2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal 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 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 portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

I think a sales tax is a great idea, as long as they also lower income taxes by a significant enough amount to compensate. 

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context

I actually thought the discussion of the funding for the Soccer stadium was more informative than usual in decoding the policy speak (how they justify their claims of taxpayer benefits, etc.)  but you have to really be paying attention to figure out who is responding to what argument. 

I think that Emily Harris often does an excellent job of clarifying what people are saying, especially when guests are responding to policy speak using policy speak, and catching them in using misleading language.  The host's questions are key to framing the discussion so we all get a better understanding of what's going on.

Mainly, I want to know

1. the theories behind the optimistic claims of "no cost to taxpayers", etc.  (ask tough questions and make them explain themselves in plain English)

2. How do tax policies affect individuals?  For example, last year you did a show on Bill Sizemore's propositions but there was no discussion of at what income people would be affected.  Maybe get an tax preparer on the show for situations like that?

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context

How is it that Veronica Rodriguez got 6 years in prison under Measure 11 for hugging a kid, and this coach wouldn't even go to prison?

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context

Did Nigel Jaquiss just call in and claim that he doesn't work for Willamette Week?  I don't understand the logic behind it, but it's really odd.

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context

John Charles is right.  You haven't brought a single homeowner on the show who isn't at fault for their own situation.

The solution to get prices in line with incomes is for banks to actually require 20% down, and require people to be able to prove that their income is in line with their mortgage payment.  It's simply good business on both sides of the contract.  Both the homeowner and the bank should want to be sure that the payments are sustainable.

posted 4 years, 4 months ago
view in context

When I was studying Forestry Conservation in New Zealand one of the biggest problems was getting rid of the non-native possums, which eat everything, and are wiping out ground nesting birds.  They also have amazing fur coats, which some people make into coats and try to sell... but there is such a strong anti-fur stigma that the average person can't buy them without a lot of explanation.  For example, a friend of mine gets harrassed every time she wears her vintage (bought used) fur coat in Portland. 

On the flip side, it seems that people who produce furs are focusing on certain marketable animals.  It would be great if one of those fur companies actually produced coats only from invasive species which are currently just killed and left in the woods.

I think the bottom line is that we as a species need to diversify how we clothe and feed ourselves, and be aware of where our products are coming from.

posted 4 years, 4 months ago
view in context

You guys sound very patronizing.  You keep jumping and loudly adding your own words to your guest's answers.

posted 4 years, 4 months ago
view in context

I don't understand the argument against providing tax credits to low income people.  I agree that they shouldn't be getting money back if they didn't pay out in the first place, so why not make them normal tax credits instead of the refundable kind?  If they fall into the bracket of not paying taxes, then they don't get money back, so what's the problem?  If they are paying taxes but making very little money, then most of that money will go straight into the economy.

posted 4 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Many people don't realize that you can bring your own glass container to the grocery store to fill at the bulk section. You just take it to the counter to have them weigh the container before you fill it. This used to be standard practice in health food stores and co-ops, but for some reason at New Seasons and the new big healthy grocery stores this isn't common at all. Every time I bring a container in another customer sees it and says, wow, I never knew you could do that!

It really doesn't do anything to decrease trash production by buying in bulk if you're still using one of their plastic bags.

posted 4 years, 6 months ago
view in context

As a former forester and current insurance adjuster, I would like the posters who want to "leave the forest alone" to consider the big, complicated picture in land use. If you were the one with the responsibility to make these decisions, looking at 10 little redwoods sprouts coming out of one stump choking each other out for the sun, I think you'd start to understand the complexity of issue.

Some things to consider:
1. We all use wood, whether it comes from our forests or is shipped in from Canada or New Zealand. Everything we buy is shipped on a palette made of wood.

2. Killing the timber industry locally leads to private forest lands being sold off into smaller tracts and houses, which leads to more roads and traffic that is more frequent than logging operations, where roads are used during the summer (creating exponentially less runoff into rivers) and then not used for 10 or more years. Small housing units out in the wilderness are a big reason why the Forest Service and state governments expend so much money fighting forest fires rather than letting them burn.

I worked in 80 year old second and third growth forests that activists were calling old growth. They were beautiful forests, which should be a relief and an inspiration to us to work together to sustainably harvest local timber. We can have wood and healthy forests, but we have to be on the same page about what that means. 80 year old trees, while they may be "large" (whatever that means), are still young and fast growing, and usually crowded so close together that crown fires are more likely. You can remove 1/4 of the trees in the stand and make the whole stand more healthy (less susceptible to disease and crown fire.)

posted 4 years, 7 months ago
view in context

Logging is already one of the most dangerous jobs in the US. I don't think that making it harder for the people on the ground is the solution.

When I was a forester there was a guy in Northern California who had developed a yarder that sat on a pickup, which allowed selection cutting with much less damage to standing trees. He presented it to several of the timber companies in the area, but as far as I know they weren't able to use it since he was the only one who could operate it.

My point is, there is still opportunity for developing technology to improve forest management, perhaps through smaller landowners like Critias the Elder hiring innovative loggers to thin their land.

posted 4 years, 7 months ago
view in context

Oh, great. The discussion is already over. These ballot measure discussions are so philosophical and contentious it's impossible to get any real information out of them.

posted 4 years, 8 months ago
view in context

Could you please get a tax advisor on so we can hear some real numbers about how this will affect us?
As far as I know, we already get to write off our state taxes on our federal income statement, so we would not get double taxed.

Also, does this cap get raised for inflation? At what adjusted income do people stop getting to write off their federal taxes?

posted 4 years, 8 months ago
view in context

My cousins moved here from Bosnia when they were in high school. They found that Since they didn't speak Spanish and were not able to get help in their native language, they were able to learn English much faster than the students who had the crutch of being able to talk to others in their native language (Spanish). I also felt the same way when I was learning Spanish and Bosnian.

I don't think we should teach subjects in any language other than English. I also think it would benefit students to not be allowed to speak their native language in school.

It is also inherently unfair to allow teaching subjects in Spanish or other languages when you can't provide that service to all students.

posted 4 years, 8 months ago
view in context

$150k right out of college indeed. I wouldn't bet your financial future on it.

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context

I got out of UC Berkeley with very little debt. I think I was in about $4,000 at most. The key:
1. No car. I cannot stress that enough.
2. State school.
3. Live as cheap as possible. I took advantage of the co-op system, which provided room and board at a set price and allowed me to work for some of that cost.
I think people take a lot of expenditures for granted. Cell phones, cars and eating out are all luxuries. College is a time when you should be living as cheaply as possible, because you're not bringing in much income. Don't take any expenditures for granted-- pare down your life as much as you can.

I also have to say that not every college degree is going to be worth the expense. Look seriously at what you're studying, what you're spending, and compare that to what people in your field are making. I know lots of artists living in a hell of collections calls because they splurged on a ridiculous college education that they couldn't pay off after graduation.

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context

Your guest stated that we have more assets, but I question the long term value of the assets he is speaking of. Furniture and cars are not considered long term investments.

As an insurance adjustor, I have also seen a startling decrease in the quality of new construction. I think that the housing boom has encouraged this kind of shoddy construction because people are not thinking about their house as a home, but as an investment. Realtors look at houses in terms of square footage and number of rooms and price based on these items alone, encouraging overbuilding and poor quality construction.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context