Mccain picks Sarah Palin as VP!!

MC.no.spin · 09-05-08, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jallman

Exactly. The government doesn't the means of production, just the raw materials. That's why I can't really say it's socialism. It's more like the government in Alaska sells the right to produce the resources but it doesn't actually levy tax on raw profit.

I don't think it would work nationwide. Keep in mind we are only talking about 600k people here that are more like "shareholders" in the state (because the state really is run like a business as opposed to it being a full time nanny).

Great topic.

It wouldn't work nationwide - we would be better off increasing the royalty rate and using the revenue to reduce the deficit.

It's not socialism. It's a nice slice of populism. Teddy Roosevelt has entered the building.

Quote:

Britannica Concise Encyclopedia: populism

Political program or movement that champions the common person, usually by favourable contrast with an elite. Populism usually combines elements of the left and right, opposing large business and financial interests but also frequently being hostile to established socialist and labour parties. In the U.S. the term was applied to the program of the Populist movement of the 1890s.

US History Encyclopedia: Populism

Populism arose in the late 1880s and 1890s as a movement of farmers, laborers, and other reformers protesting the inequities of American life. The late nineteenth century was an era of rapid innovations in telecommunications, steam transport, industrial organization, and global trade. The Populists believed that these changes unfairly benefited the leaders of industry and finance, and impoverished the men and women of the farms and workshops that produced the nation's wealth. Because of this belief, scholars have often described Populism as an expression of the resistance of tradition-bound small producers to the modernizing ethos of progress. Yet many late-nineteenth century farmers and laborers showed as much commitment to the ideals of progress as any other group of Americans. Instead of rejecting change, the Populists sought to put their own stamp on the technical and market revolutions. Farmers, mechanics, and other ordinary citizens were confident that they could collectively shape commerce and government to serve their own interests. Therein lay the significance of the Populist movement.

(3) More generally, support for the preferences of ordinary people. The meaning has always been somewhat derogatory (‘pander to Populism’, 1893, is the earliest reference in OED). In so far as a specific set of populist beliefs can be identified, they involve defence of the (supposed) traditions of the little man against change seen as imposed by powerful outsiders, which might variously be governments, businesses, or trade unions. These beliefs are disproportionately prevalent among the petite bourgeoisie. Although the Russian populists were intellectuals going among the peasantry, most populism is anti-intellectual in tone. Movements which have been generally regarded as populist include Peronism, Poujadism, and the US Presidential campaigns of Ross Perot 1992 and 1996. Politicians of any party may appeal to populist sentiment when it suits them, and denounce such appeals when that suits them.

populism: Definition from Answers.com

What better way to benefit the ordinary American than by strengthening the value of his dollars by reducing the deficit?

Gill · 09-05-08, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tryreading

You didn't get it. My point is the tourist tax does help pay for the infrastructure, and then some.

So you think it's wrong for the state of Alaska to pay for oil infrastructure, the oil companies should pay all of it, but it's ok for the state of Florida to pay to encourage tourism rather than the businesses that prosper from it?

Sounds hypocritical to me.

tryreading · 09-05-08, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill

So you think it's wrong for the state of Alaska to pay for oil infrastructure, the oil companies should pay all of it, but it's ok for the state of Florida to pay to encourage tourism rather than the businesses that prosper from it?

Sounds hypocritical to me.

The way jallman describes it, Alaska doesn't pay for the oil infrastructure, but gets money because of where the raw material sits, on Alaska land.

I'm not really sure what you're arguing anymore, but, again, my point is the money would be better used to build needed infrastructure and encourage commerce.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.debatepolitics.com/archives/35248-mccain-picks-sarah-palin-vp.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date
Demi Moore Will Play Il Atty Gen. Madigan In The Blagojevich Film - America's Political Chat Room - A Hard Core Chat Politics Forum	This thread	Refback	12-12-08 02:30 PM