'We fought hard and made the case for protecting schools and the $83,402 a year average in pay and benefits to Oregon state workers (30% higher than what private sector workers receive), ensuring seniors get the care they need in their own homes, keeping our communities safe, and shoring up our Public Employee Retirement System funding. We respected the electorate by providing them with straight facts about our plan (okay... we didn't really say anything about the possible need to shore up PERS funding or the $83,402 a year average in annual pay and benefits)

...Oregon now has a chance to be a leader to the rest of the nation. Those in Massachusetts and Washington DC can and should learn this lesson: Progressive solutions to great challenges - backed by courage, conviction and hard work - will win support. Of course, you folks in New York and California who have also made your state revenues very dependent on a very small group of people in an unsuccessful attempt to close the budget abyss you're currently staring into... you just didn't devote enough courage, conviction, and hard work.

Yet another irony in this whole 6667 deal occurred Wednesday morning after the election when NPR reported that a New York-based "Italian" Ice cream producer was moving to Eugene. Because we have "good milk." (rBGH-free). MORE jobs!

~EIO

"We fought hard and made the case for protecting schools.."

Every tax hike is for the schools and the kiddies. But apparently, the money never gets there - because this is the argument behind every tax hike. It's the same old argument. I am already hearing talk of how the Kicker needs to be taken away - for the kids to save schools.

What a scam.

Washington taxes gross receipts but not personal income or capital gains. Now Oregon taxes gross receipts, personal income, and capital gains.

So, where do you want to start that new business of yours? If you've got a choice, it's not going to be here.

Oh God meg, if only you had posted your brillant insight a few weeks ago ....

With more than four decades of experience between them at studios such as Laika and Disney, Roland Gauthier, Michael Kuehn and Alex Tysowsky shared with the intimate audience of students and industry members why they decided to start their animation and visual effects studio, Hinge Digital, in Portland and how the city could tap into its creative potential to become a go-to source for digital content.

What first attracted the Hinge founders to Portland – after spending years working in Los Angeles and the Bay Area – were the same things that have drawn many people looking to get out of the rat race: the fresh air, friendly people and overall quality of life.

Scott,

Do you not think they left the Bay Area and LA for reasons other then to escape to some fresh air? They left because the Bay area and the LA area are even more difficult business environments environments than Portland. Yes there is fresh air. Yes, folks in less populated areas tend to be more friendly. And, yes, the quality of life is nice here.

Like almost all business people, they chose this area for a variety of reasons. And I am sure one of the negatives was the entitlement culture and tax and spend legislature. It is just a few years behind the California situation that has been so instrumental in California's economic implosion. They also likely came here because unemployment is so high that labor is cheap.

At some point, people have to stop asking for more from their government. At some point, there will be enough people who understand that private sector jobs pay for the public sector jobs. At some point more people will vote for what is right than those who vote for their mother or brother or wife who has a government job.

The Yes camp started with 25% of the voting public either working for government or related to someone who did. Weigh that against the "top 2.3% of the earners." The Yes people then worked harder and told the better lies. They deserved their win, but the people will regret it in years to come.

Since right and left find the idea of "service track" public service positions, replacing as much of middle management as there are volunteers to work at a nominal, fixed salary ($25,000-$30,000/annum), to be "monumentally stupid", you are left with acting like State gov was a fully competitive public corp, or crafting policy with the scalpel.

Both sides seem far more interested in making theoretical points than solving problems. You're right. The bloody spectacle we just went through is ready for prime time!

. Yes, folks in less populated areas tend to be more friendly.

Having lived in NY, CA, OR, and traveling extensively, I have not observed this. Rural people often seem suspicious of outsiders, and though they may be outwardly friendly, one can sense the distance. New Yorkers are great, but they think and react in an accelerated manner that is different from most other parts of the country. If you need help, though, they will bend over backwards. Same with SF. The rudest people I've met, frankly, are in Oregon. Maybe it's the weather, but there seem to be a lot of people in Oregon with little black clouds over their heads.

As Steve points out, there's acting and being. From my experience, if you have a flat tire in the middle of nowhere, a rural Southerner will stop, offer condolences, maybe offer to call someone, and go on their way. A Bostoner will stop, lecture you for not having a spare, and do whatever it takes to get you going again.

So, which is "more friendly"?

When pushing against the tides, how far becomes the real question.

If after WW2 the Greatest Generation felt compelled to rebuild America and the top tax bracket would consent to pay 90% until Kennedy would finally change it, where do the needs and responsibilities of this day bring us? Where do we say a fair progressive tax rate is for the top tax bracket, for corporations that have been elevated to personhood by our new conservative majority of the Supreme Court? We must shape the debate to reveal the truth about our history as a free enterprise, and democracy. We as progressives offering solutions must reveal the success of those programs tried and true. The message is that failures are hard lessons toward success, not the excuse needed to give up, to quit! The Apathy that the rich/corporations used to distort our economy, our democracy, our definition of who we are to one another as Americans has to end. What's more John Wayne than the never give up attitude?! So, would it not make sense that we can solve the debate for the future and settle on a fair progressive tax rate to stay constant? To define to the electorate what we see as a top to bottom definition of what their tax burden will be? What the benefits will be for their sacrifice, and to remake the spirit of devotion to America above just making more money for money's sake. The only people at the megaphone are preaching the gospel of the rich, the tired rationales like capital gains tax is a double tax, or the inheritance tax is a death tax. We progressives need to define with devotion what a fair corporate tax rate should be, what the top tax bracket rates should be, and where a fair tax burden is bared by all. We need to find the real balance for the pendulum of how much government influence is enough, and how much the corporation's, and wealth's influence is enough. We need to speak to people to remind them that the top 2% should only have 2% of the vote, not 50% because of their wealth. So, when the argument is made that government can't be trusted, remind them our government is us, and our responsibility. If left to it's own devise by apathy there are those who will gorge themselves on all the wealth they can no matter how much damage they may do, leaving us all with far more problems than if we paid attention. Just like our every day lives. Happy Thoughts

Maybe it's the weather, but there seem to be a lot of people in Oregon with little black clouds over their heads.

It's because they have a better grasp of reality. I used to know Lyn Abramson fairly well, and she would find Oregonians textbook examples of her theory.

And, alternatively, just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you.

@ Zarathustra

Nicely put: "A Bostoner will stop, lecture you for not having a spare, and do whatever it takes to get you going again." My point about rural folks was too broad a brush. They do, generally, seem to have more time to do the things that matter. It seems city folk are strung out from tight schedules and don't have time to help.

Nolan proves once again why those who take credit for this, like you Kari, and Steve, and and all the unbelievably egotistical fools don't get it: What happened in Oregon is exactly what happened in Massachusetts, and it has nothing to do with progressivism or all you self-congratulatory fools like Nolan claim. This was a populist reaction that happened to have the only opportunity to be heard in Oregon in a (thankfully) sound tax increase because of slovenly blue tinge of our state.

Remember, it was Nolan and the Democratic majority in both houses who refused to do anything in the wake of Measure 50 (which was properly defeated despite the obnoxious efforts of the very same disgusting backslappers taking credit they DON'T deserve for Measure 66 and Measure 67) in the 2008 special session to respond to some very specific calls to raise the same taxes in Measure 66 and Measure 67 because it was an election year and they were cowards. The economy forced their hand in 2009, and taking credit for being forced to do the right thing one year later when there was no choice, when the cowardly refused to do it one earlier when it would have helped immeasurably more, is immoral, plain and simple.

And because Nolan illustrates how all those taking false credit for this success can at times be dense as concrete, the point is: Be careful in that egotism; the backslappers and the legislators amongst them who are already talking in this way show they are choosing to get the wrong message They are taking what happened as an affirmation of them and their views, rather than the voters sending a message to government. Keep it up with the hubris, draw the wrong conclusions and as a result legislatively act in the wrong way, and the result next time will again look more like Measure 50 then Measure 66/67. Or Massachusetts.

what a good example to set for the rest of the nation..go Oregon!

What is their "fair share"?

Is their a ceiling on that "fair share"?

Who determines what is the "fair share"?

Is their "fair share" a debt to society?

If so, who do they owe the debt too? The people who fought tooth and nail to stop them from making a living? The people who voted yes on 66 and 67? Or do they owe to people who made a great business environment for them like the ones who voted no?

Now that "they" are paying their "fair share" does that mean the rest of us are too?

What about our "fair share" to the rest of the world?

We have too much wealth. Making anything above $2000 a year catapults us above the majority of mankind on this planet. Should we pay our fair share to the world? If so, what is that amount?

"And I am sure one of the negatives was the entitlement culture and tax and spend legislature."

Really Tom? Are you sure about that?

Sorry, you're wrong.

One of the big reasons they moved to Oregon is because in the last couple of years the number of TV series, cable productions, and feature films has increased dramatically. And the reason for that dramatic increase can be directly attributed to the Governor's Office of Film and Television. That's right - those lazy, selfish, PERs gettin' guver-mint employees.

Which makes your next line only more ironic:

"At some point, there will be enough people who understand that private sector jobs pay for the public sector jobs."

Bullshit. Who do you think built the roads, bridges, the courts system, sewer, gas lines, the education system, etc. etc. etc.? You think Phil Knight or Little Timmy Boyle at Columbia built the infrastructure to satisfy the common good of the nation? No, they merely exploit it.

"They deserved their win, but the people will regret it in years to come."

The only regret I'll have in years to come is people like you will benefit from the hard work of those trying to build a solid foundation for all Oregonians.

@ Scott

Not quite sure where you got " ...those lazy, selfish, PERs gettin' guver-mint employees." It was not from me. Is that how you feel about government employees? The meanest thing I implied, but did not say, was that a large percentage of the voting public was employed by government or related to a government employee and as such would likely have voted 'yes' out of 'self interest'.

I am still convinced that the Governor's Office of Film and Television was just one of many positives that added up to the decision to move here. I still believe that lower labor costs were also a reason. You seem to think it was all due to the Governor's Office and, "...the fresh air, friendly people and overall quality of life."

You don't seem to want to address my arguments. You do want to use them as an excuse to attribute to me lots of opinions that fit the stereotype you want for me. My point was, and still is, that Nolan and you are wrong about why the Yes side won and that most Oregonians will live to regret the vote. Feel free to disagree with that, but, save your random rants and argue your point next time.

Thanks.

Galen: Their "fair share" is an amount which reduces the ever-widening gap between the rich and poor in this country. Personally, I believe that there ought to be a "maximum annual income," beyond which everything is taxed at 100%. What should that maximum be? How about the equivalent of 50X the minimum wage? Back in the '70s, the average CEO earned roughly 40X what his/her lowest paid employee made. Now that same CEO averages OVER 400 TIMES the income made by his/her lowest-paid employee. That is blatantly unfair, selfish and downright obscene... not to mention bad for the economy as a whole.

<h2>http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aqLMEUObhysc</h2>