Phil Knight hits hard on Measure 66-67

By PHIL KNIGHT
As seen in The Oregonian here

Forty-six years ago, when Mark Hatfield was governor, I started a small business in Oregon. In our first year, sales totaled $8,000. I am proud that it eventually became a major employer in the state. It has been my hope that other entrepreneurs would similarly pursue their dreams in Oregon.They won’t.

Measures 66 and 67 should be labeled Oregon’s Assisted Suicide Law II. They will allow us to watch a state slowly killing itself. They are anti-business, anti-success, anti-inspirational, anti-humanitarian, and most ironically, in the long run, they will deprive the state of tax revenue, not increase it. The current state tax codes are all of those things as well. Measures 66 and 67 just take it up and over the top.

The state of Washington has no income tax. Its unemployment rate is 20 percent lower than Oregon’s — before 66 and 67. These measures would give Oregon the highest income tax rates in the country.Reputable economists forecast 66 and 67 will cost the state thousands — maybe tens of thousands — of jobs, and that thousands of our most successful residents will leave the state.

We are way too anti-business as we are now. The state in past years was headquarters for The First National Bank, US Bank, Pacific Power, Willamette Industries, Georgia-Pacific, Jantzen, White Stag, G.I. Joe’s, Monaco Coach, Meier & Frank, among many others. They are now headquartered elsewhere, are controlled by non-Oregonians or no longer exist.

One Fortune Global 500 company remains. But its founder and chairman is not merely an economic man. He has webs between his toes. But he, too, has some limits.

Do you really think any of these overseas “business trips” our leaders take will bear fruit? Can they get a company to move to anti-business Oregon without waiving taxes, passing even more burden onto the rest of us? There are words to describe what we are doing with 66 and 67: It is called a death spiral.

Phil Knight is co-founder and chairman of Nike Inc.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 07:23 | Posted in Measure 37 | 98 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • retired UO science prof

    My respect for Phil Knight’s judgment went way south when he built the gaudy, useless new Crystal Palace for so-called “student athletes” to get their remedial education. A grotesque use of his own money. On scarce UO campus space, too.

    He has enough baggage with his “sweatshops” spread all over the world. The Crystal Palace is icing on the cake. I doubt that he’ll be persuading many fence-sitters.

    • Anonymous

      Hey, UO Sci Prof: Did not that building provide jobs to the men and women who built it? And did not Phil Knight pay taxes on that money he earned? How would you have him spend his money? Oh, right, he should just give it away.

      Ingrate.

      • retired UO science prof

        Yes, it provided jobs. So does stimulus money. The point is they are both a waste.

        The money could have been used for something better.

        By the way, it was a gift.

      • JJJ

        That doesn’t make child labor in china okay.

    • Mort

      But you worked in a sweatshop, too. Underpaid and overworked at a third rate university.

      • retired UO science prof

        I would never claim UO is a sweatshop.

        Is it third rate? Not according to the U.S. News rankings, it’s about in the top 70 in “peer assessment” among “national universities”. In about the top 35 among public university campuses. In the top 120 or so overall. That much lower because it is so badly funded by the state of Oregon.

        If it is slipping, and I think it is, that is mainly due to the stinginess and neglect by the people of Oregon.

        Oh, and the priorities of its wealthy benefactors.

        • Mort

          Peer review doesn’t mean much when the peers are third rate, too.

          • retired UO science prof

            Oh, so now you know about my peers, and you’re looking down on the world scientific elite, the people who run the journals and review the papers. You must be a Nobel prize winner, or is that third rate for you too? You are Newton and Einstein rolled into one?

        • Bennie

          Peer review just like the Climate gate scientist where they shut out any opposition to anyone who slightly doubted their made up science?

        • eagle eye

          prof, what do you mean by “peer assessment” in the U.S. News rankings of colleges? Are you talking about peer-reviewing in journals? It sounded like you meant something else in your original statement, but then you got off into peer-reviewed publications, replying to someone else. Are you letting them distract you?

          By the way, UO may once have been in the top 70 among national universities in the U.S. News “peer assessment” ranking. But I believe UO has slipped in those rankings just in the past ten years or so. Any comment?

        • retired UO science prof

          Replying to several comments at once.

          eagle eye: Very good! Yes, “peer assessment” in the U.S. News rankings is something different from “peer review”. The US News peer assessment is judgment of different colleges and universities by “peers” — I think they ask the provosts (head academic officer at most schools, often chief operating guy, senior VP etc) — it’s a subjective judgment. I was going by my latest copy of these rankings in 2002 — UO was 3.4 out of 5.0. (By comparison, Harvard, Princeton etc. are near 5.0).

          And yes, UO has probably slipped in peer assessment — I’m told to 3.2 in the 2009 rankings, I can’t check this myself. It was 3.4, as I say, which put UO in the top 70 or so. 3.2 is a significant slip. Maybe due to all the publicity about the insane focus on athletics, plus bad news about UO’s academic decline? So far it hasn’t affected the overall US News ranking of UO, which seems to hold steady in about the top 120, hanging on in the “second tier” of national universities. (The rest of the US News ranking is other things, including financial resources, where Oregon universities score miserably.)

          Peer review of journal articles is something different, yes, eagle, I let myself get distracted by Mort. (Baited?)

          Bennie: No, not like “climategate”. I’m not in climate science, how did you know? But I have looked at it a fair bit.

          I thought the climategate stuff was pretty awful. I’m kind of a global warming skeptic myself insofar as I think it’s much less well-understood than most of the “pros” seem to think. (It’s not “made up” though; it’s a lot more complicated.)

          But you know what? They really weren’t able to do much to suppress papers. There are too many journals, world-wide. There’s actually a lot of credible scientific work that doesn’t conform with the mainstream global warming “consensus”, and it’s getting published. That’s the result of a free scientific press, decentralized, international, multiple funding sources too. The global warming skeptics are probably right that they’ve been unfairly treated, but it hasn’t really made much difference.

          By the way, as somebody pointed out to me the other day, most of the global warming skeptics in science seem to be people at universities.

          • eagle eye

            Thanks for the clarification about the assessments.

            Interesting points about the climate science publication situation, and the dissenters being academics.

            Can you give some examples of the latter?

          • retired UO science prof

            I’m not familiar with all of them, but some names that come to mind: Richard Lindzen (MIT), the most prominent; Roy Spencer and John Christy (U Alabama); some guys in Colorado at both U. Col. and Col. State. A guy in Washington.

            A good website for posts from that point of view is wattsupwiththat.com.

            Hope that helps.

      • retired UO science prof

        Mort, I thought about that some more. Suppose UO is a third rate sweatshop. I don’t believe that, but let’s suppose.

        What does it say about the state of Oregon?

        What would it say about Phil Knight then that he was giving so much money to such a place?

  • John

    Hey Phil, how many of your companies manufacturing jobs are located in Oregon? Nike has tens of thousands of employees located in overseas sweatshops making your over-priced products while your company receives millions of dollars in tax breaks.

    Stop being a hypocrite and relocate 80% of your manufacturing to Oregon, if you care so much about Oregon!

    • retired UO science prof

      Nike does have something like 7000 employees in Oregon, not a small factor.

      But Nike’s days of innovation are long in the past, their stock has done OK but not stellar for years.

      Nike’s product and style no longer go well with our current situation. Frivolity is not going to save us.

      The latest stuff with the UO Crystal Palace, the Arena, the whole loony athletic mania at a struggling state university barely hanging on in the second tier — it all fits together.

      The guy is over 70, living in the past — the new Arena a poignant example.

      I don’t think he’s going to sway many people that he is the guy who sees the future.

    • Richard

      Get your head out of the manufacturing ass. Nike and Intel represent how companies can keep jobs in the US while having large offshore manufacturing. The trick is to keep product research, development, adversing and management in the US.

      Frankly let the Chinese poor bastard spend their life on an assembly line turn screws, and getting cancer form sucking in hazardous chemicals for a lifetime.; I rather stick to an air conditioned office anytime.

  • Anonymous

    It seems Phil has his Rush Limbaugh hat on this morning. Is this a veiled threat to move Nike HQ elsewhere? How about Laika?

    • retired UO science prof

      A kind of veiled threat. He may even be right about the economic fallout of the taxes. I just don’t think he’s going to sway many people with this. Where was he early on in the financial crisis? Kind of late with his message now. “I’m a loyal Duck and if you do this I may …” The low boiling rage is hard to miss.

      He did the same with UO many years ago, badly muttered messages that came too late and didn’t get through Dave Frohnmayer’s tin ears.

      For a guy who is supposed to be a marketing wizard, kind of strange.

      • Howard

        One thing we know for sure – he is a lot smarter than you are, some pathetic retired “prof” who could not run a business if your life depended on it.
        What have you done for Oregon except feed at the public trough??

        • retired UO science prof

          Let him take some advanced science classes and we’ll see how smart he is!

          Are you sure I’ve never run a business? In fact, I have, and done well at it.

          Did I “feed at the public trough”? Well, I was recruited to come to your public university from another university, and I accepted the deal that was offered me. I taught thousands of your students and most of them went on to successful careers. I trained Ph.D. students and brought in millions of dollars in research grants. The University got about a third of that money in “overhead” to help pay its expenses. I’ve written many dozens of scientific papers. So I don’t feel too bad about what I’ve done.

          I still do it, by the way, I mean the research, without pay.

          • Howard

            OK, sorry for jumping to conclusions, congrats on your business success. You must know, then, that OR is not a good place for business. If it was, they would not all be leaving as noted in Phil’s article.
            You can’t have it both ways.
            And why should the U of O keep your grant money for “overhead”. What a scam.

          • retired UO science prof

            Still jumping! The business was/is in another state.

            As I said elsewhere here, “He may even be right about the economic fallout of the taxes.” I was questioning his ability to sway people against the taxes. And of course, his judgment in his recent gifts to UO, which I think is wretched.

            As for overhead on grants — it’s called “indirect cost returns”. It compensates the university for things like lab space, library costs, electricity, etc. etc. It’s all completely according to law, it’s all audited. The indirect cost rates at universities are low in comparison to private companies and national labs, by the way.

            They are costs actually borne by the university, but it has many indirect benefits, including for the students.

            Take away the indirect costs, and most of the labs at UO (and OSU and some at PSU) would not exist.

  • Rupert in Springfield

    All the bad words for Nike. Oh what a horrible company, oh what an evil man.

    And yet, when any AGW stuff comes up Knight is constantly trotted out to show how business supports cap and trade etc.

    Wonder how long it will take for people like Knight to figure out with friends like lefties, who needs enemies.

    Oh sure, we will hear protestations of “oh no, not me, I never have praised Knight for anything, nope, not me” but we all know that when Knight is brought up for supporting AGW, the people that have such vitriol for him now will remain silent. Their high moral standards of sweat shop objection being as fleeting as the wind.

    What a bunch of BS.

    The fact is Knights ethics (which I think are lousy btw. He clearly supports cap and trade simply as a way of wringing out the competition ) have little do do with his opinion on this matter. He is right and I think most people know that.

    Whether Nike’s styles are in vogue or not may be in question but is irrelevant. The current vogue of business leaving Oregon, is certain.

    While some would argue if these taxes will cause business to leave, none would argue they will cause business to move here. Oregon is a text book economics example. High taxes combined with an increasing antagonism to business leads to high unemployment. Oregon is dead set on a downward spiral, and it hardly began with these taxes. Our fate was sealed when government growth exploded over the last 20 years and a sleazy PERS union deal threw a noose around our necks. Measure’s 66 and 67 hardly constitute initiation of a suicide pact as Knight states. Rather they are the death spasm of the victim who commenced such action a long time ago.

    • v person

      “While some would argue if these taxes will cause business to leave, none would argue they will cause business to move here.”

      True enough. No one moves somewhere to pay a tax. But if…..and this is a big if….Oregon can ever get our act together on improving public education, particularly higher education, then new businesses will move here or better yet, form here because of our better educated citizens.

      Look at the cities that attract innovation. Boston, Seattle, Austin, Charlotte, Chicago, the Bay area. What do they have in common (bsides being fairly liberal politically?) Top rated public and private research universities.

      What does Oregon have? 2nd and 3rd rate. 66 and 67 won’t help very much. They may keep us from sinking further. But that in itself would amount to progress in these times.

      Rupert….where are Oregon businesses moving to? Which states have lower total business taxes than Oregon?

      • Rupert in Springfield

        >Oregon can ever get our act together on improving public education, particularly higher education, then new businesses will move here or better yet, form here because of our better educated citizens.

        Very true. No one would argue against improving education although most would argue that it is the only solution. It certainly is not at all a near term solution.

        Either way, it is somewhat irrelevant,. The one thing we do know is improving education does not cost money. The amount of money paid, especially with regard to public schools, has never been shown to have any bearing on the quality of that education.

        Indeed, an inverse relationship between money spent on schools and quality of education is often the case and few would argue that.

        Schools in Europe do a better job and spend far less.

        Private schools in this country do a better job and spend far less (61% less on teacher pay according to the BLS numbers).

        We have spent more in real dollars on education in this country and have seen the results do little but go down.

        There are no certainties in life, but the closest thing we have to one regarding education is that we spend enough and in fact might be spending too much.

        >Look at the cities that attract innovation. Boston, Seattle, Austin, Charlotte, Chicago, the Bay area. What do they have in common (bsides being fairly liberal politically?) Top rated public and private research universities.

        Some cities have universities and….. What the hell are you talking about?

        The comment was about business leaving Oregon, not about which cities had a lot of universities.

        You are off on a Dean weasel number 1 again.

        >Rupert….where are Oregon businesses moving to? Which states have lower total business taxes than Oregon?

        Um, the last few times I commented to you on yet another business moving out it was to South Carolina. Freightliner would be one of those. They got driven out by both high taxes and an Oregon AG who probably should have been indicted.

        I sure as hell hope you aren’t going to try and argue business gets sick of taxes here because they want to move to a place with higher taxes?

        I mean sure, I can imagine a few maybe moved to Denmark, but not a lot.

        • neo-fascist

          Freightliner to move 341 jobs out of Portland
          By Scott Bernard Nelson, The Oregonian
          November 01, 2007, 9:57AM

          Freightliner announced today that it will shift 341 white-collar jobs out of Portland to Fort Mill, S.C., by mid-2008.

          At a news conference today at its Swan Island headquarters, chief executive Chris Patterson said the main reason for the move — affecting sales, marketing and technical support positions — was to keep those workers in closer contact with customers, which are primarily on the East Coast.

          The affected employees will be moved to South Carolina if they want to go, he said. If not, the company will offer “generous packages” for those who remain in Portland and leave the company.

          Paterson said there were “no plans” to move Freightliner’s corporate headquarters, although he said he could not predict whether the company would still be in Portland 10 years from now.

          Fort Mill is in York County, not far from Freightliner’s truck- and parts-making facilities across the state line in North Carolina. It’s also about 40 miles southwest of Charlotte, North Carolina’s largest city and a national banking center.

          Patterson said the move is not related to the company’s optioning of 300 acres in nearby Lancaster County, S.C.

          This morning, Multnomah County Commissioner Jeff Cogen noted that the move affects workers who do a lot of traveling and that basing them in the Carolinas was necessary for the company’s position in its industry.

          “This was essentially inevitable, given the geography of their business,” he said.
          The move represents about one-tenth of the company’s white-collar workforce in Portland. The jobs will be in South Carolina by July 31.

          Freightliner, which is owned by Daimler AC of Germany, officially informed workers about the move this morning.

          This year alone, Freightliner has endured layoffs, the end of its signature truck production in Portland and a strike.

          http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2007/11/freightliner_to_move_340_jobs.html
          http://charlotte.bizjournals.com/charlotte/stories/2007/10/29/daily33.html

        • neo-fascist

          Is that what you were referring to? Or are you referring to the lawsuit with Daimler Trucks?

          It is my understanding that Freightliner is still headquartered in Oregon?

          • retired UO science prof

            Whatever your intent in posting here as a “neo-fascist”, it’s not a good idea.

        • v person

          “It certainly is not at all a near term solution. ”

          We agree on something. Amen (its Sunday).

          “The one thing we do know is improving education does not cost money.”

          We disagree. (All is right with the world again). We don’t *know* any such thing. There are cases where more money has not produced good results (Washington DC). There are cases where lack of money has produced lousy results (most southern states for many years). There are cases where high spending clearly helps (check the school budget and test scores in any rich suburb in America). Catholic Schools, which pay their semi-slave Nun teachers very little, get good results.

          If we could only get Nuns to teach in our public schools and pay them in gruel and give them a hard cot to sleep on, our problems would be solved. Though some parents might complain about their kids bruised knuckles.

          “The comment was about business leaving Oregon, not about which cities had a lot of universities.”

          Gee Rupert…do I have to spell it out for you? Are you really that obtuse? I was making the point that there is a correlation between good universities and where businesses locate or stay or are created in the 1st place. Better facilities and higher pay attract high end researchers, who attract high quality students, who together invent new things and businesses. Unless you think Silicon Valley, the Research Triangle, Bellvue, and the high tech corridor in Mass. were mere geographic accidents.

          If Ms 66&67 go down our already paltry funding for our public universities will go down. Faculty salaries will continue to be near bottom. The future will not be bright. Capiche?

          “Um, the last few times I commented to you on yet another business moving out it was to South Carolina.”

          Yes, I think you did mention that. And I think I responded that South Carolina, your shining example, as of November was tied for 47th in the nation in unemployment. Theirs is 12.3%. Oregon’s is 11.1%. Do you have any other examples?

          “I sure as hell hope you aren’t going to try and argue business gets sick of taxes here because they want to move to a place with higher taxes?”

          No. in fact I stated, I thought pretty clearly, that no one moves to pay a tax. What is it you always say about reading more carefully before spouting off?

          “I mean sure, I can imagine a few maybe moved to Denmark, but not a lot. ”

          Maybe so and maybe not, but their latest unemployment figures say they are at 7.2% That beats the hell out of the United States, Oregon, and South Carolina in ascending order. Now how can the Danes be doing that well when they have about the highest taxes in the world? And why is it American states are falling all over themselves to get Danish industries like Vestas to move here?

        • retired UO science prof

          The private schools that have such low teacher salaries generally are religious schools, Catholic schools and conservative Protestant.

          I gather Rupert is a big fan of conservative, religious values!

          • Roger

            Private schools are bad because they use teachers who are not real teachers and they do not have unions so those people are hurting everyone. Plus, those kids don’t learn as much in those private schools.

          • retired UO science prof

            Whatever your point is, you’re not responding to anything I said.

          • Roger

            No one cares what you said. We are posting our thoughts.
            What do you know that makes you so special?

          • retired UO science prof

            If you had no interest in what I said, why did you post a comment in reply underneath mine?

          • Mort

            Just to see if you were paying attention, which may be hard for you to do.

          • retired UO science prof

            Very clever! You get a D- for that.

          • Wayne Brady

            I have no idea where you heard that private schools do not do as good a job as public schools. The reverse is true.

            In many countries in Europe, there is school competition. The money goes with the child regardless of which school he goes to. The result is much better education.

  • Vigilant Earp

    Methinks the Anti-Knight ‘gum’ fighters at the Phil’s NOT OK CORRAL probably have a large PERS at stake.

    • retired UO science prof

      You have someone like me in mind?

      Yes, I was in PERS for a number of years, a lot fewer than you probably think — my last dozen years at UO I was in the “optional retirement plan” for faculty, not many people know about it. The money went into my own private designated contribution plan. The state can’t touch it, that was the reason I joined. I was in a similar plan for quite a few years before I moved to UO.

      As for PERS, it’s extremely unlikely that these tax measures will have any effect, no effect whatsoever on my account from the years I was in PERS.

      • Carol

        I think you are making a lot of money in your retirement if you are a member of pers. I have heard of people making a lot – sometimes even more than they ever made when they “worked”.
        You sound like one of those.
        At least you are retired so you can not poison more minds with your left-wing claptrap.
        You earned it, though, right?
        You worked hard.
        Very hard.
        How nice.

        • retired UO science prof

          Yes, I earned it. I worked according to the terms that we agreed upon.

  • Wayne Brady

    Whatever you think about Phil Knight, his departure would cost jobs and tax revenue for the state. A 20% increase in the tax rate is going to provide a big incentive to leave.

  • Joe

    Hats off to Phil for saying what needs to be said on these tax measures. He surely knows that personel attacks will follow. Welcome to the wonderful socialist world of Steve Novick. Give all your money as he says….or he will trash you.

  • Diamond Jim

    Maybe they could get Tiger to endorse the new taxes?

  • Joseph

    There is no way Nike should stay in OR. Look what those idiots in Beaverton tried to do to them. And now this. Move and move now.
    Texas, South Carolina, Alabama, somewhere business friendly.
    Besides, the campus is looking a bit dated anyway.
    MOVE ON OUT NOW!
    Please – and show these morons in Salem what you are made of.
    Just do it.

    • v person

      “There is no way Nike should stay in OR.”

      Is that you Jerry? Why do you hate Oregon so much. Or better, why do you stay here if you hate it so much. Why don’t you move to South Carolina and add to that great state’s 12% unemployment rate?

  • skippy

    The Green Butt Skunk blog got it right. Google it.

  • Angry Small Business Owner

    What many fail to realize is that this tax is on the gross income we make as a small business, not the net. That means when I don’t make anything this year due to the economy, but still barely keep my lights on, I will still have to pay $15,000 in taxes. My problem is I can’t move. My family, my clients, my life, is in Oregon. Why should I have to move just because Salem can’t tighten their belts and run a budget properly?

    Get rid of all the other taxes and have a sales tax like everyone else. Make every tourist, illegal, and wealthy retiree who lives here fund our economy. Now I didn’t say “add” a sales tax, I said remove all other taxes and replace it with a sales tax.

    Phil Knight is just the prominent “tip” of the mountain that is going to explode if this passes.

  • John in Oregon

    I hesitate to comment on the “public education” as it’s a bit of a red herring. However it is necessary to address.

    As Rupert noted accurately spending has little correlation to education success and in the USA is mostly neutral or inversely correlated. More spending less success.

    The worst funded public school system in the US spends more by far in purchasing power parity per kid that any other school system world wide. American kids enter school ahead of EU kids. By grade 6 USA kids are failing on average, well behind the EU kids.

    VP brought up the *”cases where more money has not produced good results (Washington DC).”*

    Two facts are true about the DC school system.

    1] DC school spending per kid is the highest in the nation.
    2] DC schools have produced stunning student success.

    Other than both being true these two facts have nothing to do with each other.

    The success is the voucher kids which get less per kid. The kids without vouchers get the spending and continue to fail.

    Schools represent the opportunity for the progressive to beat the people about the head and shoulders for more money. Pay up or your kid goes to school in the cold and dark to be taught in a class of hundreds.

    Yet note the thread of EU and DC school success. The money follows the kid. Otherwise known a parental choice. Surprise, surprise there is a name for this. The free markets. Schools compete and those that fail disappear.

    That is the overarching theme that brought Phil Knight to speak. Nike was started in an unfettered free market which rewarded success. Other than Big John and Sparkie who remembers Buster Brown shoes and his dog Tige?

    Phil Knight’s message is crystal clear. Nike or any other business is far less likely to flourish in Oregon today than just 30 years ago. Tax is just one of the mechanisms that punish success in Oregon. Just see the quote here > *Nike has tens of thousands of employees located in overseas sweatshops making your over-priced products while your company receives millions of dollars in tax breaks.*

    These strawmen are easy to strike down. Sweatshops in which workers compete for access to the high purchasing power parity wages. Overpriced products for which the buyer has the freedom to choose from many vendors including lower priced venders. The evil tax break, deducting the expense of manufacturing as a cost of doing business.

    Thus the evil profits must be confiscated by Government as only they know best how to use the money.

    Consider the success of mercantilism for China then balance that with the likelihood that Japan may soon default on it’s sovereign debt built to the idle of Keynesian economics.

    Then we are shown the shining visions. Silicon Valley, the Research Triangle, and Bellvue. They were not mere geographic accidents, nor were they inspired by Government. The heavy hand of California Government turned the silicon valley into the desert sand valley while Microsoft seriously considers moving to Canada. Meanwhile Boeing continues its orderly departure from the Pacific Northwest.

    None of the above even begins to touch on the destructive nature of this tax. For months I have been looking for a simple way to show the impact of the tax. Like a fun house mirror the twisted nature of the tax produces a distorted picture of reality worse than any Rod Serling twilight zone episode. But, I think I have found it.

    For your consideration I present Bill. Bill worked hard over the years to build his business. With a low profit margin, typically less than 1 percent of sales, his business was built upon providing customer service. His employees are at his customers door on time, every time.

    Then the economy turned down. Bill cut his profit, to survive to thrive another day. He cuts his own pay, while keeping his best employees and paying off his companies debt. He cuts his own pay to $100,000 cuts his prices to eek out $50 million in sales. His profit falls well below the 1 percent industry average.

    Then the knock on the door. It’s Oregon revenue. Bill my man we need your money to feed the beast. You know that 50 mill in sales, well you owe us $50,000 in tax assessment plus $8,000 personal income tax. And, forget that tax credit from last year.

    Of course Bill has no choice. He pays the tab. Now the die is cast. Bill has $42,000 and they have broken the back of his business, which soon closes. Fifty employees hit the bricks. The bank takes a bath on the loan default.

    It’s a good thing this tax only effects those earning $250,000 and the tax only went up slightly. Bill didn’t get to cheat with only a $10 tax.

    Yeahh right. Ask Bills 50 former employed workers. The beast has been feed.

    Tomorrow is another day. And the beast will be hungry.

    • v person

      “More spending less success.”

      Your data please?

      • John in Oregon

        Sources

        The Brookings Institution
        Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
        National Commission for Excellence in Education
        Herbert J. Walberg, Research Professor of Education and Psychology
        National Center for Education Statistics
        AEI
        CEI
        CATO Institute
        The Reason Foundation
        The Manhattan Institute
        Pacific Research Institute
        Cascade Policy Institute

        • Anonymous

          John, I’m somewhat familiar with The Brookings Institution’s published views on education spending and I have never read anything from them that has suggested that more spending results in less success. If anything they have in recent times been encouraging an increase of spending on early education (pre-school). If you could provide links to your sources it would be appreciated.

          “The worst funded public school system in the US spends more by far in purchasing power parity per kid that any other school system world wide.”

          Again, sources please.

        • v person

          John, normally sourcing includes reference to a paper or analysis, not to an institution that may have multiple analyses. I can only conclude you drew your rather sweeping conclusion, “more spending = less success,” based on nothing.

  • John in Oregon

    Hi Anonymous.

    Given your comments I believe I must be talking to the intelligent Anonymous as opposed to some of the other Anonymoui that appear here from time to time. Heh.

    I know what you mean regarding Brookings and your example is an excellent one. However I have found Brookings data to generally be honest. Conclusions are another matter.

    I would agree with your general summary that Brookings > *If anything they have in recent times been encouraging an increase of spending on early education (pre-school).*

    The Brookings metric for this is the USA doesn’t do much school for toddlers therefor new money is needed for new school programs for 2, 3 and 4 year olds. That’s accurate. As far as it goes. If 2 and 3 year olds in school is a good idea then more money is needed.

    Problem is other than feeling good there is nothing to support early government education. The support evidence is head start studies showing head start kids out performing late start kids in grade one. Sooo what happens by grade 3. Both are on par. The late start kids are just the same as the head start kids. If there is no long term improvement the benefit is exactly nothing. The data record is full of this kind of dead end spending.

    As to finding the spending information, that’s available from any number of sources. Your Bing works just as good a mine and if you are the same Anonymous I think you are, then the effort will be worthwhile. As I said earlier its never possible to tell which of the numerous Anonymoui that appear here is commenting.

    I would make two cautions as you look through the data. First be sure the spending data is the all funds budget. Those numbers will be around $9,000 to $15,000 per kid in the USA. Second, purchasing power is important. The monetary exchange rate doesn’t tell all the story.

    VP lets get the quote correct. “As Rupert noted accurately spending has little correlation to education success and in the USA is mostly neutral or inversely correlated. More spending, less success.”

    When you question this, do you think that inversely correlation is something other than more spending less success? Do you want us to believe that inverse correlation is less spending, more success?

    However I do take your meaning. You want us to accept that all spending increases produce more better results.

    We don’t need to do a study to test your premise. The 07/08 state spending took a huge jump. In round numbers from $5 billion to $6 billion. Did this nearly 20 percent increase produce any measurable results? Just look as some of the usual measures.

    Did the higher spending increase class time? … NO
    Did the higher spending improve teacher student ratio? … NO
    Did the higher spending improve test scores? … NO
    Did the higher spending reduce dropouts? … NO

    The higher spending doesn’t show any correlation to better results.
    Case Closed

  • Brandon

    Probably time for a sales tax.

    • John in Oregon

      The business tax is a tax on sales.

  • RTM

    Can we pleeeeeeeeeeease have our sales tax now?

  • Pingback: tickled()

  • Pingback: pengertian keterampilan()

  • Pingback: jodoh menurut islam()

  • Pingback: pengertian budaya menurut para ahli()

  • Pingback: pengertian pelajar()

  • Pingback: doa ulang tahun untuk diri sendiri()

  • Pingback: pengertian eksistensi()

  • Pingback: observasi adalah()

  • Pingback: limbah domestik()

  • Pingback: karangan argumentasi()

  • Pingback: pengertian penduduk dan bukan penduduk()

  • Pingback: pengertian siswa()

  • Pingback: jodoh dalam islam()

  • Pingback: pet food warehouse()

  • Pingback: typing games for kids()

  • Pingback: contoh pembangunan berkelanjutan()

  • Pingback: contoh karangan argumentasi()

  • Pingback: contoh karangan argumentasi()

  • Pingback: pengertian dokumentasi()

  • Pingback: tata cara sholat berjamaah()

  • Pingback: pengertian penduduk()

  • Pingback: pengertian keterampilan()

  • Pingback: variabel bebas dan terikat()

  • Pingback: pengertian bukan warga negara()

  • Pingback: variabel bebas()

  • Pingback: pengertian disiplin()

  • Pingback: pengertian budaya menurut para ahli()

  • Pingback: contoh karangan()

  • Pingback: pengertian keterampilan()

  • Pingback: signifikan adalah()

  • Pingback: pengertian eksistensi()

  • Pingback: pengertian dokumentasi()

  • Pingback: contoh limbah rumah tangga()

  • Pingback: nike roshe run similar()

  • Pingback: test()

  • Pingback: clash of clans pc()

  • Pingback: iherb raw probiotics()

  • Pingback: 1/2-Inch Drive Click Torque Wrench()

  • Pingback: read more here()

  • Pingback: acai berry diet()

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)