Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: willcousa who wrote (181065)	5/11/2005 8:28:24 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 186894

well, I think that if the citizens of Alaska want drilling, and vote for it, then drilling should be allowed- within reason of course. The problem with alaska is that, unlike california, it is not a self sustaining state, it is heavily subsidized by the rest of the nation and so the voters there will never be autonomous, really. I think a lot of these cultural issues come down to who holds the purse strings. Alaska, Hawaii, the bible belt and deep south do not. Thats their problem. If they can create industries in those states that pay the bills, then many of these arguments would be moot. California is either the 5th or 7th largest economy in the world depending on the strength of the US economy. That means if CA voters vote for something they generally get it. Not so, Alaska voters. OF course alaska could create a new oil version of silicon valley up there and become an economic powerhouse, and then all would change for them. Anyway back to oil, people that think drilling in anwar is the answer to the oil conundrum are just fooling themselves. All drilling for more oil does is keep the reliance going that the US has on foreign oil. Oil is last century's engine of growth, time to get off it, imho.