NY's Future Under A Fracking Ban

[philoshop]

Here's a very simple 'Progressive' solution to the economic problems these towns are facing:

The government buys the land that would have been used for fracking and puts up 'Social Services' buildings where they hand out money.

 

The landowners get paid, the population grows, the demand for rental property and goods and services skyrockets, the town is considered prosperous again, and the government looks like a hero. Everybody wins.

 

Yeah, I hit the sarcasm button a few times there. ;-)

[tony m]

Fracking is big business not small business. Big business solving unemployment is like big government. The simple persons rise to middle class wasn't built solely on being employed by big business but by owning small business's. Currency devaluation, taxes, laws, and regulations killed the small guy.

 

Without solving at the top, the bottom is left with the crumbs to believe their actually getting somewhere. With what we have now, the consolidation into big business (and government) is where employment will just about only be.

 

We need a stable currency, way lower taxes, and repealing of laws and regulations.  With more money in the average persons pockets, small business's could start up again.  This is the backbone that is needed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[growalot]

 

Wyoming county has a couple hundred scattered about, with a couple situated next to our camp property, and they are annoying. 400 footers with constant whooshing.

 

Shhhh...remember everyone was told they barely made any sound at all.....

PS while you are being annoyed and the guy with the cash flow is on a beach in Florida...or driving their new cars ect..ect Do you think he's got you or his neighbors discomfort on his mind...or is he hoping...you are paying just a little more to the electric company for the privilege of buying non fossil fuel electric.

Edited May 15, 2015 by growalot

[philoshop]

 

In 2013, the report states that federal regulations drained $1.863 trillion from the American economy. On the global scale, that $1.863 trillion price tag would peg U.S. regulatory costs as the world’s tenth ranked economy, more than the entire GDP of Canada ($1.82 trillion) and India ($1.84 trillion).

 

The 2014 report’s findings also include:

 

-  $14,974: the price each household pays to cover regulatory costs.

 

-  72: the number of new laws in 2013 which has led to 3,659 new rules, or a new rule every 2.5 hours.

 

-  191: number of “economically significant” rules costing more than $100 million each in annual compliance costs.

 

-  79,311: pages of regulations in the 2013 Federal Register, the fourth highest ever.  Atop the list are 81,405 pages in 2010 and 81,247 in 2011, both years under President Obama’s watch.

 

-  $10,585: average price per-employee for small business (fewer than 20 employees) to comply with regulatory costs. In comparison, businesses with 500 or more employees pay $7,755 for each worker.

 

 

http://costofgovernment.org/new-report-reveals-point-trillion-cost-a1817

 

 

The most frightening part of this, at least for me, is the fact that unelected bureaucrats are basically responsible for 27 times more legislation in this country than our elected officials.

We've lost control of our governance, and are now under rule.

Edited May 15, 2015 by philoshop

[growalot]

 

The government buys the land that would have been used for fracking

 

Your sarcasm has a point you may not expected...Yes let them each town in those areas, say hey...... wells here and only here...Same for the turbines...let the townships that have to deal with the roads and services get that to fund the town ,...for the benefit of ALL. this keeps it contained and problems involved contained...keeps it on a workable level for companies and ppl in area...Look how these turbines have started popping up..with half of them if you'll notice not turning, why well those  repair crews and parts.. are expensive

Edited May 15, 2015 by growalot

[Merlot]

Shhhh...remember everyone was told they barely made any sound at all.....

PS while you are being annoyed and the guy with the cash flow is on a beach in Florida...or driving their new cars ect..ect Do you think he's got you or his neighbors discomfort on his mind...or is he hoping...you are paying just a little more to the electric company for the privilege of buying non fossil fuel electric.

I'm hoping for my itty bitty garden to sprout some good stuff later on this year. I have a little pin wheel attached to one fence post just to know wind direction.

[mmkay]

Here's a very simple 'Progressive' solution to the economic problems these towns are facing:

The government buys the land that would have been used for fracking and puts up 'Social Services' buildings where they hand out money.

 

The landowners get paid, the population grows, the demand for rental property and goods and services skyrockets, the town is considered prosperous again, and the government looks like a hero. Everybody wins.

 

Yeah, I hit the sarcasm button a few times there. ;-)

 

 

arn't the liberal in NYS and US government already doing this?

 

BOHICA

[Mr VJP]

VJP wants proof of harm before restricting economic activity. I want proof of safety before initiating fracking.

 

Precautionary principle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The precautionary principle or precautionary approach to risk management states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is not harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking an action.

 

The principle is used by policy makers to justify discretionary decisions in situations where there is the possibility of harm from making a certain decision (e.g. taking a particular course of action) when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. The principle implies that there is a social responsibility to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific investigation has found a plausible risk. These protections can be relaxed only if further scientific findings emerge that provide sound evidence that no harm will result.

 

Why is it that none of this is ever applied to Progressive initiatives placed into law via executive order buy the messiah of the Left?

 

There have been many warnings from experts in the fields of economics, social engineering, business, law, military policy, foreign relations, labor, manufacturing, immigration, etc., etc., that have never been considered by the current administration.  Why is it nobody cared about the precautionary principle on those issues?

 

The harm done to this country by this administration and the political left is far worse than anything fracking may ever prove to be.

[philoshop]

The war(s) against perceived threats gets traction in the media because it plays on the hearts and minds of the citizens, while the actual threat to the well-being of this country is completely ignored.

Living under the rule of a 'big government' system is readily available in every other country on the face of this planet and they're all more than happy to stamp an entry visa for you.

 

Things are supposed to be different here in the US, it's a basic principle on which the country was founded. Whether we actually get it right or not is still up in the air, but we were the only ones who ever gave free-market capitalism a shot, and it revolutionized the way that every person on this planet lives today. That 'shot' at capitalism began it's decline in the late 1930's with the rise of Progressivism.

Free-market capitalism does not support big government, therefore free-market capitalism is spun as a bad thing by big government, and people believe it.

[Doc]

Kind of like the "Climate Change" arguments huh?

Oh, exactly right. There is another subject that has no shortage of armchair experts. You listen to some of the opinions on either side of that issue, and it has you scanning the walls for displayed hanging doctorate degrees.....lol. Everybody is an expert ...... just ask them. A lot of them can parrot back volumes of data that they have carefully sifted and sorted through that represents their chosen point of view.

[sweet old bill]

I sure try to see what is the issue in PA now ? I have been told there is some issue's that sure seem it is better not to do all this type of drilling. Clean water may be needed more than, cold hard cash they are now getting.

[Curmudgeon]

I sure try to see what is the issue in PA now ? I have been told there is some issue's that sure seem it is better not to do all this type of drilling. Clean water may be needed more than, cold hard cash they are now getting.

 

Thanks Bill for getting this focused back on the original topic.

[Dave]

Thanks Bill for getting this focused back on the original topic.

 

I remember a quote from years ago if goes something like this. "I capitalist will sell you the rope to hang him with"

Funny where money is concerned there is also denial of the facts, because its the money they want and no fact to the contraty will change their minds. Money justifies all !!!!!!

 

[Mr VJP]

Thank God we live under a government that wants to be sure we all have very little of it!  If you're poor, they'll be sure you stay poor.  If you're rich, they're working hard to make you poor.

 

If you believe the government really cares about you having clean air or water, you're a fool.

 

Right now, it doesn't care if Iran gets a nuke to start WW III with.  That's the climate change you guys should be worried about.

 

[Doc]

Thank God we live under a government that wants to be sure we all have very little of it!  If you're poor, they'll be sure you stay poor.  If you're rich, they're working hard to make you poor.

 

If you believe the government really cares about you having clean air or water, you're a fool.

 

Right now, it doesn't care if Iran gets a nuke to start WW III with.  That's the climate change you guys should be worried about.

Actually there are many things to be "worried about". It is good not to get so focused on one thing that you lose track of all the others that are sneaking up on you. Regarding having a drinking water supply that does not poison you or cause a third arm to grow out of your head, it should be noted that we humans really do need a water supply that isn't lethal. That probably sits kind of high on the priority list of things to keep track of. It's certainly not an issue that should be dictated by financial concerns.

[Mr VJP]

Doc, I'm not directing this at you, but I'd like to see someone post current factual information on any actual verifiable evidence of drinking water contamination in PA.

 

After more than a decade of fracking there, with all of the suspected horror associated with the practice, the state should be suffering mass casualties and environmental catastrophe on an unprecedented scale by now.

 

Either the press is in bed with the PA government and the gas industry, or the predicted disaster just isn't there.

 

[Merlot]

Doc, I'm not directing this at you, but I'd like to see someone post current factual information on any actual verifiable evidence of drinking water contamination in PA.

 

After more than a decade of fracking there, with all of the suspected horror associated with the practice, the state should be suffering mass casualties and environmental catastrophe on an unprecedented scale by now.

 

Either the press is in bed with the PA government and the gas industry, or the predicted disaster just isn't there.

...And don't forget about those poor souls living next to transmission power lines. Used to hear a lot on TV "News" about that not long ago and people worrying about growing that 3rd eye. Not so much anymore. I'm gonna find a Wind generator to live under and be safe..

[wildcat junkie]

I remember a quote from years ago if goes something like this. "I capitalist will sell you the rope to hang him with"

Funny where money is concerned there is also denial of the facts, because its the money they want and no fact to the contraty will change their minds. Money justifies all !!!!!!

Again, another perspective that perfectly describes the climate change denial propaganda.

97% of scientists agree yet the 3% on big carbon's payroll refute the facts.

[growalot]

The internal EPA report concludes that the causes of gas migration could be drilling, spills or fracking. “In some cases the aquifers recover [in less than a year] but, in others cases the damage is long term [longer than three years],” the report says.

— Bloomberg News

 

Don't think I'd want explosive methane coming through my water lines into my house....I was evacuated in Avon because some nimrod poured gasoline into the sewer lines...and a families house a block over and half a mile from the pour, blew up..

 

here's another of many links I could post for you...

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/02/fracking-radioactive-water-pennsylvania/2904829/

[Mr VJP]

Again, another perspective that perfectly describes the climate change denial propaganda.

97% of scientists agree yet the 3% on big carbon's payroll refute the facts.

 

97% of scientists support global warming/climate change theories?

 

I'd like to see the source of that claim.

 

Last I saw, there is no consensus and the scientific community is equally divided on the issue.

[wildcat junkie]

Don't think I'd want explosive methane coming through my water lines into my house....I was evacuated in Avon because some nimrod poured gasoline into the sewer lines...and a families house a block over and half a mile from the pour, blew up..

here's another of many links I could post for you...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/02/fracking-radioactive-water-pennsylvania/2904829/

I was born & lived the first 8 years of my life in the "oil country" of N/W Pennsylvania. When the casings from oil wells drilled on the early 1900s started to rust out, methane gas would infiltrate the aquifer. That was happening by the mid '60s.

Then, there was acid run-off from coal mines turning rural trout streams into lifeless drainage ditches W/red stained bottoms.

By the mid '70s things were starting to improve due to EPA efforts. This "clean up" was mostly paid for by tax payers since the offending corporations were long gone.

Do we really have to go through all this again?

[Mr VJP]

Ancient history has no bearing on today's industry, which operates under more stringent oversight, with far greater safety measures in place.

 

Many more people died in automobiles prior to seat belts and air bags.  Should we be removing cars from the roads too?

 

[growalot]

Oh please at least come up with better comebacks than that...seriously now

[Mr VJP]

Just trying to keep people in the present.  Some prefer to live in the past.  Technology advances all the time.  Why should any argument about what happened 50 years ago hold any sway in the current debate?

 

[Mr VJP]

Don't think I'd want explosive methane coming through my water lines into my house....I was evacuated in Avon because some nimrod poured gasoline into the sewer lines...and a families house a block over and half a mile from the pour, blew up..

 

here's another of many links I could post for you...

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/02/fracking-radioactive-water-pennsylvania/2904829/

 

This is part of the article you posted.  Every single report I've seen has the same type of disclaimer in it.  Why would this be needed?

 

"But other research has found little harm from fracking. Duke and federal scientists, in a study released earlier this year, found no evidence that shale gas production in Arkansas caused groundwater contamination. A Department of Energy study this year also found no proof that fracking chemicals tainted drinking water aquifers at a western Pennsylvania drilling site.

Scientists attribute the mixed research results to varying geology and industry practices nationwide. Fracking fluids are sometimes reused or disposed of in deep injection wells, but in some cases, they are treated and released into public waterways.

Years of such disposal have created "potential environmental risks for thousands of years to come," says Vengosh, adding that the water will need to be cleaned.

An industry group faults the Duke study as outdated and biased. "The shale industry has not taken flow-back water to this treatment facility, or any similar facility in Pennsylvania, since May 2011," says Patrick Creighton, spokesman of the Marcellus Shale Coalition. He cites 2011 tests by state environment officials that showed no radioactive contaminants in the water used and produced at 12 of 14 water suppliers in western Pennsylvania.

Creighton says the study's partial funding from New York-based Park Foundation, which has supported some anti-fracking projects, raises questions about impartiality."

Edited May 17, 2015 by Mr VJP