in sharing the wealth and are therefore an extreme radical.
And Alaska—we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. Do you simply pick out the part you want and throw out the rest? Do you really not understand the difference? There is no argument if its wealth distribution. That is a given. The state of Alaska owns the natural resources. The state does not own any portion of your paycheck. Now if you want to argue who has the right to distribute the wealth, that is different.
What's so bad about socialism? America has been part socialist state for a long time now, maybe not as much as Europe, but still...
But the title is playing dumb. There's certainly different degrees of "redistribution" of wealth when people talk in that term. And the redistribution of corporate profit is certainly different from redistribution through, say, personal taxes.
There is such a thing as private land and public land. If the oil is from public land, shouldn't the public get part of the benefits?
Isn't that what her neighbor Russia argues? Doesn't Russia get a cut of all oil that comes from their country, and redistribute it to the citizens too? Palin's learned quite a bit with Russia as her neighbor, after all.
