I have seen a growing effort to lump Alaska’s Permanent Fund Dividend in with so-called universal basic income (UBI) schemes coming out of Washington. Some point to pilot programs in other states or academic papers that label the PFD the world’s only functional UBI and claim it is all the same thing. Some conservatives begin to believe that hype and decide they no longer care about the PFD because of it. That’s a mistake. It is simply not true, and Alaskans should reject it outright.
The PFD is not a government handout. It is not tax money, collected from some, that politicians decide to pass out when they feel generous. It is the people’s share of our resource wealth. Alaskans collectively own the oil, gas and minerals under our feet and in our waters. The earnings from those Alaskan resources fund the Permanent Fund. When politicians withhold or divert the Dividend, they are not trimming a program. They are taking value from the owners.
When voters created the Alaska Permanent Fund in 1976 via constitutional amendment, Article IX, Section 15, the purpose was clear: protect a portion of our resource revenue for future generations. Oil and minerals are finite assets, not an endless revenue stream. Setting aside a portion of those royalties into a fund that generates earnings is good stewardship. It keeps that money out of the political cycle and prevents it from being spent away in Juneau on whatever is popular that year. Using a portion of the earnings to fund state government and avoid broad-based taxes is also sound fiscal management. Finally, giving a fraction of that interest income to Alaskans as a dividend provides a return on our shared investment to each and every resource owner. A share of the realized earnings should go directly back to the people, equally, without a means test and without strings.
That is not redistribution. It is recognition of ownership.
The French economist Frédéric Bastiat warned about legal plunder, when government stops protecting property and instead takes from one group to give to another. When the state diverts the dividend, the portion meant to be returned to Alaskans, in order to feed a growing bureaucracy, that is far closer to Bastiat’s warning than anything the PFD represents. The dividend goes to every Alaskan, rich or poor, working or retired, because every Alaskan is a resource owner.
The dividend is rooted in ownership and restraint. It reflects Alaska’s sovereignty over its resources and a belief that government should serve the people, not the other way around.
Contrast this homegrown, sustainable model with federal guaranteed income experiments. Many were launched during and after the COVID era. They were funded by deficit spending and federal borrowing. In several cases, work hours declined as cash payments reduced the immediate need to earn. That is the problem with artificial stimulus: it pulls demand forward, drives up costs, and leaves debt behind. We have lived through that cycle. Massive federal spending flooded into Alaska. Prices rose. Savings eroded. The bill always remains.
The PFD operates on a different foundation. It is tied to real earnings from real assets. It does not rely on borrowing. It does not depend on new taxes. It does not create a permanent entitlement funded by future generations. It reflects a conservative principle: limit government, respect property rights and trust citizens to make their own decisions.
When a family receives its dividend, that money moves through the private economy. It helps pay local businesses for heating fuel in January, groceries, school clothes, or a set of tires so someone can get to work. The small business owner who receives that payment hires help, orders inventory and pays bills. That is the free market at work, not money routed through a bureaucracy. It is driven by families making practical decisions in their own communities.
ALASKA WATCHMAN DIRECT TO YOUR INBOX
Real prosperity does not come from top-down programs. It comes from work, enterprise, and allowing people to keep what is theirs. Endless government expansion drains the productive base. The dividend, by contrast, returns value directly to households who then invest, save, or spend as they see fit.
So, when someone tries to paint the PFD as socialism, push back. The dividend is rooted in ownership and restraint. It reflects Alaska’s sovereignty over its resources and a belief that government should serve the people, not the other way around.
We created the Permanent Fund to endure for generations. And the dividend was not designed to be a reserve account for the latest spending idea. If we believe in limited government and in the rights of Alaskans to their own resource wealth, then we should defend the dividend with the same conviction. That was Hammond’s charge for the militant ring of Alaskans. When the legislature moves to spend the dividend, Alaskans should rally to protect the Permanent Fund itself.
Let’s keep the dividend intact and protect the fund itself from political raids. Let us preserve our revenue stream for the families who truly own it.
The views expressed here are those of the author.
23 Comments
“………socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members………..”https://www.britannica.com/money/socialism
Sorry. You can’t run away from it.
Another Leftist.
We don’t have to “run away from it”. All we have to do is sit back and watch socialism destroy itself.
“……..All we have to do is sit back and watch socialism destroy itself……..”
Agreed. And you know when that happens? When the money (PFD) is gone. And that works for me. Hell, I wish the oil rush would die as fast as the gold rush did.
Please actually read history regarding socialism, when has it EVER worked? It only works if you’re the one in control, are you that one? Probably not, good luck selling your definition.
Peace!
The pfd is our dividend and politicians are stealing it. We will know we are healing if they are facing criminal charges.
Thank you, thank you for a great explanation of our PFD. Am so tired of hearing outsiders say, ” Alaska pays you to move there “.
I think we Alaskans need to hire a different broker. The one we have keeps too much money for himself!
What Can Be Done to kick The Teeth Out of These Thieve’s
Alaskans U-night Get _ R – Done
It’s not socialism, it’s collective ownership of our oil production resources. Got it.
The definition of socialism is collective ownership of the means of production.
We, The People own the resource, not “the means of production”.
“…….We, The People own the resource……..”
Article 8, Section 1, Alaska’s Constitution:
“……..It is the policy of the State to encourage the settlement of ITS land and the development of ITS resources by making them available for maximum use consistent with the public interest………”
The STATE owns the resources, not you or we. If you can document otherwise in either the Constitution or Supreme Court decision, please reference it.
It’s been 10 years since the infamous Gov. Walekr veto reduction of the PFD amount. The current PFD is a shadow of its former self and more or less reduced automatically by Juneau legislators for State government operating budgets without political consequences. Surprisingly, I haven’t seen any voters rallying to remove the politicians from office and demanding a full staturory dividend, it has been more of shoulder shrugs and what are you going to do about it?
We are never going to see a full statutory PFD again in our lifetime no matter how good the rate of return is from the Permanent Fund. Sit back and be glad for the proverbial PFD crumbs given by legislators to placate the masses which could care less since they still get some type of permanent fund dividend.
Right on the money, Kevin.
It is TREMENDOUS that McCabe has cited Frederic Bastiat. He should be REQUIRED READING for every high schooler. They understand it right away, it is so clearly and simply stated, even in a translation. I know this because I had 12th graders read it out loud when I taught in the public schools. They marveled at its simplicity and clarity, and thanked me for it.
So when the State owns/manages a resource on behalf of the public, and distributes the income from that State managed resource to the public… That isn’t Socialism?
No, its not socialism…. It is a dividend payment from investments that were created through legislation and residential status and ownership by application of the law within the boundaries of the state. The state being Alaska as of 1959. The PFD marked use for residents or beneficiaries of the investments profits under the legal entitlement of the laws of the state.
“………It is a dividend payment from investments………”
Those investments were made by the state, not by the residents, and the state is the beneficiary. The residents made no financial investment whatsoever. They simply reside here. Thus, if the state determines that the residents can receive a dividend in any particular year, the Legislature can appropriate the funds to pay it, and the Governor can sign the appropriation. If the budget doesn’t balance, they can choose not to pay such a dividend. This constitutional requirement has been reviewed and so ruled by the Supreme Court in Wielechowski v Alaska, and is also universal practice in the private investment markets. Any attempt to “guarantee” a “dividend” regardless of financial returns or state budget process with the claim that “it’s OUR money” is obvious socialist propaganda.
I guess my point was that the “investments” were generated from a state managed resource (oil and gas that is managed by the state for the benefit of the public). You are correct that the system was created by Alaskan laws, and we receive payments because we are legal residents.
While maccabe is busy defining terms maybe he owes us a definition of carbon sequestration and clearly explain how it’s beneficial to Alaska!
I have provided that to you dozens of times Dave. You just don’t seem to care. There would not even be a thought of an AKLNG without the ability to sequester carbon on the north slope. Additionally, we must have primacy from the Feds over any underground storage, including the north slope. Finally, it will allow companies to get funding they may never get without at least a framework in law. I know you are parroting talking points from others so I am happy to go through the whole thing with you any time so you can understand and speak for yourself.
Joel, let the question be asked!
All the questions joel
Maccabe you are the parrot! Specifically of the UN!
Could not be more grateful for your clarity Rep McCabe. It’s so simple. When out of the ground comes some bubblin’ crude in Texas, Louisiana or South Dakota…you’re rich. Hammond and Hickel said no. We the people are owners. Not individuals who become millionaires by sitting on a plot of land. Not just the Government. It is a shared resource. We get a dividend of the wealth to prevent fortuitous personal property owners from becoming wealthy alone and to prevent government from wasting it on inefficient social programs that generally make the problems worse. It was a beautiful plan that Walker, and now way too many greedy legislators, including a growing number of Republicans, are ruining. And remember, the bar-controlled, Democrat-dominated Court is the one who blessed this thievery. Only a change to our judicial selection process will fix this mess.