But . . . but . . . it's for the children!

Allan L. "The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation." ~A.Hitler, Mein Kampf

I think you might have made a bad and counterproductive call here.

The change as I read it is to permit them to bond retrofits and improvements rather than just new construction --- so by nixing these, you're maintaining the system where the schools empire just does whatever the hell it wants, wherever it wants, rather than fixing the buildings it has. I hope you'll look at this again.

You couldn't be more right, Jack. In every forum I have been to (a lot) the political crowd spins the same thing in many ways but it always means the same, "We don't think we have taxed you enough yet". It is never about the rampant spending. If you agree with them then vote for more loans, if you think they spend too much in all the wrong places - NO MORE TAXES. Every forum or debate has a dozen "For the children moments". Thgat's why I don't give money to meth heads, no matter what you give them it will never reach where it needs to go.

Jack, I totally agree with you.

George, I disagree with your argument because, as you so well know, the "Blue, Green, Red, money pile" argument swings both ways. There always seems to be a government way to mix the piles when they want. And even if they can't, the extra millions, if this is passed, just means less accountability from government because the money piles in the areas that we are tired of seeing mismanaged continues to exist.

People don't seem to realize -- state and local governments in this country are the next Greece. They're rioting in Greece right now over the much lower standard of living they're going to have for the coming decades -- all because of over-borrowing.

The best thing we can do to "save the children" is not spend what little of their future there is left.

Jerry and Jack, if you have a way to stop the school construction bonds while preventing bonds from going for retrofits, great. But if not, you're just creating the path of least resistance that the big construction lobby wants -- making it hard to get money for upkeep and maintenance, while it remains easy to get money for new schools "for the children!"

It's fine to stamp your feet and say "no new debt for building retrofits" -- but unless you can back that up by preventing them from just going and building new schools (a very popular thing to do with architects, construction bosses, and labor unions), you've just punched yourself in the face.

There's a frontrunner for the Most Unconvincing Argument of the Year award.

You are right on point. The devil is in the details. They would allow bonding for maintainence which is an operating cost.

When I fix or maintain my house, or add to it, that work is funded out of current income and savings. Many local governments rely on Paygo financing.
Well-operated condominium associations build capital reserves to fund major improvements and repairs.

It's about discipline, common sense, and fiscal responsibility; borrowing sprees for whatever reason or purpose are doomed -- always.

It's time to to put the brakes on and stop putting the kids in debt.

One of my college professors once told me: "If you vote for bonds, you're voting for taxes."

One other pesky FACT to add to this arguement: Interest rates for government bonds are GOING UP. Lots of major bond buyers such as insurance companies, mutual funds and pension plans are carefully checking out government revenue projections - and the results of those studies aren't exactly encouraging. In many cases,, these organizations can buy corporate bonds with much stronger revenue streams at better rates.

As a people who place their confidence and trust in law not in people, we have sure missed the mark. "The greatest asset of a salesman is integrity. Once you learn to fake that you've got it made". Trust is the stock in trade of con-artists (politicians). Wisdom, sound counsel and common sense is our best defense. We can not even assess the new laws (over 10,000 new bills in Oregon over the last 24 years) regulations and codes as fast as they throw them at us, and the rate is increasing. We are being strapped by an avalanche of regulation and a burgeoning army of government that is stripping us of our very soul. I just finished going through the ORS 244 and the City of Portland Code of Ethics. The city is overseen out of the Auditors office and by the Omsbudsman. His page begins with a statement of impotence, don't bother to call.

I was at a business meeting where Michael Courtney was talking about it. It seems that the only real mandate in the City Charter that is very clear is that they city will enhance and encourage business. It has done the opposite for over 20 years without consequences. Mike was talking about a citizens committee to take back our city, revise the charter and make the officials accountable. Asking corrupt politicians to be accountable is silly, MAKE THEM.

"When I fix or maintain my house, or add to it, that work is funded out of current income and savings. Many local governments rely on Paygo financing.
Well-operated condominium associations build capital reserves to fund major improvements and repairs."

So you're willing to allow government entities to raise the taxes required to fund building repair and maintenance reserve funds so that they don't have to borrow via bonds?

No, how about cutting out the overpayment to staff salaries?

"So you're willing to allow government entities to raise the taxes required to fund building repair and maintenance reserve funds so that they don't have to borrow via bonds?

Posted by George Anonymuncule Seldes | May 7, 2010 8:48 AM

No, how about cutting out the overpayment to staff salaries?"

OK, say we cut all government workers from all payrolls, since they're all useless time servers anyway who do nothing but blog and figure out ways to paint money different colors.

What mechanism exists to allow the various governments (we're talking schools in this case) to keep the money saved by eliminating all the workers in a reserve fund as was proposed? There isn't one -- schools get operating funds from the state, and there's nothing included in that money to pay for capital improvements, so even eliminating every single teacher, administrator, and janitor still won't get you any building maintenance done.

Didn't see your opposition statement in the voter's pamphlet, Jack, so I imagine this one is going to pass with flying colors, no matter what.

Been a while since I've seen a ballot measure in there with not a single opposition statement.

George, I know you have reasoning and comprehension skills.

The point being made by others is that "capital improvements" and maintenance has in decades past (and should be now) have been a reasonable percentage of a budget. If voters aren't willing to bond themselves or tax themselves to death, then a responsible school board should budget appropriately including maintenance and capital improvements.

My uncle was a school board member/president for decades, and that is what they did. Why not now-why are times different?

"The point being made by others is that "capital improvements" and maintenance has in decades past (and should be now) have been a reasonable percentage of a budget. If voters aren't willing to bond themselves or tax themselves to death, then a responsible school board should budget appropriately including maintenance and capital improvements.

My uncle was a school board member/president for decades, and that is what they did. Why not now-why are times different? "

Well, if you ask me, it's because America underwent 30 years of programming in the "All Problems Have Easy, Painless Solutions" and "You can always get something for nothing" school we call TV, culminating in the election of a hack TV actor named Ronnie Ray-gun who told Americans that government wasn't the solution to any problems, government WAS the problem, and that what good freedom lovers should do is cut government spending ('cept for war, natch) and taxes and all would be well.

A nation whose reasoning faculties had been severely damaged by the constant barrage of idiocy bought into it hook, line and sinker, and we've been struggling with the aftereffects ever since. The natural dislike of taxes has been elevated to the status of a moral position instead of being recognized as a juvenile insistence on getting something for nothing. Worse, the kind of idiot antics that Jack chronicles here so often play right into the anti-taxers' hands, so that all ideas, good, bad, or indifferent, are discredited.

What I really don't like about 69 is that in allowing bonds for purchase of existing structures it opens the door for additional financing for folks like Wim Wievel (sp?0 at PSU to get more deeply in bed with the developer weasels and PDC.

Not a good idea, IMHO.