Advertisement

Moderate

Follow

Comment history

Should residents or businesses who use too much water be fined?

Do you own a home or are you busy imposing impacts on other people who live differently. Why must some people have brown lawns in the summer with associated costs to replant in the fall. If we are short - fine. If not just charge for usage. Asking home owners to subsidize conservation by others may just be a step too far.

May 25, 2013 at 6:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Should residents or businesses who use too much water be fined?

Not very convincing. While a somewhat complex issues there is no shortage of water here. That does not mean w \e should not be good stewards of that water but it does suggest we do not need to destroy our way of life.

May 25, 2013 at 2:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

GOP tax plans would increase taxes on low-wage Kansans, decrease taxes for high-income Kansans, report says

workers of the world unite!!???? All problems will b e solved????

May 25, 2013 at 10:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

GOP tax plans would increase taxes on low-wage Kansans, decrease taxes for high-income Kansans, report says

Don't tax pass through income - for many businesses we do not. . To do that we do not need to reduce personal income taxes.

May 25, 2013 at 10:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Should residents or businesses who use too much water be fined?

Replace all lawns with painted rocks??

May 25, 2013 at 10:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Should residents or businesses who use too much water be fined?

Why? Are we short of water? The recommendation on every other day sprinkling was predicated on processing water not availability of water.

May 25, 2013 at 10:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Should residents or businesses who use too much water be fined?

a fine for overuse.must be tied to rationing. If we need to ration then a case needs to be made. Clearly there is a case in Wichita.

May 24, 2013 at 4:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Editorial: Guns, speech

Help me here. Are we arguing that there is a free speech right to public funds to argue a cause?

May 23, 2013 at 4:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

GOP tax plans would increase taxes on low-wage Kansans, decrease taxes for high-income Kansans, report says

Now for some reason our "goivernator" believes that by cutting taxes for the wealthiest Kansans that will increase job prospects for the rest of us. I do not understand that reasoning.

Are we arguing that by allowing an increasingly free ride for all high income Kansans we will attract business? Just how many high income Kansans own a business where the proceeds are taxed as personal income. Could those in that set not incorporate and avoid personal income taxes on the businesses’ income? Would not the businesses most likely to hire any significant number of Kansans not be subject to personal income taxes?

Do the wealthy people running these companies actually pay personal income taxes or is much of their income tax preferenced? Is asking the wealthiest Kansans to pay 2 or 3% more on the salaried portion of their income a real driver on any real decision process?

Could we just be a demonstration project for the Republican notion of "starving the beast"? If so what is the beast in Kansas. We are at best in the middle of the pack on services provided and taxes taken. It is interesting that we seem to be avoiding as much as possible any real cuts in services or are offering a way for those services to be funded locally. (tax transfer as opposed to tax cuts)

I hate being a test case for implementing theory with no tie to reality. In 2016 will we see Mr. Brownback move back to the national stage touting credits for reducing income taxes at the state level in Kansas? Will he be leaving behind a meaner state government while ignoring tax increases (sales tax) or local tax increases to minimize the services cut?

I suspect the fix is in to show with statistics job increases as we are coming off a recession and there are a number of federal initiatives that will bring many good jobs to the state (not caring one iota about state income taxes.

The average Kansan will mostly see a negligible tax reduction (.1%) while experiencing service cuts and local tax increases. The vast majority will not benefit from any increase in jobs brought about by Mr. Brownback’s initiative. I seriously doubt that the average Republican voter in the rest of the state opted for this.

Look at the positive side. We will all have an opportunity to put it all back together at the next state election cycle when the surviving Republicans (after Mr. Brownback’s team leaves) will have the unenviable opportunity to explain the mess they created.

May 23, 2013 at 4:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Previous