Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Boomers talked for decades about building a road to Nome, an epic 500-mile plus project that would run through some of the most remote wilderness of forest, tundra, rivers and valleys in the world. Now Gov. Sarah Palin, to the dismay of some state legislators, is making a push for what could be a $2 billion project.

Palin highlighted the project in her State of the State speech 10 days ago, declaring that she's pursuing a road to Nome, while in the same speech acknowledging a potential budget shortfall of more than a billion dollars. Some lawmakers are scratching their heads.

"I would say that with the limited amount of funds we have for projects I don't know how high that would rank," said Bethel Democratic Sen. Lyman Hoffman, a budget leader in the state Senate. "And if we did construct the road, what are the benefits Alaska would get for such a large-ticket item?"

Palin's transportation commissioner, Leo Von Scheben, gets a gleam in his eye when that question is posed.

http://www.adn.com/news/government/legi ... 75137.html

Sounds like a waste. I'm sure its much cheaper to fly.

"I think it brings hope to Western Alaska," Kelly said. "There are some folks out there who are out of hope."

....yeah....about 5 people.....what a stupid whore....good job Repukes....she's starting to sound like a Big-Government-Bushie....

Appaholic wrote:"I think it brings hope to Western Alaska," Kelly said. "There are some folks out there who are out of hope."

....yeah....about 5 people.....what a stupid whore....good job Repukes....she's starting to sound like a Big-Government-Bushie....

Where do the Republicans find these pin-heads?

The population of Nome is about 3,000 - 3,500, the median income is 68K+. Nobody is stuck in Nome.

You guys don't get it. Palin is thinking AHEAD of the curve! See, she's playing the gubmint against itself here. IF they continue to go down OwlGore's path of "Global Warming", then after all the glaciers have melted Alaska will become a veritable tropical paradise with gorgeous views and beautiful beaches.

So, to access these new wonderful beaches and destination resorts vacationers will need roads correct?

Besides, its' no more folly than some of the veritable bullshit in this "stimulus" package. It'll create jobs right??

Republicans

BigApp wrote:Besides, its' no more folly than some of the veritable bullshit in this "stimulus" package. It'll create jobs right??

Agree 100%....as you can see, "change" isn't going to happen insce we didn't change either of the parties in power....typical....there are two parties in this country: the governing elite and the weeds (us) they piss and sh!t upon....

D1B wrote:Republicans

Republicons...

dbackjon wrote:

D1B wrote:Republicans

Republicons...

Democraps. They're both the same, the folly is people don't see it.

Appaholic wrote:

BigApp wrote:Besides, its' no more folly than some of the veritable bullshit in this "stimulus" package. It'll create jobs right??

Agree 100%....as you can see, "change" isn't going to happen insce we didn't change either of the parties in power....typical....there are two parties in this country: the governing elite and the weeds (us) they piss and sh!t upon....

The entire stimulus package is a fcuking joke. Might as well throw this in there and make it an even $890 billion.

Honestly, how can a democrat look themselves in the mirror and chastise Palin about $2 billion when the stimulus package is loaded with so much pork it makes Grizo look like a donkey.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
Agree 100%....as you can see, "change" isn't going to happen insce we didn't change either of the parties in power....typical....there are two parties in this country: the governing elite and the weeds (us) they piss and sh!t upon....

The entire stimulus package is a fcuking joke. Might as well throw this in there and make it an even $890 billion.

Honestly, how can a democrat look themselves in the mirror and chastise Palin about $2 billion when the stimulus package is loaded with so much pork it makes Grizo look like a donkey.

Instead of bailing out the housing market and this and that business. Wouldn't it have been better to just give every American Tax Payer $100,000? That would have jump started the economy...right?

grizzaholic wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:

The entire stimulus package is a fcuking joke. Might as well throw this in there and make it an even $890 billion.

Honestly, how can a democrat look themselves in the mirror and chastise Palin about $2 billion when the stimulus package is loaded with so much pork it makes Grizo look like a donkey.

Instead of bailing out the housing market and this and that business. Wouldn't it have been better to just give every American Tax Payer $100,000? That would have jump started the economy...right?

Griza.....quit making sense....

Appaholic wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
Instead of bailing out the housing market and this and that business. Wouldn't it have been better to just give every American Tax Payer $100,000? That would have jump started the economy...right?

Griza.....quit making sense....

Sorry. It only happens once in a while. Next time it happens I will keep it to myself.

grizzaholic wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:

The entire stimulus package is a fcuking joke. Might as well throw this in there and make it an even $890 billion.

Honestly, how can a democrat look themselves in the mirror and chastise Palin about $2 billion when the stimulus package is loaded with so much pork it makes Grizo look like a donkey.

Instead of bailing out the housing market and this and that business. Wouldn't it have been better to just give every American Tax Payer $100,000? That would have jump started the economy...right?

Actually, that isn't a terrible idea. First thing I'd pay off? My federal student loans. I'm sure that I wouldn't be the only one. I'd say invest the rest, but that doesn't seem so stable in today's market.

Purple For Life wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
Instead of bailing out the housing market and this and that business. Wouldn't it have been better to just give every American Tax Payer $100,000? That would have jump started the economy...right?

Actually, that isn't a terrible idea. First thing I'd pay off? My federal student loans. I'm sure that I wouldn't be the only one. I'd say invest the rest, but that doesn't seem so stable in today's market.

You know, I hear this "argument" about once a month.

Let's do the math, shall we? $890 BILLION divided by 140 MILLION taxpayers is $6537.00 EACH. That ain't gonna pay off ONE of my credit cards, let alone leave me anything to "invest".

AZGrizFan wrote:

Purple For Life wrote:
Actually, that isn't a terrible idea. First thing I'd pay off? My federal student loans. I'm sure that I wouldn't be the only one. I'd say invest the rest, but that doesn't seem so stable in today's market.

You know, I hear this "argument" about once a month.

Let's do the math, shall we? $890 BILLION divided by 140 MILLION taxpayers is $6537.00 EACH. That ain't gonna pay off ONE of my credit cards, let alone leave me anything to "invest".

I just threw a number out there AZ. But if you take both of these packages you have almost 2 trillion. That is about 15 grand a person. That would sure pay some CC bills, mortgages and utilities bills.

Side note, AZ, lay off the CC.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Purple For Life wrote:
Actually, that isn't a terrible idea. First thing I'd pay off? My federal student loans. I'm sure that I wouldn't be the only one. I'd say invest the rest, but that doesn't seem so stable in today's market.

You know, I hear this "argument" about once a month.

Let's do the math, shall we? $890 BILLION divided by 140 MILLION taxpayers is $6537.00 EACH. That ain't gonna pay off ONE of my credit cards, let alone leave me anything to "invest".

You're right, but apparantly this isn't going to bail out all of the banks and will help NO taxpayer pay off ANY debt....instead of giving it directly to te banks, give it to the people to give to the banks as payments on current debt in an effort to get some currency back in the market WHILE paying down personal debt....

Appaholic wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
You know, I hear this "argument" about once a month.

Let's do the math, shall we? $890 BILLION divided by 140 MILLION taxpayers is $6537.00 EACH. That ain't gonna pay off ONE of my credit cards, let alone leave me anything to "invest".

You're right, but apparantly this isn't going to bail out all of the banks and will help NO taxpayer pay off ANY debt....instead of giving it directly to te banks, give it to the people to give to the banks as payments on current debt in an effort to get some currency back in the market WHILE paying down personal debt....

Leave it to a hillbilly from the sticks to say it way better than us City folk.

grizzaholic wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
You're right, but apparantly this isn't going to bail out all of the banks and will help NO taxpayer pay off ANY debt....instead of giving it directly to te banks, give it to the people to give to the banks as payments on current debt in an effort to get some currency back in the market WHILE paying down personal debt....

Leave it to a hillbilly from the sticks to say it way better than us City folk.

Hell, I don't know if this would work or not....I'm not in finance. And it sounds like to simple and obvious of a possible solution. owever, I would appreciate someone who is privy to financial systems to explain why it wouldn't work. The chief complaint I hear is that there is not enough cash in the credit markets due to insolvent and bad loans. So, if you gave money back to the taxpayers and required them to pay towards outstanding debt so that capitol is back in the market and loans become solvent.....I don't know, there's got to be a reason this WOULDN'T work, but I'm just ignorant to how financial systems workd outside of don't spend more than you make....

Appaholic wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
Leave it to a hillbilly from the sticks to say it way better than us City folk.

Hell, I don't know if this would work or not....I'm not in finance. And it sounds like to simple and obvious of a possible solution. owever, I would appreciate someone who is privy to financial systems to explain why it wouldn't work. The chief complaint I hear is that there is not enough cash in the credit markets due to insolvent and bad loans. So, if you gave money back to the taxpayers and required them to pay towards outstanding debt so that capitol is back in the market and loans become solvent.....I don't know, there's got to be a reason this WOULDN'T work, but I'm just ignorant to how financial systems workd outside of don't spend more than you make....

This is why it wouldn't work.

grizzaholic wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
Hell, I don't know if this would work or not....I'm not in finance. And it sounds like to simple and obvious of a possible solution. owever, I would appreciate someone who is privy to financial systems to explain why it wouldn't work. The chief complaint I hear is that there is not enough cash in the credit markets due to insolvent and bad loans. So, if you gave money back to the taxpayers and required them to pay towards outstanding debt so that capitol is back in the market and loans become solvent.....I don't know, there's got to be a reason this WOULDN'T work, but I'm just ignorant to how financial systems workd outside of don't spend more than you make....

This is why it wouldn't work.

That's what I was afraid of......

Appaholic wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
Leave it to a hillbilly from the sticks to say it way better than us City folk.

Hell, I don't know if this would work or not....I'm not in finance. And it sounds like to simple and obvious of a possible solution. owever, I would appreciate someone who is privy to financial systems to explain why it wouldn't work. The chief complaint I hear is that there is not enough cash in the credit markets due to insolvent and bad loans. So, if you gave money back to the taxpayers and required them to pay towards outstanding debt so that capitol is back in the market and loans become solvent.....I don't know, there's got to be a reason this WOULDN'T work, but I'm just ignorant to how financial systems workd outside of don't spend more than you make....

If you did that there wouldn't be any money left for corporate welfare.

Appaholic wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
Leave it to a hillbilly from the sticks to say it way better than us City folk.

Hell, I don't know if this would work or not....I'm not in finance. And it sounds like to simple and obvious of a possible solution. owever, I would appreciate someone who is privy to financial systems to explain why it wouldn't work. The chief complaint I hear is that there is not enough cash in the credit markets due to insolvent and bad loans. So, if you gave money back to the taxpayers and required them to pay towards outstanding debt so that capitol is back in the market and loans become solvent.....I don't know, there's got to be a reason this WOULDN'T work, but I'm just ignorant to how financial systems workd outside of don't spend more than you make....

It wouldn't work because it's a temporary solution. People would still be out of work.

This economic disaster, as bad as it is, is a blessing in disguise. It's part market correction and part cultural and political correction. Our consumer-based economy was a house of cards. No one saved any money, business became lazy and too many took risks and our government was asleep at the wheel.

ASUMountaineer wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
Republicons...

Democraps. They're both the same, the folly is people don't see it.

Democan'ts pay their taxes.