• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are Teachers Overpaid and Underworked?

Are teachers overpaid and underworked?

  • Yes, they are overpaid and underworked

    Votes: 10 15.2%

  • No, they are not overpaid and underworked

    Votes: 56 84.8%
  • Total voters
    66
Where I live, public school teachers are paid a pretty nice salary, average about $70K per year, which is well above the average worker's pay where I live. So, I think they're paid just about right here. A good salary for hard work, and teaching is not easy, despite what some people think.

I do wish the guaranteed pensions would be done away with. They're simply not sustainable. They should have their own personally funded 401K, the growth (or non-growth or loss) of which is determined by the stock market, like the vast majority in the private sector. I think that will happen sooner than later.
 
the makeout hobo said:
What specifically happened between 1970 and today to account for the ballooning CEO pay? In many respects the market is less regulated than it has been for a large part of the post-war era.
Click to expand...

In some important respects it is far worse. I would say going off the gold standard was one of the big controobuting factors. But it is of really relevant to my point, becausE we've never had a pure free marks. Even when we were on a gold standar the tovt discriminated against women and minorities. So anything before the modem civil rights era is worthless.
 
Aderleth said:
Teachers are not overpaid, nor are they underworked. The profession is generally not either respected or appreciated. It's a ****ty job, they make less money than any number of significantly less-well educated employees, and they do something extremely important (i.e. educating children).
Click to expand...

I wanted to be a teacher, but chose otherwise because of the pay. And I live in a state where the teachers get paid rather well compared to the rest of the nation.
 
Aderleth said:
Please draw me a line from "not all teachers are math and science teachers" to some sort of conclusion. Pointing me back to the post that I already asked you to elaborate on isn't very useful or compelling.
Click to expand...
You asked a question that was already answered.
 
mpg said:
You asked a question that was already answered.
Click to expand...

Not so much, no. I take it you're completely unwilling to, y'know, make an argument of some kind?
 
No, I think for the most part teachers are paid pretty fairly. Some are overpaid, some are underpaid, just like with any field.
 
Guy Incognito said:
You know, I dont normally play this card, and it might not necessarily be true of you, but this notion that top excurives are "overpaid" simply by virtue of being top paid executives is bogus. In a free market, in a fully privatized industry like education would be ideally, people would get paid what the market will bear. Investors and employers pay employees for their value, not a penny more nor less.
Click to expand...

How about if you stop playing the "Ostrich with his Head in the Sand" card? Many top executives are overpaid by virtue of the fact that they are obviously paid more money in one year than anyone could reasonably need in a lifetime.

The market makes sure that people are not overpaid or underpaid.
Click to expand...

Not in the absence of organized labor. We know this much from history.

If you think teachers deserve million dollar salaries and executives don't, that is sweet and childlike in its naïveté. But it is wrong. Teachers may be doing God's work, and executives might generally be d-bags, but they get paid what the market will bear.
Click to expand...

This is why unions, including teacher's unions, are so essential: They make sure the profits are fairly distributed to all worthy parties, and not just those in the top office, whether that office be private or otherwise. Thus, you could say that a union salary is just another expression of "what the market will bear." It's just expressed more democratically.
 
Aderleth said:
That's just not true. If you read the abstract to the study I posted, you'll find that a) there are chronic staffing problems not just in math and science (although the problems are more marked in those fields) and b) that it has less to do with a shortage of teachers in any given field than it does with the conditions teachers work in.
Click to expand...

Generally speaking, if there is a shortage of teachers, there are two ways to fill it: 1. Improve the compensation packages, 2. Improve the working conditions (essentially a non-monetary form of compensation). So I definitely agree...any schools experiencing these kind of shortages aren't compensating their teachers properly.

But the corollary is also true: If there is a surplus of teachers, schools are compensating teachers too much relative to their market value.

The clear implication is that those who are qualified to teach frequently chose not to do so, because there are other more lucrative and less troublesome fields they can go into.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I thought about going into teaching myself because it seems like a rewarding job...but I couldn't deal with the fact that I could be making a lot more money elsewhere.

I think it's important to keep in mind that there are different levels of qualification. If you want to get world-class teachers, it might cost $200,000 a year. If anyone with a college degree will do, even $30,000 might be too much. (And generally, schools tend to favor the latter approach more than the former.) I would have no problem at all with a school compensating an extremely good teacher quite handsomely.

Conclusion: teachers are generally underpaid. Now, obviously that's not always the case, but it is the trend.
Click to expand...

I don't think your paper supports this conclusion, except perhaps for math/science teachers. It looks like only 5% of schools have difficulty filling English positions, and only 2% have difficulty filling social science positions (graph on page 15). That doesn't really seem like a general shortage IMO...more just a problem at a handful of schools.
 
Last edited:
Some good teachers are underpaid. Some bad teachers are overpaid.

I'm a teacher and I don't think I'm underpaid at all. Although there are days when I mutter to myself, "I don't get paid enough for this crap..."....like today....
 
Sig said:
How about if you stop playing the "Ostrich with his Head in the Sand" card? Many top executives are overpaid by virtue of the fact that they are obviously paid more money in one year than anyone could reasonably need in a lifetime.



Not in the absence of organized labor. We know this much from history.



This is why unions, including teacher's unions, are so essential: They make sure the profits are fairly distributed to all worthy parties, and not just those in the top office, whether that office be private or otherwise. Thus, you could say that a union salary is just another expression of "what the market will bear." It's just expressed more democratically.
Click to expand...

Look, this is just commie talk. A person is not overpaid just because they get paid more than they need. A person is overpaid or not based on the value they contribute to their employer. And employers are going to be watching like hawks to make sure they don't overpay their employees, far better than any govt would do. And if the employees are underpaid they will simply stop working there. It is tautological. If it is a free market, nobody gets under- or over-paid.
 
So essentially Guy's position is to redefine over and underpaid from a moral position to a position where it is totally defined by the market and then argue from that perspective.

Its like saying "a rectangle is a circle, because I define it that way!"
 
Josie said:
Some good teachers are underpaid. Some bad teachers are overpaid.

I'm a teacher and I don't think I'm underpaid at all. Although there are days when I mutter to myself, "I don't get paid enough for this crap..."....like today....
Click to expand...

I couldn't even imagine being a full time teacher. I had to teach classes here and there in the Army, and it was like trying to herd a bunch of cats.
 
megaprogman said:
So essentially Guy's position is to redefine over and underpaid from a moral position to a position where it is totally defined by the market and then argue from that perspective.

Its like saying "a rectangle is a circle, because I define it that way!"
Click to expand...

Nonsense. I'm solving the problem, where bed wetting socialists use the undefined and thus meaningless term "underpaid" to justify monkeying around with the free market for their social engineering experiments.
I'm here to save the ****ing day.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Nonsense. I'm solving the problem, where bed wetting socialists use the undefined and thus meaningless term "underpaid" to justify monkeying around with the free market for their social engineering experiments.
I'm here to save the ****ing day.
Click to expand...

Your "solution" would be worse than the problem ...
 
Guy Incognito said:
Nonsense. I'm solving the problem, where bed wetting socialists use the undefined and thus meaningless term "underpaid" to justify monkeying around with the free market for their social engineering experiments.
I'm here to save the ****ing day.
Click to expand...

Saving the day with zealotry!
images
 
megaprogman said:
Your "solution" would be worse than the problem ...
Click to expand...

What's the problem again? Teachers aren't getting paid as much you feel, deep down in your bleeding heart (and without any economic basis) that teachers "should" be paid?

And you get mad at me for crapping all over your socialist parade of rainbows and lollipops by bringing up such ugly and unfashionable things as dollars and cents?

It sucks when the realities of the economy interfere with pinko candy land, huh?
 
Guy Incognito said:
What's the problem again? Teachers aren't getting paid as much you feel, deep down in your bleeding heart (and without any economic basis) that teachers "should" be paid?

And you get mad at me for crapping all over your socialist parade of rainbows and lollipops by bringing up such ugly and unfashionable things as dollars and cents?

It sucks when the realities of the economy interfere with pinko candy land, huh?
Click to expand...

Why are you getting so angry?

I am trying to have a civil discussion here and all you can seem to do is insult.
 
megaprogman said:
Why are you getting so angry?

I am trying to have a civil discussion here and all you can seem to do is insult.
Click to expand...

I think you're misreading me :shrug: I am being jovial.
 
Guy Incognito said:
I think you're misreading me :shrug: I am being jovial.
Click to expand...

Do you want to act like an adult and discuss or do you want to keep insulting?

I am going to assume the former, so...

Over and Underpaid are fundamentally moral questions for this profession. The reason I say this is that teachers have a unique job where they are literally an investment in the long term future and prosperity of this nation. Public education is probably the PRIMARY reason for this country's prosperity and thus should be looked at from a perspective of the good of the nation and not simply market forces. Education is far more important than capitalism as it is one of the primary resources that a modern economy feeds off of to run well or else we would very likely reflect a third or second world country.

Despite what a market fundamentalist may claim, a market is a purely artificial social construct that will always reflect it social inputs to produce its outputs of wealth. And quite frankly, as a moral position, if a social construct is not furthering the society it finds itself in in terms of wealth, happiness, and other less tangible aspects, a better system should be devised. How our economy is constructed is not a moral question or one that is really even that important, but the end results are what matters.
 
megaprogman said:
Do you want to act like an adult and discuss or do you want to keep insulting?

I am going to assume the former, so...

Over and Underpaid are fundamentally moral questions for this profession. The reason I say this is that teachers have a unique job where they are literally an investment in the long term future and prosperity of this nation. Public education is probably the PRIMARY reason for this country's prosperity and thus should be looked at from a perspective of the good of the nation and not simply market forces. Education is far more important than capitalism as it is one of the primary resources that a modern economy feeds off of to run well or else we would very likely reflect a third or second world country.
Click to expand...

I think you are being overly sensitive. Considering how bad libertarianism gets insulted around here, I think socialism can withstand a few playful insults.
Especially since this whole exchange was iniated by YOUR insult.
Will get to your main point in a few minutes.
 
Guy Incognito said:
I think you are being overly sensitive. Considering how bad libertarianism gets insulted around here, I think socialism can withstand a few playful insults.
Especially since this whole exchange was iniated by YOUR insult.
Will get to your main point in a few minutes.
Click to expand...

Where did I insult you?

You consider me pointing out your bad definition of value being wrong as insulting?
 
megaprogman said:
Where did I insult you?

You consider me pointing out your bad definition of value being wrong as insulting?
Click to expand...

My how quickly we forget:

megaprogman said:
So essentially Guy's position is to redefine over and underpaid from a moral position to a position where it is totally defined by the market and then argue from that perspective.

Its like saying "a rectangle is a circle, because I define it that way!"
Click to expand...

Not that it's a big deal, you're welcome to do so. It's fair game. So why can't you handle it when the sarcasm gets turned back around on you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom