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.

Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (14006)	3/29/2012 2:08:48 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

Texas has been pumping oil and gas for 100 years. How much would be in there over that amount of time? Texas also has a permanant fund (although not for 100 years). But as resource rich as Texas is, its less resource rich per person than Alaska. Alaska is two and a half times as big with a small fraction of the population. The population densities for each state Alaska 1.26/sq mi, Texas 98.1/sq mi, Texas is 78 times as dense. (And Texas is only middle of the pack in density, New Jersey has almost 1200 people per square mile, almost 1000 times as dense as Alaska, if Alaska was as dense as New Jersey than the US would have about as many people as India.) The fund has little impact on politicans or state budgets except when oil prices were low. If money goes in to the fund it can't be spent right away, that restrains budgets in good times, without the fund structure (and without wise and disciplined politicians to restrain themselves without the fund), spending would be higher in good times.