Lest you get the wrong idea, I’m a big fan of Willamette Week ^[1]. I read it religiously, and think they do a bang-up job when it comes to investigative journalism, and getting the news out about the various things that happen in our fair city in any given week. That said, I’ve read some stuff lately that’s raised a minor hackle.

First, this article ^[2]. Specifically, the sentence “So, yuppies who can afford a $22,000 new Prius get a tax giveaway. Meanwhile, the poor get squeezed—even though their daily commute is cleaner.” The author seems to be attempting to make the following points – one, that no tax credit should be given for those who buy hybrids (fuel savings should be incentive enough), and two, that he or she seems to believe that only yuppies can afford them, and therefore don’t deserve the tax credit. Well, if it’s true that only yuppies can afford to buy hybrids, then shouldn’t we keep the tax credit to help non-yuppies afford such a vehicle? Maybe there’s something I’m not getting here. Or maybe I’m just not understanding why a vehicle with an entry point of $22,000 (which is fairly low as far as new cars go) is so exclusive as to be available only to yuppies. Further, I think that we still need to do everything we can to promote alternatives to gas-guzzlers, and that the tax break should remain intact. Finally, of all the people I know that own hybrids, none of them would qualify as anything you could remotely call “yuppie”.

Anyway, I thought that particular angle was a bit Larson-esque – strange from such a normally progressive paper.

One other gripe was in the “Finder” – a glossy, IKEA-catalog looking thing that you can find at a number of locations city-wide. This “Willamette Week’s Guide to Portland” has some pretty good stuff in it. There’s a breakdown of the city neighborhood-by-neighborhood which is a great read, and made me proud of the town we call home. However, there was one article “Breeders and Beer” which gave me pause. The article listed a number of local joints where you could drink beer AND take your kids. The article then goes on to rate each establishment by “Supervision level”, ranging from “Toddlers need to be watched” to “Little needed”. Rogue Ales Public House on Flanders is rated as “some supervision needed”. Parents, your local pub is NOT a nursery. It’s true that the Laurelhurst has a playroom – but it’s still not a nursery. You need to watch your kids. And more than “some” supervision is needed in places like the Rogue. While it’s true your child is not likely to be abducted, it’s more than a little annoying (and dangerous for the serving staff) to see little Johnny running up and down the aisles while grown-ups are trying to unwind after work. Even at a place like the Laurelhurst, your kids are going to need more than just a little supervision.