Inside The Numbers of Measure 97
#1
Todays "Other Views" from the Albany Democract Hearald and printed in the Mail Tribune gives us food for thought. 


http://medfordmailtribune.or.newsmemory....FBbXhxTXls=

I wonder if at some point citizens will need to make a list of the the services they need/want and rank them in importance. 

Can we all agree we need to start with fire and police? 

Then what?
Reply
#2
Measure 97 was going to be used to try and shore up pers, that's why when it became evident that it wasn't going to pass governor brown and her cohorts hatched a plan to try and borrow money to try and shore up pers. Well, Oregon has something in our laws stating we can't borrow against public debt, thankfully.
Reply
#3
(11-22-2016, 11:42 AM)orygunluvr Wrote: Measure 97 was going to be used to try and shore up pers, that's why when it became evident that it wasn't going to pass governor brown and her cohorts hatched a plan to try and borrow money to try and shore up pers. Well, Oregon has something in our laws stating we can't borrow against public debt, thankfully.
Edit: No content.
Reply
#4
(11-22-2016, 07:22 PM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(11-22-2016, 11:42 AM)orygunluvr Wrote: Measure 97 was going to be used to try and shore up pers, that's why when it became evident that it wasn't going to pass governor brown and her cohorts hatched a plan to try and borrow money to try and shore up pers. Well, Oregon has something in our laws stating we can't borrow against public debt, thankfully.
Edit: No content.

I propose a public servant tax. If you are getting paid for public service, you should have to pay a tax.
This money can be used to fund PERS.
Reply
#5
(11-22-2016, 07:29 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(11-22-2016, 07:22 PM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(11-22-2016, 11:42 AM)orygunluvr Wrote: Measure 97 was going to be used to try and shore up pers, that's why when it became evident that it wasn't going to pass governor brown and her cohorts hatched a plan to try and borrow money to try and shore up pers. Well, Oregon has something in our laws stating we can't borrow against public debt, thankfully.
Edit: No content.

I propose a public servant tax. If you are getting paid for public service, you should have to pay a tax.
This money can be used to fund PERS.
It's my understanding employees in the public sector pay taxes too. 
PERS was agreed to by our state representives and so is a valid contract. It's becoming obvious that PERS will have to be renegotiated (again) to bring it inline with the realities of state revenues and to confrom to the common standards of benefits in the private sector. 

And still...

If you would first fund a fire department and police, what would your list look like in terms of priority for the taxes we pay. This simplistic thought is a the heart of our tax/spend issue.
Reply
#6
(11-23-2016, 09:42 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(11-22-2016, 07:29 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(11-22-2016, 07:22 PM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(11-22-2016, 11:42 AM)orygunluvr Wrote: Measure 97 was going to be used to try and shore up pers, that's why when it became evident that it wasn't going to pass governor brown and her cohorts hatched a plan to try and borrow money to try and shore up pers. Well, Oregon has something in our laws stating we can't borrow against public debt, thankfully.
Edit: No content.

I propose a public servant tax. If you are getting paid for public service, you should have to pay a tax.
This money can be used to fund PERS.
It's my understanding employees in the public sector pay taxes too. 
PERS was agreed to by our state representives and so is a valid contract. It's becoming obvious that PERS will have to be renegotiated (again) to bring it inline with the realities of state revenues and to confrom to the common standards of benefits in the private sector. 

And still...

If you would first fund a fire department and police, what would your list look like in terms of priority for the taxes we pay. This simplistic thought is a the heart of our tax/spend issue.
Public sector employees wouldn't be able to pay anything if it wasn't for private sector employees
Reply
#7
(11-23-2016, 10:07 AM)orygunluvr Wrote:
(11-23-2016, 09:42 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(11-22-2016, 07:29 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(11-22-2016, 07:22 PM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(11-22-2016, 11:42 AM)orygunluvr Wrote: Measure 97 was going to be used to try and shore up pers, that's why when it became evident that it wasn't going to pass governor brown and her cohorts hatched a plan to try and borrow money to try and shore up pers. Well, Oregon has something in our laws stating we can't borrow against public debt, thankfully.
Edit: No content.

I propose a public servant tax. If you are getting paid for public service, you should have to pay a tax.
This money can be used to fund PERS.
It's my understanding employees in the public sector pay taxes too. 
PERS was agreed to by our state representives and so is a valid contract. It's becoming obvious that PERS will have to be renegotiated (again) to bring it inline with the realities of state revenues and to confrom to the common standards of benefits in the private sector. 

And still...

If you would first fund a fire department and police, what would your list look like in terms of priority for the taxes we pay. This simplistic thought is a the heart of our tax/spend issue.
Public sector employees wouldn't be able to pay anything if it wasn't for private sector employees

Oddly, the same holds true for most private sector employees.
Reply
#8
(11-23-2016, 01:27 PM)Cuzz Wrote:
(11-23-2016, 10:07 AM)orygunluvr Wrote:
(11-23-2016, 09:42 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(11-22-2016, 07:29 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(11-22-2016, 07:22 PM)Wonky3 Wrote: Edit: No content.

I propose a public servant tax. If you are getting paid for public service, you should have to pay a tax.
This money can be used to fund PERS.
It's my understanding employees in the public sector pay taxes too. 
PERS was agreed to by our state representives and so is a valid contract. It's becoming obvious that PERS will have to be renegotiated (again) to bring it inline with the realities of state revenues and to confrom to the common standards of benefits in the private sector. 

And still...

If you would first fund a fire department and police, what would your list look like in terms of priority for the taxes we pay. This simplistic thought is a the heart of our tax/spend issue.
Public sector employees wouldn't be able to pay anything if it wasn't for private sector employees

Oddly, the same holds true for most private sector employees.

And even that's beside the point. Want to live a world where there are no public sector employees? I'd just bet you would.  Razz
Not long after man can down out of the trees and formed social groups there have been "public sector employees". 
But why do we bother.  Sad
Once more the conversation gets hijacked, derailed, and stabbed. 
Hey OL, how soon will you be moving to Washington to be part of "the team"? You will become part of the Public Sector, helping tear apart everthing we value.
Reply
#9
http://bluebook.state.or.us/state/govtfi...ance01.htm









It's just money.
Reply
#10
(11-23-2016, 04:18 PM)Wonky3 Wrote: But why do we bother.  Sad
Once more the conversation gets hijacked, derailed, and stabbed. 
Hey OL, how soon will you be moving to Washington to be part of "the team"? You will become part of the Public Sector, helping tear apart everthing we value.

The plaintive cry of another curb-stomped liberal. Why can't we all align ourselves with the progressive arc of history? It's just so sad.
Reply
#11
Quote:PERS was agreed to by our state representatives and so is a valid contract

Are they not also on PERS? Seems like a conflict of interest.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)