From: les@SAIL.Stanford.edu (Les Earnest)
Subject: Re: State Finances ( was Re: Healthy Winter)
Reply-To: les@cs.stanford.edu
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1992Dec27.021416.8710@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
	<26DEC199222412653@acad3.alaska.edu>
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 14:18:48 GMT

A rather defensive Dennis P. Harris responds to my remarks on
Alaska state dividends to residents, saying:
  You must not understand how dividends are funded.

Actually I understand quite well inasmuch as a number of my relatives
are helping to spend that money.

  Dividends are paid from a
  portion of the earnings of the state's Permanent Fund.  Alaska's Constitution
  requires that at least 25% of the state's nonrenewable resource income be
  deposited in the Permanent Fund.  Some of the earnings are used to inflation
  proof the fund, some are reinvested, and some are paid out in dividends.

  The purpose of the dividend was to ensure that the legislature would delay
  using the earnings of the fund for state government operating
  expenses as long as possible, so that the corpus of the fund could
  reach maximum value.  So far, that strategy has worked.

Ah yes, the fund that will last forever!  If you believe that, can I
interest you in buying a lovely orange bridge across the Golden Gate?

An alternative interpretation is that the purpose of the dividend is
to take oil revenues that were made possible by the federal
government's purchase of Alaska from Russia (even though they arguably
didn't own it) and an industry that was capitalized and mostly built
by people from elsewhere and use those proceeds to enhance the
lifestyles of Alaska residents so as to ensure that the money will be
used up shortly after the oil runs out.  That way Alaska can promptly
go back to being a welfare state subsidized by the federal government
and the residents who don't wish to face the harsh life without an
annual dividend check can head South.

  Unfortunately, we also got rid of our state income tax about the
  same time, so that all the Texans working 2 weeks on/2 weeks off
  on the North Slope who headed home to Texas on their off weeks never
  had to pay any income tax while they took jobs away from Alaskans
  who had pay Alaskan living expenses and pay for all of the
  infrastructure and social services to support the oil industry.

Poor boy!  It appears to me that those nasty Texans should not only be
able to avoid state income taxes, like you, but should also share in
the oil dividend, inasmuch as they are doing more to earn it than are
most of the people who receive it.

  And since the death rate and longevity of these villagers is much higher than
  it was in the "good old days", and many of these villages have *no* energy
  resources for home heating (wood doesn't exist in the tundra,

I suspect that Mr. Dennis didn't mean to claim that the villagers'
death rate is now much higher, though that's what he says.  In any
case, the current high birth rate in the villages compounds the problem
that they do not have a sustainable economic future.

  and I'm sure an elitist academic like you would cringe at the
  thought of stripping the willow brush for miles around a village),
  what would you have them do to heat the homes of the much larger
  population?  What do you heat the 60-student local school with?
  Seal oil?  Get real...

My, my . . .  Mr. Dennis doesn't know me or anything about me but he
hurls the devastating claim that I'm an "elitist academic."  I
don't know what got his panties in a bunch, but I wouldn't think of
resorting to such tactics.  ;-)

Regarding the problem of meeting the current living needs of native
groups, I see no problem with using state funds for such purposes
provided that the subsidy is not tied specifically to increasing their
consumption of petroleum products and that there is also a plan and
progress toward making those people self-sufficient in the long term.
In fact, I would much rather see state funds spent in that way than on
subsidizing Mr. Dennis's lifestyle, whatever that might be.

  There are not enough salmon available to feed the dogs that would
  be necessary to feed all the teams that all the villages in
  Southwest, Interior, and Arctic Alaska would need to subsistence
  hunt.

There are lots of fish in the Bering Sea that are finding their way
into foreign nets.  There is a real opportunity for native groups to
develop that resource and make a living from it if they get some
assistance in building facilities and connecting with commercial
distribution in the U.S. and elsewhere.

  And I bet you'd just love using your "older resources" to
  row 20 miles up the Yukon or Kuskokwim to get a sick
  relative to a doctor.  Get off the elitist "noble savage" kick!

Where did I mention "noble savages?"  Alternatively, why does Mr.
Dennis feel that it is necessary to fabricate quotations or to
speculate on my rowing ability?  It's pretty good, by the way.
I'm also pretty good at running across tundra, though it makes my legs
uneven.

  [.  .  .]
  What the Feds used to do was give away the resources in an area to rich white
  capitalists.  Now at least some villages have been allocated some Bering Sea
  groundfish resources so that they can build shore-based processing plants
  instead that provide jobs, instead of letting Seattle-based catcher-processor
  boats strip our waters clean.

But if you look closely, it isn't happening.

  And our state legislature refuses to let Alaskans vote on a constitutional
  amendment that would give hunting and fishing preference to rural residents,
  so that we can once again manage Alaskan game on Federal lands in the state.
  Much of the rural economy is not cash based --- it's resource based.
  People who can hunt and fish in their region without having recreational
  or commercial fishermen or "sport" hunters coming in to rip off
  their villages food resources won't need handouts.

Let me see if I understand this.  In addition to the oil dividend, you
want the Feds to turn over game management on their lands so that you
can exploit that too?  Sure, sounds fair to me -- not!

  You should learn a little bit about the economics and culture of the bush
  before you pontificate, Les.  Like try teaching school in a bush village for a
  year.  On second thought, don't...  they'd probably run you out of the village.

Sigh.  Not only does Mr. Dennis think he knows of my athletic ability,
he even claims to know about my teaching skills.  I suggest that his
arguments would be more persuasive if he discussed the few things he
understands instead of speculating on the many things about which he
is totally ignorant.

--
Les Earnest           Phone:  415 941-3984    Fax: 415 941-3934
Internet: Les@cs.Stanford.edu              USMail: 12769 Dianne Drive
UUCP: . . . decwrl!cs.Stanford.edu!Les         Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
Newsgroups: alt.culture.alaska