Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Boo
IMO - I am PRO drilling in ANWR.
The US needs to have multiple sources of oil in case of war. Early in the exploration we would be able to get a true picture of the total reserves. If there is not a profitable amount of oil the oil companies will not spend the money to produce anyway.
The state needs (and deserves) to develope its natural resources. Developing its resources will not only assist the people of Alaska, but will trickle down to the lower 48 and Canada. The manufacturing sector would enjoy a nice profitable few years.
Even "welfare" places that "USED" to be STEEL states could benefit from another oil boom in Alaska instead of nice place to be "FROM".
I suggest that states that vote against ANWR need to have their natural resources removed from utilization. No mining in Nevada, Arizona etc....
I really like the PFD arguments. Another total outside opinion that makes me wonder where all the math teachers are. Anyone that moves to Alaska because of the PFD has some serious calculator problems. The people that count on the PFD usually exist in the subsistance lifestyle. The PFD is used for purchasing items that can only be purchased with cash money.
It is funny how people are against drilling in ANWR because someone might make money from it. Don't Alaskans deserve the right to make a decent living too?
|
You and I both know that everyone looks forward to those checks every October. And not everyone who lives a subsistance lifestyle depends on those PFD's. Plenty of peole in Anchorage who spit out babies just to collect more PFD money. Somebody from outside might believe that. but locals know better. If you doubt that, then you don't really know whats going on.
Oil well after oil well is not the solution. I will have a good laugh if the ecosystem is destroyed up there and there isn't enough oil to be found anyway. It'll just be another blemish to Bush and Co's "legacy."