Why Aren't We Talking About Union Busting?
- Thread starter mykevermin
- Start date
[quote name='UncleBob']Isn't it really odd how anyone can reply to a topic with anything they want? For example if the topic is shifting into a different direction, you can still post a reply with something relevant or newsworthy to the original topic at hand? Neat concept, eh? It's pretty common for conversations to change and evolve topics - and I know it can be pretty hard for some people to stay up to speed when it happens, but always feel free to post updates about the WI Union situation - they make for a good read.[/QUOTE]
.
.
[quote name='Strell']Remember when this thread was about union collective bargaining being destroyed and not some stupid nonsense some idiots turned it into because that's their only stratagem in every single last thread they inject their shit in?[/QUOTE]
I think Roger Goodell needs to get out of the talks and the players from the now dissolved NFLPA need to drop the lawsuit.
I think Roger Goodell needs to get out of the talks and the players from the now dissolved NFLPA need to drop the lawsuit.
Kirin Lemon
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 2 (100%)
[quote name='Msut77']http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/29/wisconsin-senate-busting-unions/[/QUOTE]
The phrase "Big Labor" made me roll my eyes harder than I've ever rolled them before.
The phrase "Big Labor" made me roll my eyes harder than I've ever rolled them before.
[quote name='Clak']I mean really, has any president ever kept every promise they made while campaigning? I'll bet most couldn't even remember every promise they made.[/QUOTE]
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/
That thing is kind of fun.
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/michele-bachmann/
scratch that, it's A LOT of fun!
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/
That thing is kind of fun.
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/michele-bachmann/
scratch that, it's A LOT of fun!
Last edited by a moderator:
silentevil
CAGiversary!
[quote name='mykevermin']In Wisconsin, in Ohio, and in New Jersey.
, in Wisconsin the governor is threatening to send out the National Guard if unions protest.[/QUOTE]
They're not union busting. Please explain the issue with asking teachers and other public sector workers to contribute to their own retirement. 3% oh my they are going to be in the poor house. Also the education system sucks in this country. Why should lack luster teachers leech off tax money?
, in Wisconsin the governor is threatening to send out the National Guard if unions protest.[/QUOTE]They're not union busting. Please explain the issue with asking teachers and other public sector workers to contribute to their own retirement. 3% oh my they are going to be in the poor house. Also the education system sucks in this country. Why should lack luster teachers leech off tax money?
[quote name='silentevil']Please explain the issue with asking teachers and other public sector workers to contribute to their own retirement. 3% oh my they are going to be in the poor house. Also the education system sucks in this country. Why should lack luster teachers leech off tax money?[/QUOTE]
I have no problem with that, and I don't think myke does either. What we do have a problem with is forever ending the ability for public workers to negotiate future changes.
I have no problem with that, and I don't think myke does either. What we do have a problem with is forever ending the ability for public workers to negotiate future changes.
Kirin Lemon
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 2 (100%)
[quote name='silentevil']They're not union busting.[/QUOTE]
Yes, they are, and Republican leadership in Wisconsin has even admitted as much in the past few weeks.
[quote name='silentevil']Please explain the issue with asking teachers and other public sector workers to contribute to their own retirement. 3% oh my they are going to be in the poor house.[/QUOTE]
Nobody contested this. The issue is about collective bargaining rights.
[quote name='silentevil']Also the education system sucks in this country. Why should lack luster teachers leech off tax money?[/QUOTE]
Misdirection and obfuscation of the issue. Way to regurgitate those talking points, though.
Wow, you're batting 0. Care to keep going?
Yes, they are, and Republican leadership in Wisconsin has even admitted as much in the past few weeks.
[quote name='silentevil']Please explain the issue with asking teachers and other public sector workers to contribute to their own retirement. 3% oh my they are going to be in the poor house.[/QUOTE]
Nobody contested this. The issue is about collective bargaining rights.
[quote name='silentevil']Also the education system sucks in this country. Why should lack luster teachers leech off tax money?[/QUOTE]
Misdirection and obfuscation of the issue. Way to regurgitate those talking points, though.
Wow, you're batting 0. Care to keep going?
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
lackluster is one word; your point about the quality of education is well made.
silentevil
CAGiversary!
I like how I disagree on this and I get attacked. It's ok though. I see no problem with telling people who get paid with tax payer money they do not have the right to set their own wages. Teachers fail at their jobs and expect to receive raises. This is not a talking point it is a fact. I agree workers in the public sector deserve to be paid fairly, but I do not agree they have the right to pick and choose their wages. I feel the same way about all government. No private company is going to allow people to pick their wages. This is not union busting they still have plenty of power just not free will. I have seen union busting. The county jail back home tried to unionize when the sheriff was going to turn it private. He tried to get his lackeys to intimidate anyone who signed a union card. The FBI eventually got involved. Needles to say he did not get re-elected.
The world would be much better if people would stop with the entitlement attitude.
The world would be much better if people would stop with the entitlement attitude.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='silentevil']I like how I disagree on this and I get attacked. It's ok though. I see no problem with telling people who get paid with tax payer money they do not have the right to set their own wages.[/quote]
collective bargaining ≠ "set their own wages."
The failure of education in the United States is the result of a number of things - it is not the result of poor teacher performance, however. No political party dare point out the obvious - education is hard work, and parents need to step the up and make sure their children do the work and engage in their education. Obama was laughed at by some in the gaming community for telling children it's time to "put down the Xbox" (or something to that effect). Thing is, he's right.
Teacher pay is not related to performance, but teacher pay is terrible compared to the time and cost it takes to become an educator. Persons who do not teach would be much better off if they went into the private sector.
Define fairly. Let's talk numbers, then. Instead of tossing out some ambiguous phrase ("paid fairly"), tell us what you want them to be paid. Wisconsin teachers earn $48,000 on average, with around $25,000 in benefits packages per year. Grand total of $73,000 per year (based on NEA data).
So what would you have them earn instead. Let's talk real world - salaries - and stop talking in vagaries. Have some dignity, pick a figure, stick to it, and justify why it should be that.
Double dog dare ya.
The WI teachers' union agreed to increase their benefits contributions back before the Democrat state senators left the state to avoid quorum. They agreed *entirely* to the financial burden that was proposed in Walker's bill. They would not budge on ending collective bargaining. Walker, though he postured that this was all to repair the budget, refused to negotiate with the teachers. Even though he was being given the plans of his balanced budget openly by the union, he would not concede and insisted collective bargaining be taken off the table, too.
Why? Because if unions can not bargain, if they can not represent themselves, they have no voice. They have no power. Would you join a union that could not offer you any of the benefits of being a union? If you were a sensible person, you would not. That is the purpose of removing collective bargaining on wages and benefits - to remove the purpose of a union. This will reduce union membership, therefore union dues, union solidarity, and union political power.
The only reason you could not see this as union busting is if you're truly that thick, or if you're playing the role of whimsically naive numbskull for the purpose of simply being okay with union busting, but savvy enough to promote it overtly. Like a tobacco company executive - he'll (let's be honest, they're all men) never admit that smoking willing kill you, but do you really believe he thinks that?
When people draw from programs they pay into, they are not entitlements. You don't understand what that word means.
Let me ask you a riddle:
Q: When a person is confronted with the fact that Scott Walker refused to accept the budget cuts he asked of unions because he wanted to take away collective bargaining too, and yet that person still believes the bill is not about union busting, what do they do in response?
A:
collective bargaining ≠ "set their own wages."
The failure of education in the United States is the result of a number of things - it is not the result of poor teacher performance, however. No political party dare point out the obvious - education is hard work, and parents need to step the
up and make sure their children do the work and engage in their education. Obama was laughed at by some in the gaming community for telling children it's time to "put down the Xbox" (or something to that effect). Thing is, he's right.Teacher pay is not related to performance, but teacher pay is terrible compared to the time and cost it takes to become an educator. Persons who do not teach would be much better off if they went into the private sector.
Define fairly. Let's talk numbers, then. Instead of tossing out some ambiguous phrase ("paid fairly"), tell us what you want them to be paid. Wisconsin teachers earn $48,000 on average, with around $25,000 in benefits packages per year. Grand total of $73,000 per year (based on NEA data).
So what would you have them earn instead. Let's talk real world - salaries - and stop talking in vagaries. Have some dignity, pick a figure, stick to it, and justify why it should be that.
Double dog dare ya.
The WI teachers' union agreed to increase their benefits contributions back before the Democrat state senators left the state to avoid quorum. They agreed *entirely* to the financial burden that was proposed in Walker's bill. They would not budge on ending collective bargaining. Walker, though he postured that this was all to repair the budget, refused to negotiate with the teachers. Even though he was being given the plans of his balanced budget openly by the union, he would not concede and insisted collective bargaining be taken off the table, too.
Why? Because if unions can not bargain, if they can not represent themselves, they have no voice. They have no power. Would you join a union that could not offer you any of the benefits of being a union? If you were a sensible person, you would not. That is the purpose of removing collective bargaining on wages and benefits - to remove the purpose of a union. This will reduce union membership, therefore union dues, union solidarity, and union political power.
The only reason you could not see this as union busting is if you're truly that thick, or if you're playing the role of whimsically naive numbskull for the purpose of simply being okay with union busting, but savvy enough to promote it overtly. Like a tobacco company executive - he'll (let's be honest, they're all men) never admit that smoking will
ing kill you, but do you really believe he thinks that?When people draw from programs they pay into, they are not entitlements. You don't understand what that word means.
Let me ask you a riddle:
Q: When a person is confronted with the fact that Scott Walker refused to accept the budget cuts he asked of unions because he wanted to take away collective bargaining too, and yet that person still believes the bill is not about union busting, what do they do in response?
A:
Walk away from the thread and never come back, because there's not a ing lick of sense they can make of such a contradiction without having the guts to admit they are wrong.
ing lick of sense they can make of such a contradiction without having the guts to admit they are wrong.
silentevil
CAGiversary!
I agree the problems with the education system have a lot more problems other than teachers.
CBAs are used to negotiate wages amongst other things. It is not union busting.
Average household income for Wisconsin was 52,000 on average 1 teacher is raking in 73,000 in cash and benefits. Do I have an issue with this yes. They work 9 months a year. Most teachers graduate in the bottom half of their college class.
The entitlement attitude is a huge problem is this country. The government throws cash at people with reckless abandon and are dumbfounded when people don't attempt to move up in the world.
http://legis.wisconsin.gov/11Act010.pdf
That's the bill. Please read it. Show me where they are attempting to get rid of unions.
Also why is no one saying anything about the Democrat run legislature in Illinois trying to do same thing? So what were you saying about contradictions?
CBAs are used to negotiate wages amongst other things. It is not union busting.
Average household income for Wisconsin was 52,000 on average 1 teacher is raking in 73,000 in cash and benefits. Do I have an issue with this yes. They work 9 months a year. Most teachers graduate in the bottom half of their college class.
The entitlement attitude is a huge problem is this country. The government throws cash at people with reckless abandon and are dumbfounded when people don't attempt to move up in the world.
http://legis.wisconsin.gov/11Act010.pdf
That's the bill. Please read it. Show me where they are attempting to get rid of unions.
Also why is no one saying anything about the Democrat run legislature in Illinois trying to do same thing? So what were you saying about contradictions?
Last edited by a moderator:
Do people seriously think teachers are gaming the system? For real?
You know what goes hand-in-hand with entitlement syndrome? Scapegoatism. It's the teachers ruining the economy. It's the illegals. It's the lower class getting healthcare. It's the anyone-who-isn't-me.
Entitlement with a different change of clothes. The great thing about that argument is that you deflect your anger onto someone else, which is both convenient and sneaky.
You know what goes hand-in-hand with entitlement syndrome? Scapegoatism. It's the teachers ruining the economy. It's the illegals. It's the lower class getting healthcare. It's the anyone-who-isn't-me.
Entitlement with a different change of clothes. The great thing about that argument is that you deflect your anger onto someone else, which is both convenient and sneaky.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='silentevil']Average household income for Wisconsin was 52,000 on average 1 teacher is raking in 73,000 in cash and benefits. Do I have an issue with this yes.[/quote]
Then pick a number. What's suitable? Should teachers make at the average, or slightly more or less than average? Have some dignity, friend.
Or is it not that they are teachers, but public employees? Then all public employees, from Mister "MTV's The Real World oh woe is me on my paltry $174,000 per year" state senator salary Duffy should take a paycut. Yes? And the state shit shoveler should get a raise? Let's make all public employees take the same wage and benefits. No variation.
More to the point, you're comparing two separate measures: household income (which excludes benefits) to income plus benefits. If you want to compare on income alone the teachers are $4,000 below the household average figure you cite. Do you now think they deserve a $4,000 raise so they can be at the average?
Compare like figures, man. Again, have some dignity.
This is the internet and all, but this is not true and I willin' fight anyone who dares tell me I work 9 months a year. I *have class* 9 months a year. I work 52 weeks a year, and during those 9 months, I'm putting in 70 hour weeks. So you can take a in' hike.
Or perhaps you're one of those people who thinks that teachers are only working when we're in the classroom teaching? No research, no continuing ed, no meetings no putting up with your filthy spoiled children (the truly entitled)?
Right. Myin' ass.
1) cite your source
2) and? Explain and justify how GPA is supposed to be tied to income in your world.
You know what I'm dumbfounded about? That so many people use vagaries such as this, and it must be true, since so many people say it. But I've never been to a government reckless abandon cash party before.
I think the problem is the robber barons in the country. The difference between you and I is that I can back up what I think with numbers and facts. Not this "the government spends money and stuff and people get mad and stuff" horseshit.
Aight, you're a troll. I give. You can't be that underpants-on-the-outside-of-my-jeans dumb.
There are union busting efforts in over 5 states right now. Wisconsin is the most public, but if you think this is party politics, then I have to rescind my comment about you being a troll - because only someone trulying stupid would think as much.
Then pick a number. What's suitable? Should teachers make at the average, or slightly more or less than average? Have some dignity, friend.
Or is it not that they are teachers, but public employees? Then all public employees, from Mister "MTV's The Real World oh woe is me on my paltry $174,000 per year" state senator salary Duffy should take a paycut. Yes? And the state shit shoveler should get a raise? Let's make all public employees take the same wage and benefits. No variation.
More to the point, you're comparing two separate measures: household income (which excludes benefits) to income plus benefits. If you want to compare on income alone the teachers are $4,000 below the household average figure you cite. Do you now think they deserve a $4,000 raise so they can be at the average?
Compare like figures, man. Again, have some dignity.
This is the internet and all, but this is not true and I will
in' fight anyone who dares tell me I work 9 months a year. I *have class* 9 months a year. I work 52 weeks a year, and during those 9 months, I'm putting in 70 hour weeks. So you can take a in' hike.Or perhaps you're one of those people who thinks that teachers are only working when we're in the classroom teaching? No research, no continuing ed, no meetings no putting up with your filthy spoiled children (the truly entitled)?
Right. My
in' ass.1) cite your source
2) and? Explain and justify how GPA is supposed to be tied to income in your world.
You know what I'm dumbfounded about? That so many people use vagaries such as this, and it must be true, since so many people say it. But I've never been to a government reckless abandon cash party before.
I think the problem is the robber barons in the country. The difference between you and I is that I can back up what I think with numbers and facts. Not this "the government spends money and stuff and people get mad and stuff" horseshit.
Aight, you're a troll. I give. You can't be that underpants-on-the-outside-of-my-jeans dumb.
There are union busting efforts in over 5 states right now. Wisconsin is the most public, but if you think this is party politics, then I have to rescind my comment about you being a troll - because only someone truly
ing stupid would think as much.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='Strell']It's the anyone-who-isn't-me-or-wish-to-be.[/quote]
took care of a clerical error there for yeh.
took care of a clerical error there for yeh.
- Feedback
- 736 (100%)
Posting just to say teachers rule and are under-appreciated. Pisses me off when people complain about them, especially when they don't know what they are talking about.
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
How many here have seen the movie "Waiting for Superman"? It's a movie about the education system that's done by the director of inconvenient truth.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
Just got it from Netflix last week. I hope to get some free time soon to watch it.
silentevil
CAGiversary!
Average household income in Wisconsin has two wage earners. All you are doing is getting angry and failing to prove your point that they are trying to break up the union. I gave you the bill. I've read it. Have you? Makes sense that you are teacher, but I'll leave you with this. Unions have leeched off tax payers too long. At one point in time unions were necessary. That being said teachers aren't mining coal or working in factories 12 hours a day 7 days a week. So keep crying no one cares.
Those who can, do; those who can't, teach.
Those who can, do; those who can't, teach.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
so now you've shifted your rationale from them not being deserving b/c they're *public* unions to lambasting *all* unions as antiquated (that means old, to you) and irrelevant?
i'd accuse you of moving the goalposts if I thought you were smart enough to do so deliberately.
i'd accuse you of moving the goalposts if I thought you were smart enough to do so deliberately.
silentevil
CAGiversary!
[quote name='mykevermin']so now you've shifted your rationale from them not being deserving b/c they're *public* unions to lambasting *all* unions as antiquated (that means old, to you) and irrelevant?
i'd accuse you of moving the goalposts if I thought you were smart enough to do so deliberately.[/QUOTE]
You have still failed to show that Scott Walker is union busting. I provided the bill for you to look over. All you can do is attack me and fail to prove any points. Like I said before keep crying no one cares.
i'd accuse you of moving the goalposts if I thought you were smart enough to do so deliberately.[/QUOTE]
You have still failed to show that Scott Walker is union busting. I provided the bill for you to look over. All you can do is attack me and fail to prove any points. Like I said before keep crying no one cares.
Myke - Can you expand on that last bit where Union Busting isn't party politics?
"Also why is no one saying anything about the Democrat run legislature in Illinois trying to do same thing? So what were you saying about contradictions?
There are union busting efforts in over 5 states right now. Wisconsin is the most public, but if you think this is party politics, then I have to rescind my comment about you being a troll - because only someone truly ing stupid would think as much. "
Maybe I'm feeling mean spirited today, or there's some sort of implied double negative but for whatever reason that just doesn't seem to read correctly.
"Also why is no one saying anything about the Democrat run legislature in Illinois trying to do same thing? So what were you saying about contradictions?
There are union busting efforts in over 5 states right now. Wisconsin is the most public, but if you think this is party politics, then I have to rescind my comment about you being a troll - because only someone truly ing stupid would think as much. "
Maybe I'm feeling mean spirited today, or there's some sort of implied double negative but for whatever reason that just doesn't seem to read correctly.
I'm not against unions in theory but I think the teachers union (especially here in NJ) has gotten way too powerful and I'm glad Christie is stepping up and trying to do something about it. Tenure is a ridiculous concept and so is "last in first out" when it comes to cutbacks. The best teachers should advance in the ranks and the shitty ones should be fired to make room for the ones that give a damn. I also think asking teachers to just contribute a little bit to their retirement or chip in a little more for their benefits isn't too much to ask. The rest of us make it work.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='nasum']Myke - Can you expand on that last bit where Union Busting isn't party politics?[/QUOTE]
Oh, I can see how you would misread that. Not party politics = equal attacks on those who attempt to weaken or destroy the collective power of unionized labor, whether Democrat or Republican (it just happens to be largely Republicans, who stand to gain the most politically from such legislature).
It's not party politics from those leading the defense of labor rights - all enemies will be outed and fought. It is most *certainly* party politics for the Republicans, who, again, stand the most to gain by a long shot by defeating they only real check on unfettered oligarchy in the United States.
[quote name='Javery']I also think asking teachers to just contribute a little bit to their retirement or chip in a little more for their benefits isn't too much to ask. The rest of us make it work.[/QUOTE]
You make over $200,000 per year, as you noted before. How dare you put yourself in the same category as teachers, claiming you "make it work." Of course you do - and I don't begrudge you for that. But if you took a paycut of 60% of your current income, could you still "make it work" where you live?
Simply put, you are not them, and your income means you do not know what it is like to be them. So it's disheartening to see you - a smart person by any measure - try to imply that you're roughly in the same boat as teachers when your income is over 300% greater.
You are not them.
silentevil, the bill is unchanged from its past form. if you want an answer to your question, you have to define what you think union busting is for me, because it seems we have very different definitions.
Refusing to accept increased pension contributions to take away bargaining rights is union busting.
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/116502958.html
Taking away bargaining rights and enacting prohibitions on striking is union
busting.
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/...bargaining?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE
Now, if you think union busting necessarily involves overt, violent action of the state and that political action that covertly achieves the same goals is not union busting, then before we get to the language of the bill, we're going to have to have a longer talk about why you're so very wrong.
Oh, I can see how you would misread that. Not party politics = equal attacks on those who attempt to weaken or destroy the collective power of unionized labor, whether Democrat or Republican (it just happens to be largely Republicans, who stand to gain the most politically from such legislature).
It's not party politics from those leading the defense of labor rights - all enemies will be outed and fought. It is most *certainly* party politics for the Republicans, who, again, stand the most to gain by a long shot by defeating they only real check on unfettered oligarchy in the United States.
[quote name='Javery']I also think asking teachers to just contribute a little bit to their retirement or chip in a little more for their benefits isn't too much to ask. The rest of us make it work.[/QUOTE]
You make over $200,000 per year, as you noted before. How dare you put yourself in the same category as teachers, claiming you "make it work." Of course you do - and I don't begrudge you for that. But if you took a paycut of 60% of your current income, could you still "make it work" where you live?
Simply put, you are not them, and your income means you do not know what it is like to be them. So it's disheartening to see you - a smart person by any measure - try to imply that you're roughly in the same boat as teachers when your income is over 300% greater.
You are not them.
silentevil, the bill is unchanged from its past form. if you want an answer to your question, you have to define what you think union busting is for me, because it seems we have very different definitions.
Refusing to accept increased pension contributions to take away bargaining rights is union busting.
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/116502958.html
Taking away bargaining rights and enacting prohibitions on striking is union
busting.
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/...bargaining?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE
Now, if you think union busting necessarily involves overt, violent action of the state and that political action that covertly achieves the same goals is not union busting, then before we get to the language of the bill, we're going to have to have a longer talk about why you're so very wrong.
[quote name='mykevermin']You make over $200,000 per year, as you noted before. How dare you put yourself in the same category as teachers, claiming you "make it work." Of course you do - and I don't begrudge you for that. But if you took a paycut of 60% of your current income, could you still "make it work" where you live?
Simply put, you are not them, and your income means you do not know what it is like to be them. So it's disheartening to see you - a smart person by any measure - try to imply that you're roughly in the same boat as teachers when your income is over 300% greater.
You are not them.[/QUOTE]
Well, to be fair, I do know have some idea what it is like... before I quit my previous life (I worked for 3 years in between college and law school and then during law school) and worked my way up the ladder here I was making about $35k a year at a private company that only matched 3% to my 401k (I still maxed out at 15%) and I had to pay for my benefits. I made it work. I definitely couldn't have afforded to live where I live now though and my lifestyle was quite a bit different but that's just the way things work. I don't feel like I should be able to afford Beverly Hills or Aspen because I simply don't make nearly enough money to afford that lifestyle. It's all relative.
There are plenty of non-teachers paying for their benefits and contributing towards retirement who also make it work. I just don't understand why teachers feel entitled to this special treatment they have been enjoying. My feelings on this topic are not meant to be a shot at you or any other teacher out there - I couldn't do what you do. I also think that you should try to get all of the money/benefits you can get because I would do the same thing (it just doesn't mean I agree with it!).
Also, I don't recall mentioning what I earn (although with eleventy billion posts it's a possibility) but feel free to speculate all you want.
Simply put, you are not them, and your income means you do not know what it is like to be them. So it's disheartening to see you - a smart person by any measure - try to imply that you're roughly in the same boat as teachers when your income is over 300% greater.
You are not them.[/QUOTE]
Well, to be fair, I do know have some idea what it is like... before I quit my previous life (I worked for 3 years in between college and law school and then during law school) and worked my way up the ladder here I was making about $35k a year at a private company that only matched 3% to my 401k (I still maxed out at 15%) and I had to pay for my benefits. I made it work. I definitely couldn't have afforded to live where I live now though and my lifestyle was quite a bit different but that's just the way things work. I don't feel like I should be able to afford Beverly Hills or Aspen because I simply don't make nearly enough money to afford that lifestyle. It's all relative.
There are plenty of non-teachers paying for their benefits and contributing towards retirement who also make it work. I just don't understand why teachers feel entitled to this special treatment they have been enjoying. My feelings on this topic are not meant to be a shot at you or any other teacher out there - I couldn't do what you do. I also think that you should try to get all of the money/benefits you can get because I would do the same thing (it just doesn't mean I agree with it!).
Also, I don't recall mentioning what I earn (although with eleventy billion posts it's a possibility) but feel free to speculate all you want.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='Javery']Also, I don't recall mentioning what I earn (although with eleventy billion posts it's a possibility) but feel free to speculate all you want. [/QUOTE]
nah, we had a discussion long ago about cost of living expenses - I distinctly recall you bringing up that comparing dollar figure amounts cross-nationally leads to imperfections when drawing conclusions (i.e., living in NYC is hella more expensive than anywhere else).
It was something I didn't appreciate until I hit the east coast myself. It's not that big of a difference (though Philly ≠ NYC), but it's there.
That's why I remember. Because you made a decent point that I still don't really agree with.
[/QUOTE]nah, we had a discussion long ago about cost of living expenses - I distinctly recall you bringing up that comparing dollar figure amounts cross-nationally leads to imperfections when drawing conclusions (i.e., living in NYC is hella more expensive than anywhere else).
It was something I didn't appreciate until I hit the east coast myself. It's not that big of a difference (though Philly ≠ NYC), but it's there.
That's why I remember. Because you made a decent point that I still don't really agree with.
[quote name='mykevermin']nah, we had a discussion long ago about cost of living expenses - I distinctly recall you bringing up that comparing dollar figure amounts cross-nationally leads to imperfections when drawing conclusions (i.e., living in NYC is hella more expensive than anywhere else).
It was something I didn't appreciate until I hit the east coast myself. It's not that big of a difference (though Philly ≠ NYC), but it's there.
That's why I remember. Because you made a decent point that I still don't really agree with.
[/QUOTE]
Hold on a second...isn't that the guy that said that he isn't living high on the hog with a 6 figure income, lives close to the city with an expensive-ish house, landscaper, maid service/baby sitter, day care, and a 10 year old car? Cause that shit if you can't make ends meet on 6 figures and have all that shit. How the is someone going to live or raise a family on that $35k that he brought up. Not as easily as making 4x that. his point. The scale is still all out of whack.
It was something I didn't appreciate until I hit the east coast myself. It's not that big of a difference (though Philly ≠ NYC), but it's there.
That's why I remember. Because you made a decent point that I still don't really agree with.
[/QUOTE]Hold on a second...isn't that the guy that said that he isn't living high on the hog with a 6 figure income, lives close to the city with an expensive-ish house, landscaper, maid service/baby sitter, day care, and a 10 year old car? Cause
that shit if you can't make ends meet on 6 figures and have all that shit. How the is someone going to live or raise a family on that $35k that he brought up. Not as easily as making 4x that. his point. The scale is still all out of whack.
- Feedback
- 736 (100%)
[quote name='Javery']
There are plenty of non-teachers paying for their benefits and contributing towards retirement who also make it work.[/QUOTE]
Maybe it's not the same everywhere else but I'm looking at my wife's paycheck and 7.5% of it goes into the retirement fund, so doesn't seem to me to be a free lunch.
There are plenty of non-teachers paying for their benefits and contributing towards retirement who also make it work.[/QUOTE]
Maybe it's not the same everywhere else but I'm looking at my wife's paycheck and 7.5% of it goes into the retirement fund, so doesn't seem to me to be a free lunch.
[quote name='Pookymeister']Maybe it's not the same everywhere else but I'm looking at my wife's paycheck and 7.5% of it goes into the retirement fund, so doesn't seem to me to be a free lunch.[/QUOTE]
All state workers in MA are required to contribute 10% of their salary to a mandatory retirement fund. I'm guessing that there are more of these programs than not, but don't tell anyone, it's a secret.
Oh, and it never was a free lunch. While teachers and other public employees might make "more," that's because everyone else's wages have remained stagnant or gone down for the last 30 or so years.
BTW, wasn't all this started when Walker created a deficit by cutting corporate tax rates? I'm too lazy to google-fu it.
All state workers in MA are required to contribute 10% of their salary to a mandatory retirement fund. I'm guessing that there are more of these programs than not, but don't tell anyone, it's a secret.
Oh, and it never was a free lunch. While teachers and other public employees might make "more," that's because everyone else's wages have remained stagnant or gone down for the last 30 or so years.
BTW, wasn't all this started when Walker created a deficit by cutting corporate tax rates? I'm too lazy to google-fu it.
No it WAS a free lunch. I know I saw teachers taking extra milk cartons, sighing heavily and loudly just to lord their great countenance above me as a wee student, their insane laughter fresh in my mind after all these years.
And they got extra jello! EXTRA JELLO! Myke is sitting over the having a second pudding cup, and there's not a god damn thing you can do about it.
And they got extra jello! EXTRA JELLO! Myke is sitting over the having a second pudding cup, and there's not a god damn thing you can do about it.
Kirin Lemon
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 2 (100%)
[quote name='dohdough']BTW, wasn't all this started when Walker created a deficit by cutting corporate tax rates? I'm too lazy to google-fu it.[/QUOTE]
Yup.
Yup.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='Strell']No it WAS a free lunch. I know I saw teachers taking extra milk cartons, sighing heavily and loudly just to lord their great countenance above me as a wee student, their insane laughter fresh in my mind after all these years.
And they got extra jello! EXTRA JELLO! Myke is sitting over the having a second pudding cup, and there's not a god damn thing you can do about it.[/QUOTE]
You bring in tapioca, or change the brand from Jello to Kozy Shack, there's gonna be busted kneecaps and strikes in your future, pal.
And they got extra jello! EXTRA JELLO! Myke is sitting over the having a second pudding cup, and there's not a god damn thing you can do about it.[/QUOTE]
You bring in tapioca, or change the brand from Jello to Kozy Shack, there's gonna be busted kneecaps and strikes in your future, pal.
onetrackmind
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 81 (100%)
[quote name='Javery']There are plenty of non-teachers paying for their benefits and contributing towards retirement who also make it work. I just don't understand why teachers feel entitled to this special treatment they have been enjoying. My feelings on this topic are not meant to be a shot at you or any other teacher out there - I couldn't do what you do. I also think that you should try to get all of the money/benefits you can get because I would do the same thing (it just doesn't mean I agree with it!).[/QUOTE]
I think you're kind of missing the issue a bit. The teacher's are not making a big deal about paying more for their healthcare and pensions, from the get go they were willing to agree to the concessions. Concessions are nothing new to union members, they happen all the time. The problem they have with the bill is eliminating their collective bargaining rights for good. Taking away their ability to negotiate better wages and/or benefits in the future has nothing to do with eliminating the state's debt. I think it's a major misconception that a union can demand anything they want and force the employer or state to accept it regardless of whether it makes sense or not. I'm sure everyone has negotiated something before, one party tries to get the very most they can and the other tries to give as little as possible; then the two parties meet an agreement in the middle that both feel is fair. Also i don't think you realize the amount of time, effort and money goes into being a teacher. When taking all those factors in consideration, teachers are vastly underpaid.
I can't understand why so many people feel that having a good wage, a good pension, and a good healthcare plan are luxury entitlements. How is reducing pay and benefits for middle class workers going to help anyone out of the mess we are in? Now I don't pretend to be a smart man but I can at least understand that our economy is based on the principle that we need people to buy a ton of non-essential shit to keep the economy moving. When people don't have extra money to spend on stuff, our economy suffers and people lose jobs. I have yet to see anyone explain to me how suppressing public employee pay and benefits will eventually lead to job growth and better pay for everyone.
I think you're kind of missing the issue a bit. The teacher's are not making a big deal about paying more for their healthcare and pensions, from the get go they were willing to agree to the concessions. Concessions are nothing new to union members, they happen all the time. The problem they have with the bill is eliminating their collective bargaining rights for good. Taking away their ability to negotiate better wages and/or benefits in the future has nothing to do with eliminating the state's debt. I think it's a major misconception that a union can demand anything they want and force the employer or state to accept it regardless of whether it makes sense or not. I'm sure everyone has negotiated something before, one party tries to get the very most they can and the other tries to give as little as possible; then the two parties meet an agreement in the middle that both feel is fair. Also i don't think you realize the amount of time, effort and money goes into being a teacher. When taking all those factors in consideration, teachers are vastly underpaid.
I can't understand why so many people feel that having a good wage, a good pension, and a good healthcare plan are luxury entitlements. How is reducing pay and benefits for middle class workers going to help anyone out of the mess we are in? Now I don't pretend to be a smart man but I can at least understand that our economy is based on the principle that we need people to buy a ton of non-essential shit to keep the economy moving. When people don't have extra money to spend on stuff, our economy suffers and people lose jobs. I have yet to see anyone explain to me how suppressing public employee pay and benefits will eventually lead to job growth and better pay for everyone.
[quote name='dohdough']Hold on a second...isn't that the guy that said that he isn't living high on the hog with a 6 figure income, lives close to the city with an expensive-ish house, landscaper, maid service/baby sitter, day care, and a 10 year old car? Cause that shit if you can't make ends meet on 6 figures and have all that shit. How the is someone going to live or raise a family on that $35k that he brought up. Not as easily as making 4x that. his point. The scale is still all out of whack.[/QUOTE]
Also, your post is way off regarding my personal situation.
[quote name='onetrackmind']I think you're kind of missing the issue a bit. The teacher's are not making a big deal about paying more for their healthcare and pensions, from the get go they were willing to agree to the concessions. [/QUOTE]
I don't know - my mother, sister and best friend are all teachers and this is the only thing they are up in arms about. They haven't said a word about their collective bargaining power being stripped completely (which I do NOT agree with at all). Unions are probably necessary to avoid getting unfairly crammed down all the time but I do think that the teacher's union has gotten way too powerful (at least in NJ).
[quote name='onetrackmind']Also i don't think you realize the amount of time, effort and money goes into being a teacher. When taking all those factors in consideration, teachers are vastly underpaid. [/QUOTE]
I'm sorry - I just don't see it (mostly). This is also why I suggested some sort of sliding scale based on the higher grade you teach. It is not time consuming to "grade" 25 kindergartners' art projects or grade a bunch of math tests to see if kids can add. It's just not. Grading 25 AP History papers? That probably ruins a few nights.
Also, teachers get something that a lot of us never get - true days off. When school is not in session, everyone is off. Everyone. There is nothing going on that teachers will miss when school is closed. You can't put a price on this - most people in the business world are required to be available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, including "vacations" (I've never taken one where I didn't have to work at some point). Yes, I'm jealous.
[quote name='onetrackmind']I can't understand why so many people feel that having a good wage, a good pension, and a good healthcare plan are luxury entitlements.[/QUOTE]
This is where it gets a bit tricky - I think teachers should earn a good wage and have a good healthcare plan. Everyone should. Pensions? I'm not so sure about. Almost no one in the public sector has a pension plan any more. Put in 20 years and then get 80% of you last salary for the rest of your life? Sounds pretty luxurious to me.
that shit if you can't make ends meet on 6 figures and have all that shit. How the is someone going to live or raise a family on that $35k that he brought up. Not as easily as making 4x that. his point. The scale is still all out of whack.[/QUOTE]
Also, your post is way off regarding my personal situation.
[quote name='onetrackmind']I think you're kind of missing the issue a bit. The teacher's are not making a big deal about paying more for their healthcare and pensions, from the get go they were willing to agree to the concessions. [/QUOTE]
I don't know - my mother, sister and best friend are all teachers and this is the only thing they are up in arms about. They haven't said a word about their collective bargaining power being stripped completely (which I do NOT agree with at all). Unions are probably necessary to avoid getting unfairly crammed down all the time but I do think that the teacher's union has gotten way too powerful (at least in NJ).
[quote name='onetrackmind']Also i don't think you realize the amount of time, effort and money goes into being a teacher. When taking all those factors in consideration, teachers are vastly underpaid. [/QUOTE]
I'm sorry - I just don't see it (mostly). This is also why I suggested some sort of sliding scale based on the higher grade you teach. It is not time consuming to "grade" 25 kindergartners' art projects or grade a bunch of math tests to see if kids can add. It's just not. Grading 25 AP History papers? That probably ruins a few nights.
Also, teachers get something that a lot of us never get - true days off. When school is not in session, everyone is off. Everyone. There is nothing going on that teachers will miss when school is closed. You can't put a price on this - most people in the business world are required to be available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, including "vacations" (I've never taken one where I didn't have to work at some point). Yes, I'm jealous.
[quote name='onetrackmind']I can't understand why so many people feel that having a good wage, a good pension, and a good healthcare plan are luxury entitlements.[/QUOTE]
This is where it gets a bit tricky - I think teachers should earn a good wage and have a good healthcare plan. Everyone should. Pensions? I'm not so sure about. Almost no one in the public sector has a pension plan any more. Put in 20 years and then get 80% of you last salary for the rest of your life? Sounds pretty luxurious to me.
Last edited by a moderator:
bread's done