Nice work beating back the big money ads. http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/voters_pass_tax_measures_by_bi.html
Such bullshit. Every fucking election they have a new tax "for the children". Every election they come down and cry about our schools. For over a year now I've had people come into my classrooms and attempt to strike fear by claiming that our tuition is going to go up if we don't pass the next tax. It's all fucking bullshit. The tax passes, nothing happens for the schools, and they use the same lame ass excuse the next time around. They told me my tuition would go up if we didn't pass the PCC tax last year. Guess what? The tuition went up anyway. They're all fucking liars. They use schools and children as a catalyst to get their bills passed, and then they don't use the money on schools or children. Someone should be punished for this fraudulent advertising. We have one of the worst state governments in the country. They can't balance their own budget, so they raise taxes to meet the budget.
You tell me? Explain to me how admissions at PCC and PSU are the highest they've been in decades, and yet tuition goes up. Explain how they could possibly need cutbacks? The money aint going to schools.
Yes, how about some backup to that conservative urban myth. You will remember the last time someone claimed Oregon is 7th worst in the nation for taxes or something like that. I asked for a link and got no answer. Some claim large job migrations. Let's see some numbers. As I said before, some states should show inflows, totalling the outflows of the other states. Someone said his college enrollment is up, then we hear of construction. Cause and effect. I agree that colleges get too many shiny new buildings. The old ones are left 90% empty.
Someone? I said it like two posts ago. 90% empty my ass. PCC is overflowing with people. There's no parking available. They have the highest enrollment in decades. Where is the money going?
Nate, tuition only pays for 33% of the costs of education at PCC. So if you add more students, and no more revenue from taxes, the school gets poorer, not richer. It's like saying why does the soup kitchen need more money? There are homeless people lined up around the block to get fed! Where is the tax money going? It's going to subsidize your education. barfo
Was that comment really necessary? My point is, you said the old buildings are 90% empty and that's wrong. Wrong at PCC and wrong at PSU. The campus is packed at both schools.
A friend of mine is closing his business today. I talked with last night. He has a small business and while this will only cost him about $5,000, it's enough to push him to the curb. The retroactive and new taxes have made it now impossible to stay open and make enough to live on. He also now has instant legal tax problems that may not be solved by bankruptcy. All this to promulgate lavish union retirements in the state that has it on the brink of bankruptcy. And the Californication of what was once a great state continues.... Another victory for the unions. BTW, contrary to the first post in the thread, according to the Oregonian the "Yes" side well outspent the "No" side. Still, it was a fair election and the will of Multnomah county prevails for the state. I accept that. Besides, outside of a small amount of new unemployment and a bit higher prices, this has no effect on me- fortunately.
Last night in class, we were discussing the issue of some schools (not in this state) instituting programs in which students were being paid by the schools for grades and test scores. The argument in favor was that many students were underachieving, and that cash-for-grades programs would motivate them to perform better. What amused me was that one of my classmates, a community college employee and a vocal proponent of 66 & 67, spoke up and pointed out that throwing money at the problem is no more than a cop-out which diverts attention from the real problem, taking the onus off of teachers and administrators to make the necessary effort to ascertain why the kids were not motivated to succeed and what efforts they could make to better facilitate learning. After her diatribe, I leaned over and told her that she had just perfectly articulated my argument against raising taxes to cover governmental budget shortfalls. She had no response.
No matter what you may believe about Measures 66 and 67, we should at least be truthful about the realities of campaign spending. Public-employee unions raised and spent more than double what business interests did on these measures: http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/public-employee_unions_flex_mu.html Kind of makes you wonder if they might have had more interest in making sure that they maintain their bloated PERS benefits than any real interest in what's best for the longterm interests of the state.
How about examples of corporations coming here because of the tax breaks and incentives they received? Typical lefty crap. Not ever considering that we may want to actually GROW the pie, not just redistribute. This is just gibberish.
