Wolf's rise to power signals change of direction in Pennsylvania regarding drilling

A Wolf is at the door:

Change lies directly ahead for PA drilling

Views: 3692

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Thomas Lilli on January 29, 2015 at 7:19am
Good point. Thanks for the perspective.
Permalink Reply by CA770N on February 2, 2015 at 5:50am

I find it funny when people complain about teacher's salaries, because they think it is something they should be able to control.  Teachers deserve a good salary for having to teach so many little brats that have no upbringing at home.  This includes rich & poor.  No one seems to care how many billions CEOs of private companies get for outsourcing jobs & selling us cheap Chinese crap. Nothing in this discussion will change, as long as the two party system controls the money & who we vote for.  How many times has a presidential primary meant anything by the time it is held here in PA?  But we go back and forth damning "leftists" & "right wing nuts" while the politicians are laughing all the way to the bank.  Until we change our political system & quit falling for the slick campaigns, we will keep sinking lower, as we have for at least 40 years. JMHO  

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on February 2, 2015 at 8:03am

Hi Cindy

You're certainly right about the PA Presidential primary being meaningless and not offering PA voters any input into the process.  Our primary always happens really late . . after the nominees already (effectively) have been chosen by persons living in other states.

My opinion is that the leaders of the two parties in PA, all fully aware of our de facto disenfranchisement, purposefully do not want us to have a say.  They're all filthy scum IMO.

Permalink Reply by Deb Reynolds on February 4, 2015 at 5:07am

(No matter how it seems) the goverment is not stupid, collectively--and they have people who can do math. So, they know that "taxing the rich" (the aforementioned billionaires) won't get them very much $$. There just aren't enough "rich". So, they tax everyone. But, the media has us convinced that if those who "have more" would just "pay their fair share" then all our problems would be over. Do the math. It's just not true. 

(and a flat tax would actually reduce tax rates on the wealthiest, who pay a larger percentage, loopholes notwithstanding.)

Permalink Reply by darla McFadden on February 2, 2015 at 5:44am

The liberal ideology always out ways common sense.  He wants the money from the drillers but his base will cause him to drive them out any way.  He will just find something else to raise taxes on to pay for his liberal agenda.  He already is going after the "rich" who make 70-90k (which last time I looked a married couple making 35K each is not rich neither are small business').  This was in the local paper before he was even sworn in.  NOT looking forward to 4 years of this train wreck.

Permalink Reply by Charlie Gas on February 2, 2015 at 6:04am
Help!
I am a bit confused.
Who is the "he" who made the outrageous statement that a $70,000 family income would be considered rich?
Does that refer to Wolf, Obama, or other?
Please let me know the source for that nonsensical statement.

Charlie
Permalink Reply by darla McFadden on February 2, 2015 at 9:12am

He = Wolf   Article was in the Sunday Tribune Review before he was even sworn in.  I think it was Sun Jan 18 paper.  You can find the article on line -published Sat Jan 17 TribLive Politics.

Wolf, a Democrat who will take office Tuesday, seeks to establish an exemption for low- and middle-income workers and raise the flat rate of 3.07 percent to increase income taxes on those who make above $70,000 to $90,000 a year.

Read more: http://triblive.com/politics/politicalheadlines/7470997-74/tax-inco... 
Follow us: @triblive on Twitter | triblive on Facebook

Permalink Reply by Charlie Gas on February 2, 2015 at 11:56am
Darla
Thanks for the link.
The article for me indicates the complexity, and perhaps the unfairness, of our current system.
" the top 1% of earners pay 4.2 percent of their income in taxes. The lowest 20% pay 12 per cent"

(This calculation apparently includes all state taxes, including income, sales and property)

Charlie
Permalink Reply by Deb Reynolds on February 4, 2015 at 5:09am

that sounds like a strongly "spun" statistic. but then, statistics. They say whatever you want them to. 

Permalink Reply by Ronald Robinette on February 2, 2015 at 6:04am

He should check Great Britain, France, Spain, Portugal and other socialist countries to see how his thinking operates...

Permalink Reply by darla McFadden on February 2, 2015 at 9:14am

They just don't get it.  They never learn and keep up their same or arguments for a utopia that can't exist.

Permalink Reply by WMP on February 3, 2015 at 7:17am

Most of us take economics in school at some point, high school or college.  For most it's boring and confusing, after all what do guns have to do with butter.  Many of the very basic principles seem to elude the liberal masses.  One of those principles is that the more something cost, the less you are likely to sell.  There are some caveats to that principle but corporations are well aware of that principle, so keeping down labor cost is certainly on their radar.  But other cost (line items) also drive up the price they have to charge for a product, and one of those line items is tax.  It is incorporated in the cost and reflected in the price.  Corporations don't really pay tax, the consumer does.  From a company's perspective it means the price will be higher and sales will be fewer.  Companies are also aware that they need investment dollars to grow and create jobs.  Much of that money comes from the 1%.  The 1% doesn't put their money in a shoebox under the bed, or keep it in a room and roll around in it, they invest it.  Higher taxes means less investment, less growth, and fewer jobs result.  When the President says "investment" that's code for "I want to tax you more."  He can say it comes from the 1%, but we all eventually pay the price.  That isn't to say that taxation and government spending are a bad thing, but only to a limit, and we exceeded that long ago.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service