2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election 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 international 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

Thanks for your thoughtful response.  Your comparisons are being diluted by your choice of data. Comparative studies should employ the same level of data (state vs state).   

In the report that you referenced, Oregon teachers are the 15th highest paid in the nation (pg. 16).  Therefore, one should reasonably assume that when comparing economic returns to investment with regard to education that teachers in Oregon should have students that test at approximately that same level. For instance, teachers that are paid the 15th highest in the country should, in theory, have students that score approximately 15th highest in the nation.

According to NAEP (I would encourage you to explore more than the limited data that I'm going to discuss here and talk about the pros and cons of data type with your teacher)

OR teacher pay 15 of 52 vs. 2007 4th Gr Math score 39 of 52

OR teacher pay 15 of 52 vs. 2007 8th Gr Math score 23 of 52

OR teacher pay 15 of 52 vs 2007 4th Grade Reading 41 of 52

OR teacher pay 15 of 52 vs 2007 4th Grade Reading 19 of 52

Comparing SAT scores is a bit less useful as not all states require all students to take the SAT.  All states do require that students be able to read and perform math. 

I don't hate the teacher's union or teachers.  I used to teach in both FL and VA.  I do want teachers to be held to high standards and want them to put their students before themselves.  I would never leave my students mid-year due to a budget shortfall.  And they shouldn't either.

I need to go cook dinner and help my kids with their homework...

Regards.

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Oregon Ballot Measure was defeated in 2004 not in the 1980s.

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

In response to mcnamarm "Years of anti-government activists working to destroy the state's infrastructure and funding mechanisms. I moved to Oregon prior to Measure 5, when the schools had a national reputation for excellence. It's been downhill since then."

Hmmm...so by passing Measure 5 and equalizating the funding between school districts so that funds are now given to districts based on the number of students in each district rather than the value of homes in the district is destroying the state's infrastructure. I'm confused. I thought the concept of "equal access to education for all students" was a liberal platform. How is ensuring that all children be educated to a minimum standard and ensuring that costs of education are born at the state level rather than the local level be tearing down our infrastructure?  So you think that it is better that the costs of education are paid for at the local level so that rich kids get to go to schools with highly paid teachers and nice buildings while poor kids get poorly paid/trained teachers and attend schools without funding for heat in the winter? 

And really, according to the Oregon Dept. of Education own publication, page 91 of the Oregon Statewide Report Card, from 1992-2008, the "average actually salary" if a teacher has increased 45.2%, the salary of a principal by an increase of 60.5%, and that of a superintendent by an increase of 72.8%.  To be fair their report does employ actual figures rather than CPI adjusted figures.  But, even adjusted for inflation, school administrators seemed to have benefited from Measure 5 which passed in 1990 because superintendents and principals received inflation adjusted increases of 14.3% and 6.2% respectively (not including their benefits). 

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

So your point is well taken. However, using real rather than nominal growth and assuming that all 10.8% of Oregon's growth in population arrived in 2001, that still only projects a budget growth of 35% from 2001-2008. Am I missing something?  To what then do you ascribe the rest of the budget increase during the period from 2001-2008? 

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

I'm blown away by argument that you don't think Oregonians should demand a tighter rein on government spending and continue to support double digit budget increases. Oregon's Legislatively Adopted Budgets have grown 64.2 percent between the 2001-03 and 2009-11 biennia, while the state's population has grown only 10.8 percent between 2001 and 2008.

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Yes, apparently it creates them too well.  According to the Oregon Employment Department, Oregon tends to have a higher concentration of state and local government employment than the nation. Oregon's employment is 20 percent more concentrated in state government than the nation as a whole. 

I appreciate government workers.  I've played the role as state worker and teacher myself.  However, as a taxpayer, I want my government to utilize my hard earned funds efficiently.  Why does it take 20% more state and local government employees in the state of Oregon to provide the same services offered in other states? 

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

You are confusing the two bills (guess the writers of the bills achieved their goal).  Measure 67 does tax GROSS receipts. 

Cut and pasted directly from state's website 

"...establishes $150 minimum tax for most businesses or minimum tax of approximately 0.1% of total Oregon revenues for some corporations with over $500,000 in Oregon revenues."

So you pay the greater of a minimum of $150 OR .1% of TOTAL REVENUES.  So, if you own a business that has high cost of goods (e.g. think grocery stores, gas stations, manufacturing-interesting that these are all businesses that cannot be easily exported to other states or countries) you will likely pay the higher .1%.  For a business with $500,000 in gross receipts this would mean paying an additional $500 to the State of Oregon regardless of whether or not you have a profit.  This tax is in addition to the others that businesses pay.  Note that the very few businesses that are supportive of this measure are service providers (e.g. travel agents). 

 These measures will prevent manufactures from locating in Oregon.  The most recent of these is Think, an electric car manufacturer that just announced that they are taking their $450 million dollar green investment money and accompanying 450+ full time jobs to Indiana rather than Oregon. 

 During the past year, there has been a lot of discussion about keeping manufacturing jobs in the US.  While services are important, they are easily moved.  As a state, do we really want to less attractive to manufacturing?  Especially during the next decade when huge amounts of investment will be spent on creating green technologies?

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

"What are you doing in Oregon? 11States beckon and you can move your employees too. billedell — Mon Jan. 4th 9:30a.m."

Yes, they are.  Perhaps she should take her clearly talented tax generating self and follow Boeing to N. Carolina or even better yet maybe she should follow Think to Indiana.  That will make the tax pool of paying patrons even smaller and the pool of people on unemployment and welfare after she lays people off even larger.  Billedell, what was your tax contribution to Oregon last year? How many people are dependent upon you for their jobs?

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Do you let you children spend their allowance before the earn it? When you spend your household budget do you spend money that you have not yet received?  If you owned a business, would you pay your expenses this year with next year’s revenue? 

Perhaps we should start the reform process by acknowledging that we shouldn't spend money before we are in receipt of it and we certainly shouldn't spend someone else's money before we have asked and received their permission to receive it. 

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Yes.  If this passes my parents have an exit plan in place to close their business.  The $500,000 they have "invested" in a local community will be transferred to a safer investment (e.g. US treasury bonds). Instead of netting 1-2% during a good year, they will double their "return on investment" and they won't have to each work 60 hour weeks.  Three full-time employees will be let go (so the state will have to pick up their benefits tab). Two part time college age students will be let go.  One part time high school student will be let go.  One high school job study will be eliminated.  In addition, the $25,000 that they donated to local non-profits (Boys and Girls Club, PTA, Boy Scouts, and Habit for Humanity to name a few) will disappear.  In addition, anyone needing an item that they sell will have to drive a minimum of 15 miles away to get it (lost gas and time for their current customers making it more difficult for the businesses that they serve to stay competitive).  It's not just about this measure.  It is about how the citizens in this state deal with their budget issues. This is just the issue that will break the back of the camel. 

And, if you think my parents are rich, you are wrong.  That $500,000 is their ENTIRE savings as my mom moved here from a foreign country and has an elementary school education, dad dropped out of college to fight a war and feed his kids.  My mom is going to "retire" this year (e.g. she won't get paid to work anymore at their business because they can't afford to pay her). If filed her social security claim the other day.  She is going to collect a whopping $300 a month.  Not an anecdote.  Real life. 

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Last year my parents loaned their business money (because banks were not loaning money) to continue to pay expenses.  One of the guests on the show, the owner of the gas station, also mentioned that he borrowed money last year to stay in business.

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

The reason that the elimination of income taxes on the first $2,400 of unemployment benefits is included in the bill is because it is an attempt to buy votes from those currently hit the hardest. Pretty smooth. 

If the writers of the bill really wanted to provide relief to the unemployed they could have written that issue as a seperate, temporary measure.  But the writers of the measure knew they would have a hard time getting enough votes for the bill so the included this sad attempt at buying the votes of the unemployed. 

But the fact remains that if Oregon continues to make itself economically unattractive as a place for businesses to invest, that unemployment will remain higher in Oregon than in other states because businesses won't move here and create jobs.  People can be very short sighted and opinion can be easily swayed for buy small incentives. 

If you are currently unemployed, think twice before falling for this scam because:

1) If you are unemployed your tax burden is probably little to none.  Even if you are unemployed and still in the highest Oregon income tax bracket if this passes, this will only save you a maximum of $216. 

2) Is $216 worth scaring away a company that might move to Oregon and create a job for you! (And yes this is already happening, if you don't belive me read the article link below...a company that makes electric cars -GREEN JOBS- just opted to take their $43 million dollars and 415+ full time jobs with benefits to Indiana instead of Oregon). 

http://news.opb.org/article/6497-thnk-picks-indiana-electric-car-plant/

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Great point.  We don't want to create another entire state level office to eat up more revenue.  See my comments below about removing the cap on unemployment taxes.  What do you think?  The system in already in place and it won't require creating a new agency to fund.

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Agreed.  Schools and public services should be funded.  But reform (in the areas of revenue collection and expenditures) is necessary!

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

I'm really disturbed by the fact that the curriculum in your school seems to be guided by the political stance of the teacher's union rather than actually academic inquiry. 

All choices have costs and benefits and your teachers do have a choice about your education. 

I propose you that in your classroom you conduct a basic comparative study (something you will have to do in real life and an exercise that will also prepare you for college).

Compare average teacher salaries across the nation, average number of school days, average length of school, against whatever indicator your class thinks is important to your education (e.g. average SAT scores, average graduation rates, average employment rates, etc.)  Your math, economics, or political science teacher should be able to help you set up the problem and gather the data with very little effort on their part. 

I think you'll be surprised at the results. 

Things to ponder while you discuss the results...

If Oregon has such a progressive education system that prepares students for careers the why has unemployment in Oregon been one of the highest in the US during the past year.

Are the test scores of the students in this state as high as the average salaries of their teachers? (e.g. if teachers have the 14th highest salaries in Oregon shouldn't your SAT/ACT scores be approximately 14th highest in the nation as well)

Do teachers in Oregon get paid more per hour than teachers in other states (e.g. average teacher salary divided by average school days divided by average hours in school per day)

I implore you as a student, as you seem to be one of those gems in the rough, to hold your teachers to a higher moral and academic standard.  Should your teachers really be spending their time trying to brain wash you into accepting their political agenda or should they be spending their time teaching you critical thinking skills like how to gather and analyze data?

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Yes, as the economist currently on the radio just mentioned, there will be a change in the landscape of type of businesses in Oregon. The people who vote for this thinking that they will be punishing the large businesses will be doing them a favor because this WILL put kill many small businesses giving larger businesses an advantage over you, the consumer.  Hmmm, Starbucks or the local coffee shop. 

 The $10 corporate fee IS a public relations DIVERSION to convince to public to vote yes.  The issues are not about the fee but about the other two tax increases they have are written into this same measure!  The measure was written to purposely confuse people.  The issues is about the state trying to pass a permanent sales tax on you the consumer without you realizing what is going on.   

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

This issue touches my heart because I can relate to the issues being faced by all parties.  I have in the past served as a state employee, teacher, and CEO of a small business.  I also have graduate degrees in economics and educational policy.  In addition, my family has owned four very successful small businesses in three states.  Their lasted enterprise is located in Oregon.  In the past year, they have increased their gross revenues by over 10% and have added several employees.  However, their net on their business will be zero dollars this year.  Why, because instead of taking their atypical 1% net on their $500,000 investment they hired two people and increased their donations to local non-profits from $5,000 to $25,000.  They asked me the other day for my "professional" opinion about what they should continue to do with their funds.  I told them that if this measure passes, they should close their business and take their investment elsewhere.

Why?  Because a business with a high cost of goods typically only nets 1-2% in a good year.  Assuming above average growth of 2.5-3% a quarter, normal employment rates won't return to normal for nine years.  That means that the next decade won't be good.  When savings accounts yield very little (as in the past few years) it makes sense to be self-employed because you won't get a decent yield on your money.  However, with public debt climbing and treasury bond yields getting higher every day, it makes more sense to take the money they have invested in inventory and put it somewhere else (e.g. not in Oregon).  How could I advise them any differently?  Why would anyone with money invest keep it or bring to Oregon when they can have a higher return on their investment somewhere else with less effort.     

I am voting NO.  The schools will continue to educate our children.  I have lived in several states where the teachers get paid much less than in Oregon (Oregon teachers are the 14th highest paid in the nation with the average teacher getting paid more than $50K, their salaries have increased over 26% in the past 10 years but have the test scores in Oregon increased that much as well) and my kids have turned out just fine. 

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

I agree with you that Oregon schools are particularly horrible.  My children are currently attending Oregon public schools have also attended schools in VA and in FL.  My youngest son has yet to be challenged in school and has yet to bring home assignment that challenge him (e.g. I have a portfolio of his work and he is doing classroom work in Oregon in 4th grade that he completed in 1st grade in FL). 

However, that being said, the is no correlation between the amount of money spent and test scores/student performance.  To test my statement, simply look at any standard test score (e.g. SATs) and student performance historically. Notice that while test scores have only risen slightly, the amount of $ spent per student has risen much, much faster. The strongest correlations for performance are between class size and teacher training. It's not about the amount of money that Oregon spends on education (the % compared to some states is quite high), it's about how the money is spent.   The budget for education in Oregon is more than adequate considering the outcomes.  I'd be willing to bet that if you compared the amount of money spent on your public education with that of the international students that you went to college with that your governement spent more money on you than they had allotted to their public educations....

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context

The key to cutting a budget is to cut costs without cutting services.  Salaries are typically the largest portion of a budget so start there.  Look hard.  Do your research and utilize your young (and free) talent to conduct CBAs- think graduate students in your university economic and policy departments. 

1.  Early retirements- Ask for volunteers.  Don't force people into retirement but it doesn't hurt to ask.  I think you might be surprised at how many people will volunteer.

2.  Furrlow days- Allow people to take 14 furrlow days when they choose.  Many Gen X and Gen Y workers would love to have 14 extra days off even if they are unpaid.  And, while people are on vacation they spend money!

3.  Consider benefit cuts- Isn't it better to have optional vision and dental rather than to have to waive goodbye to your collegues?

There are so many ways to cut a budget.  You can do it without cutting essential services! Prove the public wrong.  Get your scalpel out and get to it!

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context