2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

This discussion is a waste of time fore it seems that these elected bodies are never to resolve anything and when people state that government is to big or is the problem, then, perhaps they are right.  We could save a lot money by not having senators and representatives whom only represent themselves and not the public that voted them in.  In short why not just have a lobbyist government that dictates public policy through the corporations they represent.  This way we won't have to worry about Annual Sessions that do not produce anything.  What we should really talk about is how the middle and lower classes are taxed in the State of Oregon.  Oregon complains about the financial turn down and loss of jobs, however, if one removes certain funds from ones retirement account during retirement, one is taxed three times.  One tax is paid to the federal government, a second tax is paid once more to the federal government when your retirement income is combined to your retirement income and taxed as though it is your regular retirement income and a third tax is once more taxed by the State of Oregon on the combined income that has already been taxed a second time by the federal government.  So when Oregon and the rest of the nation complains about our financial situation and at the same taxes the hell out you when uses his or her retirement income to make purchases that help the economy and is penalized for doing so, then I do have a problem with big government.  Oregon and the rest of the country cannot have it both ways. So here I sit, unable to make purchases because if I do I will be penalized for doing so via taxes and when one is taxed out of his or her fixed income.  Then, a no sales tax system means nothing, because you are unable to make purchases, in turn you must turn to the banks and or credit cards where interest rates dictate ones life even if one has been prudent with money during ones life time or remain in a state of suspended animation waiting for nature to take it's course. It is a no win policy for American (retired Americans) from the middle or lower economic classes and NOT EXTRA SESSIONS at Salem that I am concerned with. Last but not least, who's retirement fund is it:  I it the government's, or is it a future retirement account for doctors and CEO's of medical and hospitals whom require a living standard better than mine?

posted 3 years, 3 months ago
view in context

The problem with this head scarf topic is [religion] and the rules for religions which were made by men whom made the rules for women.  We don't need head scarfs or other religious items that tells everyone that I have religion....that perhaps I am special.  Children don't know if said person is making a statement concerning religion and the supreme court is wrong on this issue.  The other part of these religions is that these religious rules are beat into you from the time you are able to learn and when you finally grow into adulthood, one tends to believe that these rules are set in stone.  And last, there are more important topics to resolve in this country than head scarf issues. It would be interesting to discuss how Muhammad returned to Mecca and slaughtered over ten thousand people (his people) to enforce his regulations for his new religion. Religions are bloody instruments so [men] may have their way throughout history and to control others, especially women.

posted 3 years, 3 months ago
view in context

If that child could some how be asked if he wished to live or die, I am most confident he would have chosen life and not religious or legal semantics which make attorney's wealthy.  In short, I do not know of any fifteen year olds who are able to make medical decisions on there own.  Nor do I know of anyone including adults whom like to go a doctor without some sort of prodding from others.

Raoul

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Since the time of Cicero and beyond, the wealthy have not wished to pay a tax.  Today we have the same situation, the wealthy do not wish to pay a fair tax, however, because of their money to influence politicians, they propose ideas to tax others for the problems they cause, fore the DNA of Rome's wealthy class is the same as the wealthy of America. Not paying a fair tax is elitism, and elitism ruins societies. Cutting educational programs in order to evade paying taxes is a wealthy elitist type of program that should never be allowed.  Education is the benchmark of a quality society.  Just because one donates to arts, like the ballet company of Oregon does not cut it.  The lesser classes whether in Oregon or the rest of the country can't afford to attend the expensive ballet, opera or other classical events.  The wealthy just don't get it.  The wealthy must pay more than a fair tax.....period!

Raoul, Bend, Oregon

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

The Congress and the Senate is not or does not wish to listen to the American public.  Regardless if we have health care reform, the facts are these:  Insurance premiums are to expensive!  If one is on a fixed income like me, the insurance premiums I am forced to pay is to expensive.  I do not want insurance premiums to compete with my cost of living especially when one is a healthy person.  For the past 44 years of my working life I have only used my medical insurance twice, yet because I am now 66 years of age I am placed into the category of the aged even though I do not take any form of medication.  I do not like being discriminated because of age.  The public option that I would like is one where one has the real option of choosing death as foretold by nature, and opting out of paying for expensive medical insurance programs that keep doctors, insurance CEOs and hospital employees employed for life through the premiums I am forced to pay.  Besides, isn't our final destination after death a better place to be......a place were real social standards are enforced for all and not just for congressmen and senators?  Yes there are a plenty of medical insurance plans to choose from, but unless your are of the wealthy class, the are to expensive.......period.

posted 3 years, 5 months ago
view in context