There is no reason for the schools to be begging for money at all. There is plenty of money, but it isn't being managed correctly. Much of the money that goes to education is wasted before it ever hits the classroom or a teacher's paycheck. Teacher's unions and public employees unions are only a small part of the problem. Every American should have access to decent healthcare and many of the benefits that City, State, and Federal employees receive. Unfortunately, you are right in one regard...the current benefits for public employees is not on par with that of most workers in the private sector. This must change, but not by taking reasonable benefits away from unionized workers. The answer is to have large corporations and their 1 percent owners contribute their fair share to the country and the economy. Public education is an important element of any healthy society. I'm guessing that one of the reasons that you can read and write is because you went to school.

Normally, I don't agree with you, but you hit it dead center on this one.

This is clearly a bad idea that is divisive. Creating a city income tax for ANYTHING, begins a slippery slope that will lead to abuses later. It is unfortunate that art and music have been extensively cut from PPS. However, there are different and better ways to fund art and music education... if the community believes that they are important. A number of writers here are unfairly targeting classroom teachers as the problem. It is true that there are serious problems within the Portland Public School District, but generally teachers are not it. The majority of the issues for PPS are a result of poor resource management by the district administration. Rather than cut the many over-paid and unnecessary positions within the administration, they take the "more taxes" route. Usually, I have strong disagreements with the anti-government and cut services crowd, but not on this particular issue. There are almost always enough resources already available for the true needs of the community. But, when tone-deaf politicians like Sam Adams and the City Council perpetually misdirect money to their own narrow and elitist pet projects it creates distrust, which sets one (or many) groups within the community against one another. It smells like another Sam Adams initiative designed to add to his narcissistic legacy as one of the worst mayors in the history of Portland.

In most regards, I agree with you. Social media reaches out to a wide swath of people with disparate values and beliefs.That attracts individuals with less than noble objectives. In other words, you don't need that much forethought, planning or commitment to show up at the designated time and place. That's unfortunate. To be more than anger, and to be a serious movement, there must be more clearly defined issues, and there must be some form of leadership that can articulate the desired messages. There are many other problems with using social media as a tool to organize demonstrations. One of the biggest problems is the nature of the media itself. When your information comes in tiny bits and bytes the key issues tend to be over-simplified. This is also true with "comment" sections, blogs, and other electronic media elements. Nonetheless, people need to communicate, and these are popular communication tools of our time.

Protesters in Portland have it pretty easy compared to marchers in many other cities across the United States. Generally, the police show restraint, and most people here are tolerant; acknowledging that as Americans we have a right to free speech and public assembly. In New York the police are pretty quick to take out clubs and use force to remove people, even when they are well within the city guidelines for protest and assembly. Still, anyone who gets out and takes a public stand against the wholesale illegal activities of large corporations and financial institutions that are ruining America deserves some credit. Some of the protesters are unemployed, and simply bored. However, many of them are genuinely committed to affecting positive change. Without any protest, there is nothing to slow down Goldman, Chase, Citi, Bank of America, and others from further degrading and corrupting our political process.
But, if you like bailing out billionaire CEOs with tax dollars, or if you believe in exempting bank executives from criminal accountability, then things may not seem that bad. As long as your social security check shows up on time, and your pension keeps paying out, maybe it's not your problem. Many of us have had the opportunity to benefit from the educational and employment opportunities that used to be available in America. Today, those same opportunities do not exist for a lot of people. Getting a good education and having a good work ethic are often not enough to get part of what used to be "the American dream."

To Riptorn conservative operative w/ 4,549 comments posted
I looked at the survey you linked to, and on the surface it seems reasonable. Most people don't think the gross tax rate is too low, it's more that the effective tax rate after deductions and loopholes is too low for individuals and corporations, particularly considering the growing deficits. It appears that both Republicans and Democrats are finally starting to appreciate this, and that there could be some agreement there. Unfortunately, translating anything as sensible as meaningful tax reform into reality is probably too much to hope for.

Calling AIG a success ignores the fact that the government (taxpayers) had to bail them out with more than $200 Billion. If you mean by "success" that some of the people who nearly destroyed the US economy got paid obscene and undeserved bonuses then that's one twisted way to look at it. As for "valuable services" would that be things like credit default swaps? I guess too that you didn't notice that in my post I said "reported" and that I put the entire text in quotation marks. Maybe in your world quoting is stealing, and stealing is succeeding.

I'm critical of many elements of the Occupy movement, including not seeking permits. Also, setting-up an extended camp attracted street people and the mentally ill, which caused most of the damage and created most of the problems. Homelessness and mental illness are problems too, but they weren't supposed to be the focus of the message. I don't automatically assume that if someone doesn't support Occupy that they also support corrupt corporations, but if you read many of the posts here that is the case. I am a small business owner, and several people in my family are educators. I am ACTIVELY involved with my neighborhood association, and I have never defecated in a park. My question to you: why do you assume that just because somebody supports peaceful protest and free speech that they break stuff and tear up the parks?

OK ALL YOU BLIND DEFENDERS OF CORPORATE AMERICA WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT THIS?
Reported today: "Last week, the American International Group (AIG) reported a whopping $19.8 billion profit for its fourth quarter. It was a quite a feat for a company that was on its death bed just a little over three years ago, so sick that it needed a huge taxpayer bailout. But if you dug into the numbers, it quickly became clear that $17.7 billion of that profit was pure fantasy — a tax benefit, er, gift, from the United States government. The company made only $1.6 billion during the quarter from actual operations. Yet A.I.G. not only received a tax benefit, it is unlikely to pay a cent of taxes this year, nor by some estimates, for at least a decade.This rule-twisting could deprive the government of tens of billions of dollars, assuming the firm remains profitable. The tax dodge — and let’s be honest, that’s what it is — also will most likely help goose the bonuses of A.I.G.’s employees, some of whom helped create many of the problems that led to its role in the financial crisis."

ALEC has been a very effective go-around strategy for corporate interests that want to circumvent the democratic process. In other words, if your company or industry can benefit from certain legislation it is easier to sway the legislators when you're at a resort and buying the drinks (among other things). So this is a well-targeted group and an issue to address with protest. It's odd that the tea party crew can't see this, since they are frequently criticizing corrupt politicians and government representatives. It's unfortunate that the protest leadership has not taken the initiative to get a permit to march because not having a permit lowers the moral high ground of a worthy protest. It also erodes some public support. Nonetheless, the cause is just, and ALEC is a menace to society and an enemy of democracy.