Tuesday, February 22, 2005
while we're on the subject of hypocrisy - oops - I meant Measure 37
...speaking of laws that Oregonians have passed, didya hear the one about the unfunded new law that says that your neighbor gets to use his land differently than you do if he bought his property before current land use laws went into effect?
Let's disregard for a moment the unfairness built into a law that essentially creates a landed gentry: the lords who were here first get to do what they want while us serfs who bought our land later must obey the rules and not whine if the lords around us change the character of our neighborhoods.
Now, wouldn't it be hypocritical to say that one law that voters passed should be dismissed, but another one should be upheld? Yup, I think so.
So any Oregonian who supports Measure 37 but thinks that the Supreme Court should overturn our assisted suicide law (or vice versa) is being hypocritical.
In the spirit of non-hypocrisy (which is hard to find in these days of presidents who allow killing innocents abroad in the name of cheap oil but god forbid an American can choose to have child or not or to die with dignity), I'm not advocating for the repeal of Measure 37, although I think it is a ridiculous law created and funded (and voted for) by the greedy jerks and ignorant idiots of this state.
Instead, I'm advocating a new tax. Oregonians should all have to pay a Measure 37 tax that would fund compensation for the greedy &$*#ers who want to build subdivisions or CAFOs on farmland. Hey, it's for the public good right? Our taxes pay for roads and government services that benefit us all. Why not have a tax to pay to avoid property uses that would not benefit the public or would reduce neighbors' property values? It would be up to the county governments to decide which Measure 37 claimants should be compensated or who should have existing land-use laws waived for their exclusive benefit.
"Not another tax" you shriek in outrage. No, Virginia, there really isn't a Santa Claus, so since we the people voted in this ridiculous law, we should have the decency to pay for it.
But of course that wasn't included in the original law since the people who spent the most money passing it - largely timber companies and real estate developers and their friends, the anti-tax advocates - did so in the hopes that they would fill their pockets by altering Oregon's land use laws which were created to protect Oregonians from these very same people.
"But my children's schools are already underfunded" you shout. "Shouldn't we pay for schools first?" Nope. With Bu$h and his ilk in power, your children are just going to grow up to be wage slaves for corporate America or servants in Republican armies anyway - why worry about more funding for their schooling? They'll get the education they need to grow up to be fodder for the corporations and our corporate government.
For the record, I'm not against the people out there who want to be able to put a home on their land. I'm against the people who want to put multiple homes on their land and turn Oregon's farmland into Washington's or southern California's endless sprawling suburbs.
So, let's step up to the plate. (sorry, R!) "We" voted for Measure 37. Now let's pay for it.
¶ 10:30 AM
...speaking of laws that Oregonians have passed, didya hear the one about the unfunded new law that says that your neighbor gets to use his land differently than you do if he bought his property before current land use laws went into effect?
Let's disregard for a moment the unfairness built into a law that essentially creates a landed gentry: the lords who were here first get to do what they want while us serfs who bought our land later must obey the rules and not whine if the lords around us change the character of our neighborhoods.
Now, wouldn't it be hypocritical to say that one law that voters passed should be dismissed, but another one should be upheld? Yup, I think so.
So any Oregonian who supports Measure 37 but thinks that the Supreme Court should overturn our assisted suicide law (or vice versa) is being hypocritical.
In the spirit of non-hypocrisy (which is hard to find in these days of presidents who allow killing innocents abroad in the name of cheap oil but god forbid an American can choose to have child or not or to die with dignity), I'm not advocating for the repeal of Measure 37, although I think it is a ridiculous law created and funded (and voted for) by the greedy jerks and ignorant idiots of this state.
Instead, I'm advocating a new tax. Oregonians should all have to pay a Measure 37 tax that would fund compensation for the greedy &$*#ers who want to build subdivisions or CAFOs on farmland. Hey, it's for the public good right? Our taxes pay for roads and government services that benefit us all. Why not have a tax to pay to avoid property uses that would not benefit the public or would reduce neighbors' property values? It would be up to the county governments to decide which Measure 37 claimants should be compensated or who should have existing land-use laws waived for their exclusive benefit.
"Not another tax" you shriek in outrage. No, Virginia, there really isn't a Santa Claus, so since we the people voted in this ridiculous law, we should have the decency to pay for it.
But of course that wasn't included in the original law since the people who spent the most money passing it - largely timber companies and real estate developers and their friends, the anti-tax advocates - did so in the hopes that they would fill their pockets by altering Oregon's land use laws which were created to protect Oregonians from these very same people.
"But my children's schools are already underfunded" you shout. "Shouldn't we pay for schools first?" Nope. With Bu$h and his ilk in power, your children are just going to grow up to be wage slaves for corporate America or servants in Republican armies anyway - why worry about more funding for their schooling? They'll get the education they need to grow up to be fodder for the corporations and our corporate government.
For the record, I'm not against the people out there who want to be able to put a home on their land. I'm against the people who want to put multiple homes on their land and turn Oregon's farmland into Washington's or southern California's endless sprawling suburbs.
So, let's step up to the plate. (sorry, R!) "We" voted for Measure 37. Now let's pay for it.
¶ 10:30 AM
