Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

Well there are different schools of thought on unions. One is clearly better than the other. The union movement was a response to unbridled capitalist corporations taking advantage of its labor force in ways you or I cant not imagine today. The living conditions of many workers in times not so long passed were just shy of slavery. Those who despise unions do not know the history of the unions, this country, or what is happening around them. It will be too late by the time they feel the impact of what they said. You will remember this day and have to explain it to your children.

Those of you who are not informed enough to know better should not be allowed to vote.

This is a very dangerous time we live in. for many reasons. Fox news being one of them.There are so many people who are so misinformed, being persuaded by Mr. Lumtz, and Rupert Murdoch marketing machine with "job creators" failed economic policies" "climate change" truly troubles the more educated peoples of the "knowing world"

Btw.. The reason why states cannot balance their budgets is not due to unemployment insurance food stamps, or government spending, it is because of a shrunken tax base and a republican congress hell bent on making a black president the boogie man. (not smart enough, lazy, wrong, anti-American, not one of us) Romney might win, not because of why you said, but because the republican electorate is largely uneducated and easily persuaded using simple marketing tactics. e.g.foxnews

Unions lifted the towns around them. For every union worker he helped created several jobs to take his money.

Thosr of you fighting against union are cutting your own throat. They have you thinking you are one of them. Very sad

ttwtt78640 said:

You AGREE that public teachers make more than private teachers,

Click to expand...

Yes.

then assert that is not a FAIR public/private comparsion because private teachers are underpaid.

Click to expand...

I said they were paid less than public teachers because they did not have to meet the same educational standards that public school teachers do.

It is not possible, in your mind, that private teachers are correctly paid but that public teachers are overpaid (but ONLY because YOU say so). So you want to compare public teachers pay to other (as yet unnamed) private "comparable" positions based on the number of years of education (but not in the same fields of study) that have entirely different work schedules.

Click to expand...

It is not my opinion. I provided studies that show that public school teachers make less, or even, what other private sector jobs pay for comparable education.

Then you say that is not fair either because the "comparable" public teacher education is somehow "continuing education" making public teachers no longer comparable to whatever you were comparing them to (again, as yet unnamed).

Click to expand...

Please quote where I said that.

Please start with SPECIFICALLY what a public teacher's pay is comparable to in the private world, then MAYBE I can see what you are talking about.

Click to expand...

I've already provided you with a list of studies that provide this comparison.

"This finding, and previous research by the same authors (Biggs and Richwine 2011), are at odds with a large body of research showing that public school teachers and other government workers have total compensation that is lower—or at least no higher—than that of comparable private-sector workers (see, for example, Allegretto, Corcoran, and Mishel 2004, 2008, 2011; Bender and Heywood 2010; Keefe 2010; Munnell et al. 2011; Schmitt 2010). Furthermore, the “teaching penalty” has grown, as teachers’ and other public-sector workers’ pay has declined relative to that of comparable private-sector workers (Allegretto, Corcoran, and Mishel 2008, 2011; Bender and Heywood 2010)."

teamosil said:

You're still just stating what the current rule, or at least what the right would ideally like the current rule to be, is. You aren't considering whether that is the optimal rule. Risk isn't the only thing that warrants a return. Work is as well.

Click to expand...

I do consider it the optimal rule and thought about it long ago. Your socialist crap is rejected as its needs illegitimate claims to property on the farce help by labor means claims to property and profits. Your personal beliefs doesn't change any of the facts which I have put out of you. Maybe you should stop rejecting them on face value and actually think about the topic outside of fairness garbage?

Fact is the work is help towards making a product and nothing more and IS treated as such. You can't change the facts so you can get to making an argument for a why it's an legitimate claim to the property now if you want.

Let me give you a personal example. I used to work in software. The company was paid on a fixed fee per-project basis. I generated something around $1 million a year in profits for the company working about 50 hours. Now, I could have worked 80 hours a week and generated $1.6 million a year. But what's in it for me? At most, I would have increased my raise by maybe $5k/year. Now, say that I got just 10% of the profits I generated. That would have been an increase in my compensation of $160k/year. Would I have worked 80 hours for that? Hell yes. And it would have increased the owner's profits by $440k/year had they set it up that way. Win-win.

Click to expand...

That is a risk and not a guaranteed one at that. And stop thinking all I care about is gains. I'm interested in property rights, not any of this here. It does nothing to further your point.

No. Owners often play dual roles as owners and workers, and they are at least usually compensated accordingly. But, you should distinguish the roles. In a massive corporation they are usually pretty much separated, and in a small company they overlap a lot, but you should still consider how much of their income is coming from working vs. from owning.

Click to expand...

It makes no difference so I have no reason to consider it. Its all just your fairness crap coming out.

Boo Radley said:

So, a qualified credentialed teacher is not worth more than an unqualifednon-credential teacher?

Also, there's another question up above.

Click to expand...

NO. This is the biggest problem with public education; it costs far more than private education, per student, yet yields worse results BOTH according to standardized student test scores and graduation rates. How is it POSSIBLE that these less qualified, lower paid, priavte school teachers get better results, in fact, so much better, that nearly ALL that have a choice, pick these private schools for their own children to attend?

Camlon said:

Ok, you do realize it is not very difficult for me to include my own quote. You were wrong, and you chose to change explanation. So here is it with my quote.



You want quotes, here you go.



Then I said ro prove you wrong.



and then you responded

Click to expand...

You left out where you proved me wrong, again.

teamosil said:

Well teachers are a significant slice of the middle class. So increasing their income directly increases the income of the middle class. It's also a sort of job that educated people can try for everywhere in the country. Lots of times it is one of the few decent jobs in small towns for example. But, indirectly, and probably more importantly, the higher teacher pay is, the higher quality candidates will go into it, the better our education is, which raises everybody up.

Click to expand...

What is your point. Yes, teaching is a good job with high pay, excellent benefits, and long vacations. I would say many teachers are above middle class. Middle class workers earn 40-70K with compensation. Not 120K, better job security and vacations. Rich people earn that much. However, increases in teachers salaries cost the government budget. That is money that would be better spent somewhere else, rather than propping up the liberal rich.

But will it increase educational performance. No it won't, because increases in wages has diminishing returns. First off, bad teachers can't be fired. It is very hard to know if a teacher is good or not before you hire them, and certainly it is even more difficult to know if a teacher will be good in 30 years. Finland do not have massive wages for teachers, in fact they are quite low, and they are in the top of the world in the PISA survey. Wage increases will not lead to better performance, it will just lead to budget cuts which will lead to worse educational performance.

Most teachers, or at least most new teachers, have master's degrees. They make way, way, less than the average person with a master's degree.

Click to expand...

Average wage for teachers was 51K in 2008, average for all master degrees is approximately 55K. However, teachers earn substantially more in benefits, they have much better job security, and longer vacations. So, no they earn more than other people with master degrees. And you just admitted that a lot of teachers do not have masters degrees.

Also, why the heck do teachers need to have masters degrees? What they really need to have is teaching skills.

Camlon said:

Degrees, or certificates do not make you a good teacher.

Click to expand...

Again, you begin with an unproven premise.

Henrin said:

And stop thinking all I care about is gains. I'm interested in property rights, not any of this here.

Click to expand...

Well I guess that sums it up. You're willing to walk away from a win-win situation on the basis of a slogan. So be it. I don't think that's an intelligent way to live. Easy and clear cut, sure. Smart, no.

Catawba said:

You left out where you proved me wrong, again.

Click to expand...

I see that you have no argument left, and instead want to be as annoying as possible.

I am still waiting for you to show me how increasing compensation for some teachers from 120K to 150K, will benefit the poor. Or maybe you don't really care about the poor. Who is the poor? There are minorities, but you want to give them favourable treatment so they should be fine. Then there are poor whites, you call them white trash.

ttwtt78640 said:

That is the classic argument used to "justify" public teachers getting "super pay", they require SO much more education, far beyond what a private school does. Does it REALLY make sense to require a masters degree to teach 3rd to 6th graders math, science, history or english? Of course not, just as it does not take a mechanical engineer to fix a flat tire, replace a fan belt or change the oil in a car. It is pure puffery, used to justify the unjustifyable.

Click to expand...

That is strictly your opinion, and not one that myself or most people accept.

Catawba said:

Yes.



I said they were paid less than public teachers because they did not have to meet the same educational standards that public school teachers do.



It is not my opinion. I provided studies that show that public school teachers make less, or even, what other private sector jobs pay for comparable education.




Please quote where I said that.




I've already provided you with a list of studies that provide this comparison.

"This finding, and previous research by the same authors (Biggs and Richwine 2011), are at odds with a large body of research showing that public school teachers and other government workers have total compensation that is lower—or at least no higher—than that of comparable private-sector workers (see, for example, Allegretto, Corcoran, and Mishel 2004, 2008, 2011; Bender and Heywood 2010; Keefe 2010; Munnell et al. 2011; Schmitt 2010). Furthermore, the “teaching penalty” has grown, as teachers’ and other public-sector workers’ pay has declined relative to that of comparable private-sector workers (Allegretto, Corcoran, and Mishel 2008, 2011; Bender and Heywood 2010)."

Click to expand...

I give up. AGAIN you cite SUMMARIES of conclusions of unknowns. Of course if you count a mere handfull of top MILLIONAIRE CEOs with "comparable degrees" in the private average yet the highest POSSIBLE public salary is SES/congress then your "proof" is pure BS. Any top 100 CEO makes 1000x what the average of congress does (using ONLY their gov't salary/benefits).

Comparable is NOT only education and hours worked. That is pure nonsense, it is like comparing a daycare worker and a plumber, apples and oranges. Try comparing POTUS and an NBA star player or rock star, that will prove your point too, Obama is WAY underpaid. LOL

Catawba said:

Again, you begin with an unproven premise.

Click to expand...

Unproven?! Are you seriously suggesting that just having a degree makes you a good teacher?

I think it is fairly obvious by now that you lack any form for arguments, and when you lack arguments you just try to be difficult and annoying. The poor of America outnumber you. They are not just going to go for CEOs. They are going to go for rich liberals like you as well. You saw what happened in Wisconsin.

ttwtt78640 said:

NO. This is the biggest problem with public education; it costs far more than private education, per student, yet yields worse results BOTH according to standardized student test scores and graduation rates. How is it POSSIBLE that these less qualified, lower paid, priavte school teachers get better results, in fact, so much better, that nearly ALL that have a choice, pick these private schools for their own children to attend?

Click to expand...

That's an easy one, private schools don't have to deal with teaching every student regardless of their capacity to learn. Public schools do.

teamosil said:

Well I guess that sums it up. You're willing to walk away from a win-win situation on the basis of a slogan. So be it. I don't think that's an intelligent way to live. Easy and clear cut, sure. Smart, no.

Click to expand...

I listed the facts of the matter. Its hardly a slogan.

Just because you have nothing to beat the facts doesn't just make them part of a slogan either.

And its hardly a win-win if you are going to make that a policy. Its one thing to make it a business decision by the owners and something entirely different to make it a government policy.

Camlon said:

Unproven?! Are you seriously suggesting that just having a degree makes you a good teacher?

Click to expand...

Being qualified and properly credentialed definitely makes for a better teacher than one that isn't qualified and properly credentialed.

Catawba said:

That's an easy one, private schools don't have to deal with teaching every student regardless of their capacity to learn. Public schools do.

Click to expand...

So you think private schools don't deal with kids of all capacities to learn? Why is that everyone thinks every kid that goes to private school is exactly the same?

Camlon said:

I am still waiting for you to show me how increasing compensation for some teachers from 120K to 150K, will benefit the poor.

Click to expand...

And I'm still waiting for you to show me the proof of your statement that teachers got an increase to $150k that your question was based on.

Catawba said:

Being qualified and properly credentialed definitely makes for a better teacher than one that isn't qualified and properly credentialed.

Click to expand...

No, you said that all teachers with masters degrees are good teachers.

Having a masters degree is completely unnecessary. We are talking about students trying to learn addition, alphabet, reading, etc. The best way to ensure good teachers is to fire bad teachers. Except in the public sector, it is impossible to fire a bad teachers. Hence a lot of teachers in public sector is quite bad. Of course you don't know that because you have no experience with bad schools in America.

Catawba said:

And I'm still waiting for you to show me the proof of your statement that teachers got an increase to $150k that your question was based on.

Click to expand...

I never said they did. I said that if teacher unions are strong, like you want them to be. Then don't be surprised if a substantial number of teachers increase their compensation from 120K to 150K in 5 years. How much do you think the poor will earn in 5 years?

I ask you, increasing the compensation of teachers from 120K to 150K. How does that benefit the poor?

Camlon said:

No, you said having a masters degree will make you better than any teacher without a masters degree.

Click to expand...

Please quote me and we will go from there. Your interpretations of what I've said in the past have been less than accurate, to say the least.

Camlon said:

I never said they did. I said that if teacher unions are strong, like you want them to be. Then don't be surprised if a substantial number of teachers increase their compensation from 120K to 150K in 5 years. How much do you think the poor will earn in 5 years?

I ask you, increasing the compensation of teachers from 120K to 150K. How does that benefit the poor?

Click to expand...

I am not responsible for, nor put any stock in, your wild imaginings.

Catawba said:

Please quote me and we will go from there. Your interpretations of what I've said in the past have been less than accurate, to say the least.

Click to expand...

I said
"Degrees, or certificates do not make you a good teacher."

You responded.
"Again, you begin with an unproven premise."

Hence, you are saying that all teachers with a degree are good teachers. Maybe you should try to respond properly next time, because when you don't thin before you write then you get embarrassed like now.

Catawba said:

I am not responsible for, nor put any stock in, your wild imaginings.

Click to expand...

Omg, so wild expecting teachers with power to increase their wage by 4.5% per year.

Especially when Chicago teachers wanted a wage increase of 30%. Do have any more dumb comments?

Camlon said:

I said
"Degrees, or certificates do not make you a good teacher."

You responded.
"Again, you begin with an unproven premise."

Hence, you are saying that all teachers with a degree are good teachers. Maybe you should try to respond properly next time, because when you don't thin before you write then you get embarrassed like now.

Click to expand...

No, I am saying that being qualified with the proper degrees and certifications makes one a better teacher than those that are not qualified with the proper degrees and certifications.

Camlon said:

Omg, so wild expecting teachers with power to increase their wage by 4.5% per year.

Especially when Chicago teachers wanted a wage increase of 30%. Do have any more dumb comments?

Click to expand...

If you mean can I come up with a comment dumber than yours, the answer is no.