You need new revenue anytime you lose your main income source, however a lot does need to be scaled back before we have a solvent way of declaring how much is needed ... You wouldn't look for the lowest source of revenue possible ... You look for who will pay you the most... Hence in essence that's what walker is doing with the pfd restructuring he's (looking at what will pay the most.  The problem with that theory is that rather than a job the income is coming out of Alaskans pockets.  Majority of that income flows into the local businesses and is the way rural Alaskans supplement their year of survival.  Restructuring doesn't help if we're putting a vast majority of more people on welfare.  I'm describing the ones who basically live at just above poverty level.