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

Its traditional, apparently, that to cover any shortfall you must attack schools and/or police. As I was listening to the dialogue and gathering my thoughts I found myself having to try to maintain some decorum. My rag would be: Why do we always grind on schools and police when there are other areas where money seems to be leaking out in no special direction. For instance, when Im driving past road crews I always make a mental note on the amount of work that appears to be getting done. I find myself amazed when all the workers, or even half of the workers are busy, which is very seldom. Usually I see a hole, one man with a shovel, one with a clipboard and three looking on. If there are eight workers on the site, three are working and five are watching, usually with animated conversation. Maybe the workers need cheering on.... I know these workers, who require no special education, are paid very, very well with our tax dollars. In 1978, my friend had the flagging job (and sometimes deer carcass picker-upper), at 18 dollars an hour. My jaw dropped, she was educated to run an art gallery, but I dont think she would have commanded that wage at that time in her profession. Anyway, I think you get my drift. Why do we never look elsewhere to cut back on expenses. I understand that legislators get lots of perks that we dont even know about, but we pay for and Im sure some of you could come up with a bunch more suggestions. What would I cut? Well Spanish immersion can go, sex education has no place in public schools, Im all for Phys. Ed. but couldnt we let school out earlier and let the parents make sure their kids are getting their excercise? We could ban twinkies and soda and their ilk, I think thats in the works, maybe we wouldnt have such a population of beached whales. Oh, didnt you ask? Sorry.

posted 2 years, 10 months ago
view in context