WOW WYOMING LAND GRAB

[SAJ-99]

So much for the concept of individual liberty.

It’s a wonderful concept...for small things. This is a very big purchase that could never be done if we followed that concept. You skepticism is warranted, but I like to see how the experiment plays out.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I mean... but isn’t your argument the same one used against Roosevelt when he created the national forests, and when wilderness areas were created.

Nope - I am fine with National Parks, I am just suggesting WY has plenty of public land and too little economic diversification so the feels more like a boondoggle than progress. But if it makes WYians happy then knock yourself out.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Nope - I am fine with National Parks, I am just suggesting WY has plenty of public land and too little economic diversification so the feels more like a boondoggle than progress. But if it makes WYians happy then knock yourself out.

I’m not talking about the parks, I’m talking about the National Forest System. The General Revision Act of 1891 removing 50 millions acres of private land through eminent domain, and then later the forest reserves and so called midnight forests under Roosevelt.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I’m not talking about the parks, I’m talking about the National Forest System. The General Revision Act of 1891 removing 50 millions acres of private land through eminent domain, and then later the forest reserves and so called midnight forests under Roosevelt.

Same thing - when there was zero, going to 50 probably good deal - and done for conservation, not poor economics. When at 55% of the state, very different. Saying more is not always better, is not the same as saying none is best.

 

[SAJ-99]

and too little economic diversification

I agree, but how do you propose they fix that? States like Illinois are economically diverse but it in horrible financial condition. Mostly of their own doing, but complexity comes with Economic diversity and can result in poor decisions. A lot of states would love to be sitting in top of those oil and mineral deposits in WY.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I agree, but how do you propose they fix that? States like Illinois are economically diverse but it in horrible financial condition. Mostly of their own doing, but complexity comes with Economic diversity and can result in poor decisions. A lot of states would love to be sitting in top of those oil and mineral deposits in WY.

Promoting individual liberty and economic diversity are not the causes of poor state finances - it is the special interest spending to follows the economic success - hogs to the trough. As for oil/minerals, there are some studies that show governments with strong natural resources actually have high correlation with poor governance and lower personal income (the resource curse). The real economic development is in the downstream processing and uses of the resources, not the primary extraction - often the source of extraction bears all of the extraction downsides and volatility and little stable long term benefits.

 

[SAJ-99]

Promoting individual liberty and economic diversity are not the causes of poor state finances - it is the special interest spending to follows the economic success - hogs to the trough. As for oil/minerals, there are some studies that show governments with strong natural resources actually have high correlation with poor governance and lower personal income (the resource curse). The real economic development is in the downstream processing and uses of the resources, not the primary extraction - often the source of extraction bears all of the extraction downsides and volatility and little stable long term benefits.

No disagreement from me. But relying on personal liberty doesn’t automatically create economic diversity. Just saying, there are a lot of states that will try their spin at the “resource curse wheel”.
you can google Federally Funded innovations and check the list. Tell me how many of those things would have created simply relying on liberty and free capitalism. There is a role for govt. you just have to set the limits.

 

[VikingsGuy]

No disagreement from me. But relying on personal liberty doesn’t automatically create economic diversity. Just saying, there are a lot of states that will try their spin at the “resource curse wheel”.
you can google Federally Funded innovations and check the list. Tell me how many of those things would have created simply relying on liberty and free capitalism. There is a role for govt. you just have to set the limits.

We probably agree more than we disagree.

As for innovation - funding to boost innovation is very different than buying marginal land as an investment - which is the topic of this post.

 

[88man]

I was thinking the same thing... lol

Only Colorado residents can hunt rfw. Draw tags

 

[88man]

I could see foreign investment purchase the deal. China??

 

[JLS]

I could see foreign investment purchase the deal. China??

They may as well. Wyoming already has enough public land.

 

[Mattff200]

What I am saying is, that if you have extra money to play real estate speculator, then you have extra money to give it back to your citizens and let them figure out how to create value for themselves.

They do that by not assessing a state income tax. As someone who worked in Colorado for a short period and that's an extra 4.68% to me every paycheck. And you know what Utah and Colorado have that Wyoming doesn't; Californinas moving here and trying to turn our state into another California. Also the way Wyoming collects taxes primarily is thought severance tax and ad vlorem taxes on extraction
wer ae a top 5 state in oil and gas production, we have down stream facilities, we have some of the largest deposits of trona which is used in making soda ash and is more competitive worldwide than synthetic soda ash and lastly we are the #1 coal producer and have the largest mines in the world. Wyoming produces 40% of all energy produced in the US. Wyoming, by nature of their tax structure is all in on energy development.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Wyoming produces 40% of all energy produced in the US. Wyoming, by nature of their tax structure is all in on energy development.

8.8%, 40% of Coal produced.

Texas is the largest producer of energy at 20% of total us production.

 

[Mattff200]

8.8%, 40% of Coal produced.

Texas is the largest producer of energy at 20% of total us production.

Sorry got bad information thanks for the correction but still state is all in on energy exploration with the tax structure.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Sorry got bad information thanks for the correction but still state is all in on energy exploration with the tax structure.

Kinda makes my point. Probably shouldn't invest your rainy day fund in sunshine - better to hedge on umbrellas for the down cycle.

 

[ImBillT]

No, this is private land being sold to a state. In CO the WY land board could apply for landowner vouchers for the unit or units they hold lands in and then sell the vouchers to the highest bidder.

Is that what CO does when private land is sold to the feds?

 

[ImBillT]

There is no wisdom of crowds. It’s BS. If WY gave everyone in the state $5000 and depleted the whole fund it wouldn’t make any difference to the WY economy. Half would piss it away and half would put it in the bank and none of it would matter. An argument can be made that the purchase is a bad economic idea, but arguing the money would be better given to the citizens doesn’t hold water, other than it makes the citizens happier. And the checks are exactly equal in amount so happiness is proportional.

As has been stated, it all depends on the price paid and the future price of the commodities underneath. Raw land is a terrible investment.

A) You don’t understand economics.

B) The money wouldn’t be “given” to the citizens. The money has already been taken from the citizens, under the guise that the money was needed by the government to provide necessary services, and clearly it was not. Giving the money BACK to the citizens, OR taking less in the future, is completely different than giving someone money for nothing.

 

[VikingsGuy]

B) The money wouldn’t be “given” to the citizens. The money has already been taken from the citizens, under the guise that the money was needed by the government to provide necessary services, and clearly it was not. Giving the money BACK to the citizens, OR taking less in the future, is completely different than giving someone money for nothing.

^^^^^^
This always grates on me too, thanks for pointing out.

 

[bluespruce]

As a non-resident who hunts Wyoming occasionally, I think this is a great use of Wyoming's state funds. It should allow for greater access for all sorts of recreation including hunting. Also, as a non-resident, if the deal turns out to not meet anticipated returns, is more expensive, or otherwise goes bad, I'm not on the hook. I really don't see a downside.

Oh, as an Illinois resident, trust me when I say the state could be spending money on far, far worse things.

 

[VikingsGuy]

As a non-resident who hunts Wyoming occasionally, I think this is a great use of Wyoming's state funds. It should allow for greater access for all sorts of recreation including hunting. Also, as a non-resident, if the deal turns out to not meet anticipated returns, is more expensive, or otherwise goes bad, I'm not on the hook. I really don't see a downside.

Oh, as an Illinois resident, trust me when I say the state could be spending money on far, far worse things.

Yup, this can only benefit me in the specific, but I still feel compelled to ask why the answer to every problem these days seems to be to tax people (or retain prior public funds) and have the government involved in everything with no boundaries. I am not anti-govt. and don't believe in a libertarian utopia, but I also do believe in a limited govt and reject a socialist utopia. (plus it's just fun to argue with Buzz, its been a while )