Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Columbus Dispatch)   Gov Kasich: Let's raise taxes on fracking. The rate is too low. Repubs: lol, okay. Here you go. Kasich: Good. This new rate....wait a minute. This bill actually lowers the overall tax rate with deductions. Repubs: Yeah. Your point being what   (dispatch.com) divider line 40
    More: Obvious, "Wait a Minute", John Kasich, itemized deduction, effective tax rates, fracking, judicial panel, income taxes  
•       •       •

1192 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 May 2014 at 11:26 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



40 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2014-05-14 09:46:36 AM  
This is a feature, not a bug. Duh.
 
2014-05-14 09:47:53 AM  
The point being more earthquakes for everyone.

*RUMBLE RUMBLE RUMBLE*
 
2014-05-14 10:30:34 AM  
grist.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-05-14 11:30:22 AM  
LOL.

Kasich's in "Oh shiat, I am going to need to get re-elected" mode. And he can't get the rest of the spiteful idiots in the Ohio GOP to go along with him. He's in some shiat. Turns out a year of trying to look reasonable is probably not going to make up for three years of sucking the knob of the Kochs and every other special interest out there in a very public manner.
 
2014-05-14 11:31:38 AM  
Incentives aren't meant to be a "thanks for existing" ribbon.  They're suppose to make companies want to do things that are more in the social good than the status quo.

What do republicans actually think that word means?
 
2014-05-14 11:33:29 AM  
"But what about the frackers, Bob? Who's helping them out, HUH?!"

quienmemandaria.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-05-14 11:38:48 AM  
So we know that fracking is causing more harm than good, but it's still being pushed as viable... of course it is.
 
2014-05-14 11:39:26 AM  
FTA "The oil and gas "isn't our stuff. It's the landowner's," said Rep. Gary Scherer, R-Circleville. " I don't know that I agree there ought to be a severance tax at all. But the industry wants some certainty." "

So Gary, when the landowners land becomes a EPA super clean up site it it still going to be 100% of the land owners responsibility?
 
2014-05-14 11:42:49 AM  

Triple Oak: So we know that fracking is causing more harm than good, but it's still being pushed as viable... of course it is.


As someone who pushes both the pro-environment and pro-science message pretty hard, I'm thinking this is a strong statement.  I mean, if you include methane leaks and their effect on both the ozone layer and climate change, yeah, that's an argument you can make.

If you just include what we know right now about water supplies and earthquakes, it's a harder case to make.
 
2014-05-14 11:45:52 AM  

astonrickenbach: So Gary, when the landowners land becomes a EPA superfund clean up site it it still going to be 100% of the land owners responsibility?


Typically, superfund sites also include a penalty assessed to the owner.
 
2014-05-14 11:50:48 AM  
"I just think that the argument about our tax rate having an impact on the competitiveness in the oil and gas industry is just folly," said Rep. Mike Fokey, D-Cleveland. "If the stuff is down there, people are going to come and drill for it. If this is our stuff in the ground, we should be benefiting from it as much as possible."

This guy is too stupid, words can't describe the level.
 
2014-05-14 11:55:30 AM  

ikanreed: astonrickenbach: So Gary, when the landowners land becomes a EPA superfund clean up site it it still going to be 100% of the land owners responsibility?

Typically, superfund sites also include a penalty assessed to the owner.


I am wondering what the possible failure point would cause a gasious well to create a superfund site.
 
2014-05-14 11:57:18 AM  

astonrickenbach: FTA "The oil and gas "isn't our stuff. It's the landowner's," said Rep. Gary Scherer, R-Circleville. " I don't know that I agree there ought to be a severance tax at all. But the industry wants some certainty." "

So Gary, when the landowners land becomes a EPA super clean up site it it still going to be 100% of the land owners responsibility?


If you want to tax an activity as though it's going to create an environmental disaster, then present the science to back it up. People may decide they don't want the activity to happen at all.

But that's not what this is about. It's about a state with debts to pay and money Democrats want for other things. Its about idiots and parasitic politicians who see a way to expand the money and power they control.
 
2014-05-14 11:59:10 AM  

Saiga410: I am wondering what the possible failure point would cause a gasious well to create a superfund site.


I think theoretically large-scale groundwater contamination, but I don't know.  I'll fully confess to not being a geologist.
 
2014-05-14 11:59:42 AM  
All 4 PA democrats are running on the raise fracking extraction fees (from zero under our current gov who may actually work for Chesapeake Energy) it will be interesting to see if one can win in the general election then how far they can get in the GOP controlled state senate.
 
2014-05-14 12:02:13 PM  

Animatronik: astonrickenbach: FTA "The oil and gas "isn't our stuff. It's the landowner's," said Rep. Gary Scherer, R-Circleville. " I don't know that I agree there ought to be a severance tax at all. But the industry wants some certainty." "

So Gary, when the landowners land becomes a EPA super clean up site it it still going to be 100% of the land owners responsibility?

If you want to tax an activity as though it's going to create an environmental disaster, then present the science to back it up. People may decide they don't want the activity to happen at all.

But that's not what this is about. It's about a state with debts to pay and money Democrats want for other things. Its about idiots and parasitic politicians who see a way to expand the money and power they control.



Like repairing roads damaged by trucks hauling heavy oil field equipment?

Remember kids: contributing to the maintenance infrastructure that directly supports your business activities through taxation is socialism.
 
2014-05-14 12:04:46 PM  

ikanreed: Triple Oak: So we know that fracking is causing more harm than good, but it's still being pushed as viable... of course it is.

As someone who pushes both the pro-environment and pro-science message pretty hard, I'm thinking this is a strong statement.  I mean, if you include methane leaks and their effect on both the ozone layer and climate change, yeah, that's an argument you can make.

If you just include what we know right now about water supplies and earthquakes, it's a harder case to make.


I guess that depends on what your definition of "harm" and your definition of "good" is.
 
2014-05-14 12:12:23 PM  

Animatronik: astonrickenbach: FTA "The oil and gas "isn't our stuff. It's the landowner's," said Rep. Gary Scherer, R-Circleville. " I don't know that I agree there ought to be a severance tax at all. But the industry wants some certainty." "

So Gary, when the landowners land becomes a EPA super clean up site it it still going to be 100% of the land owners responsibility?

If you want to tax an activity as though it's going to create an environmental disaster, then present the science to back it up. People may decide they don't want the activity to happen at all.

But that's not what this is about. It's about a state with debts to pay and money Democrats want for other things. Its about idiots and parasitic politicians who see a way to expand the money and power they control.


Kasich is a Republican. His own party is fighting against him to raise taxes on fracking.
 
2014-05-14 12:12:28 PM  

for good or for awesome: ikanreed: Triple Oak: So we know that fracking is causing more harm than good, but it's still being pushed as viable... of course it is.

As someone who pushes both the pro-environment and pro-science message pretty hard, I'm thinking this is a strong statement.  I mean, if you include methane leaks and their effect on both the ozone layer and climate change, yeah, that's an argument you can make.

If you just include what we know right now about water supplies and earthquakes, it's a harder case to make.

I guess that depends on what your definition of "harm" and your definition of "good" is.


Drinkable water being turned into oil production, earthquakes and health problems... these are harms in my eyes.
 
2014-05-14 12:13:04 PM  
Isn't it true that mathematically, there is no such thing as subtraction, so therefore, a tax rate cannot be mathematically lowered?

So, the R's agreed to increase the rate, they just creatively increased it by a negative number.
 
2014-05-14 12:13:13 PM  

ikanreed: Saiga410: I am wondering what the possible failure point would cause a gasious well to create a superfund site.

I think theoretically large-scale groundwater contamination, but I don't know.  I'll fully confess to not being a geologist.


The waste water flow back contains high levels of radium, bromide and other salts and chemicals. If either the retention ponds or treatment facilities leak or, in the case of the treatment facility, fail to adequately remove these substances from the water then you could have extensive soil contamination.
 
2014-05-14 12:17:24 PM  

Triple Oak: Drinkable water being turned into oil production, earthquakes and health problems... these are harms in my eyes.


Hadn't considered the upcoming water crisis.
 
2014-05-14 12:20:00 PM  
Said it before, saying it again:  If Republicans put a quarter of the effort they do in protecting the profits of the already stupidly rich, this place would be a goddamned paradise.
 
2014-05-14 12:26:23 PM  

max_pooper: Like repairing roads damaged by trucks hauling heavy oil field equipment?

Remember kids: contributing to the maintenance infrastructure that directly supports your business activities through taxation is socialism.


The tax for that is being paid already by the landowner's state taxes. When we get paid for the Natural Gas, it counts as normal income, and is taxed at the normal rates. And since some of the wells are really producing, we are talking a considerable amount of tax money.
 
2014-05-14 12:31:16 PM  

Krusty_the_Barbarian: max_pooper: Like repairing roads damaged by trucks hauling heavy oil field equipment?

Remember kids: contributing to the maintenance infrastructure that directly supports your business activities through taxation is socialism.

The tax for that is being paid already by the landowner's state taxes. When we get paid for the Natural Gas, it counts as normal income, and is taxed at the normal rates. And since some of the wells are really producing, we are talking a considerable amount of tax money.


So you believe the infrastructure to support an industry should be paid for by somebody else? How Republican of you.
 
2014-05-14 12:33:37 PM  

paganj: The waste water flow back contains high levels of radium, bromide and other salts and chemicals. If either the retention ponds or treatment facilities leak or, in the case of the treatment facility, fail to adequately remove these substances from the water then you could have extensive soil contamination.


And if the crew running the site doesn't want any bad publicity, they take that pretty seriously too. A deer jumped into one of the ponds on my property(got over or under the chain-link fence) and was stuck in the pond. The game warden called when the deer was found decided to shoot it.
They called in trucks to drain the pond and haul the water away to be reclaimed so they could verify there wasn't a hole in the pond liner. I don't know for a fact they ever actually used the water in that pond, but they treated as used none the less.
 
2014-05-14 12:34:42 PM  

Triple Oak: for good or for awesome: ikanreed: Triple Oak: So we know that fracking is causing more harm than good, but it's still being pushed as viable... of course it is.

As someone who pushes both the pro-environment and pro-science message pretty hard, I'm thinking this is a strong statement.  I mean, if you include methane leaks and their effect on both the ozone layer and climate change, yeah, that's an argument you can make.

If you just include what we know right now about water supplies and earthquakes, it's a harder case to make.

I guess that depends on what your definition of "harm" and your definition of "good" is.

Drinkable water being turned into oil production, earthquakes and health problems... these are harms in my eyes.


Drinkable water is not being threatened in Ohio.  Their largest population bases are locate on what can be considered an infinate water supply.
 
2014-05-14 12:37:28 PM  

max_pooper: So you believe the infrastructure to support an industry should be paid for by somebody else? How Republican of you.


No, by me. I am the one who is also profiting off of the gas. The company will still pay when they pay their taxes. What we are discussing is the new "Wait, we aren't taxing that piece right there tax"
 
2014-05-14 12:40:43 PM  

Saiga410: Triple Oak: for good or for awesome: ikanreed: Triple Oak: So we know that fracking is causing more harm than good, but it's still being pushed as viable... of course it is.

As someone who pushes both the pro-environment and pro-science message pretty hard, I'm thinking this is a strong statement.  I mean, if you include methane leaks and their effect on both the ozone layer and climate change, yeah, that's an argument you can make.

If you just include what we know right now about water supplies and earthquakes, it's a harder case to make.

I guess that depends on what your definition of "harm" and your definition of "good" is.

Drinkable water being turned into oil production, earthquakes and health problems... these are harms in my eyes.

Drinkable water is not being threatened in Ohio.  Their largest population bases are locate on what can be considered an infinate water supply.


Well, except for that time some idiot company dumped poisonous chemicals in the Ohio River.  We should totally be okay with dumping poison into our other water supplies and aquifers in the farmland.
 
2014-05-14 12:41:43 PM  

Krusty_the_Barbarian: max_pooper: So you believe the infrastructure to support an industry should be paid for by somebody else? How Republican of you.

No, by me. I am the one who is also profiting off of the gas. The company will still pay when they pay their taxes. What we are discussing is the new "Wait, we aren't taxing that piece right there tax"



I am have to pay sales tax and alcohol tax on the bottle of bourbon I bought yesterday, why should I have to pay property taxes?
 
2014-05-14 12:43:27 PM  

max_pooper: Krusty_the_Barbarian: max_pooper: So you believe the infrastructure to support an industry should be paid for by somebody else? How Republican of you.

No, by me. I am the one who is also profiting off of the gas. The company will still pay when they pay their taxes. What we are discussing is the new "Wait, we aren't taxing that piece right there tax"


I am have had to pay sales tax and alcohol tax on the bottle of bourbon I bought yesterday, why should I have to pay property taxes?


preview is my fiend, or at least it should be
 
2014-05-14 12:52:36 PM  

Dog Welder: Saiga410: Triple Oak: for good or for awesome: ikanreed: Triple Oak: So we know that fracking is causing more harm than good, but it's still being pushed as viable... of course it is.

As someone who pushes both the pro-environment and pro-science message pretty hard, I'm thinking this is a strong statement.  I mean, if you include methane leaks and their effect on both the ozone layer and climate change, yeah, that's an argument you can make.

If you just include what we know right now about water supplies and earthquakes, it's a harder case to make.

I guess that depends on what your definition of "harm" and your definition of "good" is.

Drinkable water being turned into oil production, earthquakes and health problems... these are harms in my eyes.

Drinkable water is not being threatened in Ohio.  Their largest population bases are locate on what can be considered an infinate water supply.

Well, except for that time some idiot company dumped poisonous chemicals in the Ohio River.  We should totally be okay with dumping poison into our other water supplies and aquifers in the farmland.


I'm still stumped as to what "infinate water supply" means. I wasn't aware that drinkable water was infinite on this planet. Or that infinite was spelled with an a.
 
2014-05-14 01:22:52 PM  

max_pooper: I am have to pay sales tax and alcohol tax on the bottle of bourbon I bought yesterday, why should I have to pay property taxes?


That statement is nonsense and you know it. I pay my property tax, and the income tax on the gas royalties. Triana Energy pays taxes on their profits. A tax on the fact you are pulling it out of the ground is pure politics and a money grab.
 
2014-05-14 01:30:32 PM  

Krusty_the_Barbarian: max_pooper: I am have to pay sales tax and alcohol tax on the bottle of bourbon I bought yesterday, why should I have to pay property taxes?

That statement is nonsense and you know it. I pay my property tax, and the income tax on the gas royalties. Triana Energy pays taxes on their profits. A tax on the fact you are pulling it out of the ground is pure politics and a money grab.


It was meant to be nonsensical. I just took your nonsensical argument and changed the type of taxes paid.

Mineral extraction is an activity that has a very specific cost to the public associated with it so it should have a specific tax associated with it as well.
 
2014-05-14 02:17:35 PM  

Triple Oak: Dog Welder: Saiga410: Triple Oak: for good or for awesome: ikanreed: Triple Oak: So we know that fracking is causing more harm than good, but it's still being pushed as viable... of course it is.

As someone who pushes both the pro-environment and pro-science message pretty hard, I'm thinking this is a strong statement.  I mean, if you include methane leaks and their effect on both the ozone layer and climate change, yeah, that's an argument you can make.

If you just include what we know right now about water supplies and earthquakes, it's a harder case to make.

I guess that depends on what your definition of "harm" and your definition of "good" is.

Drinkable water being turned into oil production, earthquakes and health problems... these are harms in my eyes.

Drinkable water is not being threatened in Ohio.  Their largest population bases are locate on what can be considered an infinate water supply.

Well, except for that time some idiot company dumped poisonous chemicals in the Ohio River.  We should totally be okay with dumping poison into our other water supplies and aquifers in the farmland.

I'm still stumped as to what "infinate water supply" means. I wasn't aware that drinkable water was infinite on this planet. Or that infinite was spelled with an a.


Note that he said "what can be considered an infinite supply"; that's because it would take some pretty serious climate change to cause both Lake Erie (Cleveland's water source) and the Ohio River (Cincinnati's main water source) to run dry.
 
2014-05-14 03:07:24 PM  

LibertyHiller: Triple Oak: Dog Welder: Saiga410: Triple Oak: for good or for awesome: ikanreed: Triple Oak: So we know that fracking is causing more harm than good, but it's still being pushed as viable... of course it is.

As someone who pushes both the pro-environment and pro-science message pretty hard, I'm thinking this is a strong statement.  I mean, if you include methane leaks and their effect on both the ozone layer and climate change, yeah, that's an argument you can make.

If you just include what we know right now about water supplies and earthquakes, it's a harder case to make.

I guess that depends on what your definition of "harm" and your definition of "good" is.

Drinkable water being turned into oil production, earthquakes and health problems... these are harms in my eyes.

Drinkable water is not being threatened in Ohio.  Their largest population bases are locate on what can be considered an infinate water supply.

Well, except for that time some idiot company dumped poisonous chemicals in the Ohio River.  We should totally be okay with dumping poison into our other water supplies and aquifers in the farmland.

I'm still stumped as to what "infinate water supply" means. I wasn't aware that drinkable water was infinite on this planet. Or that infinite was spelled with an a.

Note that he said "what can be considered an infinite supply"; that's because it would take some pretty serious climate change to cause both Lake Erie (Cleveland's water source) and the Ohio River (Cincinnati's main water source) to run dry.


And yet there's this whole large expanse of space in between the two where most of the fracking is actually taking place.  Columbus does not get its water from the Ohio River or Lake Erie.  And there is plenty of farm land in Ohio. We should definitely be all about wrecking the ground water with fracking.

/so looking forward to being able to light my water on fire
 
2014-05-14 03:17:40 PM  

Dog Welder: LibertyHiller: Triple Oak: Dog Welder: Saiga410: Triple Oak: for good or for awesome: ikanreed: Triple Oak: So we know that fracking is causing more harm than good, but it's still being pushed as viable... of course it is.

As someone who pushes both the pro-environment and pro-science message pretty hard, I'm thinking this is a strong statement.  I mean, if you include methane leaks and their effect on both the ozone layer and climate change, yeah, that's an argument you can make.

If you just include what we know right now about water supplies and earthquakes, it's a harder case to make.

I guess that depends on what your definition of "harm" and your definition of "good" is.

Drinkable water being turned into oil production, earthquakes and health problems... these are harms in my eyes.

Drinkable water is not being threatened in Ohio.  Their largest population bases are locate on what can be considered an infinate water supply.

Well, except for that time some idiot company dumped poisonous chemicals in the Ohio River.  We should totally be okay with dumping poison into our other water supplies and aquifers in the farmland.

I'm still stumped as to what "infinate water supply" means. I wasn't aware that drinkable water was infinite on this planet. Or that infinite was spelled with an a.

Note that he said "what can be considered an infinite supply"; that's because it would take some pretty serious climate change to cause both Lake Erie (Cleveland's water source) and the Ohio River (Cincinnati's main water source) to run dry.

And yet there's this whole large expanse of space in between the two where most of the fracking is actually taking place.  Columbus does not get its water from the Ohio River or Lake Erie.  And there is plenty of farm land in Ohio. We should definitely be all about wrecking the ground water with fracking.

/so looking forward to being able to light my water on fire


I'm more looking forward to snorting my water like they're doing in the UK.
 
2014-05-14 10:04:28 PM  

max_pooper: Animatronik: astonrickenbach: FTA "The oil and gas "isn't our stuff. It's the landowner's," said Rep. Gary Scherer, R-Circleville. " I don't know that I agree there ought to be a severance tax at all. But the industry wants some certainty." "

So Gary, when the landowners land becomes a EPA super clean up site it it still going to be 100% of the land owners responsibility?

If you want to tax an activity as though it's going to create an environmental disaster, then present the science to back it up. People may decide they don't want the activity to happen at all.

But that's not what this is about. It's about a state with debts to pay and money Democrats want for other things. Its about idiots and parasitic politicians who see a way to expand the money and power they control.


Like repairing roads damaged by trucks hauling heavy oil field equipment?

Remember kids: contributing to the maintenance infrastructure that directly supports your business activities through taxation is socialism.


Um, how about the gas tax for that? Or the property tax on the landowners property? Or the state corporate income tax paid by the businesses involved in the industry? Even ignoring those other revenues, you think you need 2.5% of proceeds from oil sales to pay for road repair? LOL!
 
2014-05-14 10:10:55 PM  

max_pooper: Krusty_the_Barbarian: max_pooper: So you believe the infrastructure to support an industry should be paid for by somebody else? How Republican of you.

No, by me. I am the one who is also profiting off of the gas. The company will still pay when they pay their taxes. What we are discussing is the new "Wait, we aren't taxing that piece right there tax"


I am have to pay sales tax and alcohol tax on the bottle of bourbon I bought yesterday, why should I have to pay property taxes?


You should also have to pay a tax for the glass you use to drink the bourbon. That will eventually have to be recycled and that costs money. And since many drink bourbon with ice you'll have to pay a potable water replacement tax. And of course, a coaster tax. Not related to any costs related to the coasters themselves but rather to help defray the costs of damage to the roads done by the bourbon delivery trucks. You probably think coaster taxes are socialism but its just paying for society.
 
2014-05-14 11:13:54 PM  
FTA "The oil and gas "isn't our stuff. It's the landowner's," said Rep. Gary Scherer, R-Circleville. " I don't know that I agree there ought to be a severance tax at all. But the industry wants some certainty." "

Um, the gas and oil belongs to whomever owns the mineral rights.  If you live in an area where there has ever been any oil, gas, coal, or mining of any type, I will bet you dollars to donuts that the property owner does not own the mineral rights.
 
Displayed 40 of 40 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report