I am a teacher in Beaverton where the genuine projection for jobs cut is 344, not 300. I think those 44 jobs are significant and it is misleading to not include them. Of those 344 jobs, most will be teachers as the district has already absorbed some the $105m in cuts by reducing classified and administrative “staffers”. Also absorbing those cuts are teacher’s incomes. We are not “joining the ranks” of those who’ve agreed work more for less. We *joined* those ranks back in 2009.

Also misleading is the idea that anyone is going to march on Salem and demand that baristas and food carts pay more taxes. I understand what you’re saying and I agree: we need more economic revenue because coffee won’t save us. But you’ve framed it using the ‘either/or’ fallacy: either we tax baristas or schools flounder… either we tax baristas or we do something to bolster Oregon’s economy.

Meanwhile the clock is ticking…

The future of Oregon’s economy sits 35 to classroom– next year 40. Most of those classrooms are dirty because the custodians were laid off years ago. Mine doesn’t have windows– or air, since I can’t hear my students when my 1960’s fan blows. Oregon’s future doesn’t have a language arts class, nor does it have social studies. It has a two for one deal called “humanities”. Shall I go on?

So while Oregon’s present leaders and visionaries noodle over how to increase tax revenue, are they really content to watch Oregon’s future languish on an expensive yet sinking ship?

Plug the holes. Tax the wealthy. Leave the baristas alone. Save our schools. And, of course, figure out a way to increase tax revenue while keeping an eye on Oregon’s future (in other words nix the coal idea– blech).