SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: pstuartb who wrote (275844)9/14/2010 7:40:40 PM
From: koanRead Replies (1) of 306849
 
<<Alaska Permanent Fund ...Any state could have done that

Not every state has massive income from oil revenues.>>

Does not have to be every state. None of the state's did it that I know of? Imagine if Oklahoma, Texas, California or Louisianna had done it. They all have lots of oil and gas. And all but California hates government.

Be we even revised it and it is now 50% of all state owned natural resources. Our permanent fund is rising faster than our population.

Any state could do that say: "25% of all state owned natural resources are put in a permanent fund for the kids". They all have some natural resources.

I think Norways Soverign Wealth fund had 450 billion. China has 8 soverign wealth funds of over 100 billion each.

Kuwait has the largest one I think?? Alberta was one of the first, but they made a mistake and allowed investment in their own country and the crooks stole it all.

We allow almost no instate investment. And we inflation proof it each year.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News