Wisconsin Unions

[AnticorRifling]

I don't know if I agree with that. I've voted for several non republican canidates in the past and I know several democrats who didn't vote for the current president.

[Keller]

If it wasn't a biased news company it would be believable. Unfortunately they pretty much worship socialism and the Dems. Wanna try another poll that has no bias?

If you go to Atlanta, there is a giant statue of Eugene Debs.

True story.

[Firestorm Killa]

I don't know if I agree with that. I've voted for several non republican canidates in the past and I know several democrats who didn't vote for the current president.

Yes you do have people who do their research and vote based on the person(I'm one of them.), but I would be willing to bet most people vote based on party. The last presidential election was pretty much decided by race as well. A record amount of black people turned out to vote in that election and I would bet most of them voted for Obama based on race.

[Warriorbird]

If you go to Atlanta, there is a giant statue of Eugene Debs.

True story.

I want to run for President from prison.

[Alfster]

Do you have that breakdown? Nacho posted something along those lines, but it amounted to 140 million dollars.

Not exactly a "huge chunk" of 3.6 billion.

I missed this thread for a few days. I do not have a breakdown, but it sounds like the actual shortfall for this year is no where near 3.6 billion. It sounds like that's an estimate for in 2 years. Again, I have nothing to back this up with, just what the news is saying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV5LRSZu8GI

I'm hating the fact that Michael Moore showed up. I hate this man with a passion, just waiting on Charlie Sheen to show up and make it a party.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgNuSEZ8CDw

Anyway, he's still a douche. I like this article the most, as it points out the obvious.

http://filterednews.wordpress.com/2011/03/05/20-lies-and-counting-told-by-gov-walker/

A link from that is his letter to employees. At the very least, it's a good read.

http://thewheelerreport.com/releases/February11/0211/0211walkerletter.pdf

[Carl Spackler]

I'm hating the fact that Michael Moore showed up. I hate this man with a passion, just waiting on Charlie Sheen to show up and make it a party.



I'm embarrassed that fat slob wears an MSU hat.

[Parkbandit]

I missed this thread for a few days. I do not have a breakdown, but it sounds like the actual shortfall for this year is no where near 3.6 billion. It sounds like that's an estimate for in 2 years. Again, I have nothing to back this up with, just what the news is saying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV5LRSZu8GI

That was my understanding as well.. that the 3.6 billion was for this year and next.



I'm hating the fact that Michael Moore showed up. I hate this man with a passion, just waiting on Charlie Sheen to show up and make it a party.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgNuSEZ8CDw

Why wouldn't he? This is right down his alley... "Workers of Wisconsin Unite!"

[pabstblueribbon]

Yes you do have people who do their research and vote based on the person(I'm one of them.), but I would be willing to bet most people vote based on party. The last presidential election was pretty much decided by race as well. A record amount of black people turned out to vote in that election and I would bet most of them voted for Obama based on race.

Racist black people. They voted for a black democrat when everyone knows most blacks don't normally vote democrat.

Yep.

[Carl Spackler]

Racist black people. They voted for a black democrat when everyone knows most blacks don't normally vote democrat.

Yep.

Isn't it true that as a race a lesser percentage of blacks vote? A lot more came out just because they were voting for a black guy.

[Keller]

Isn't it true that as a race a lesser percentage of blacks vote? A lot more came out just because they were voting for a black guy.

I wonder if just as many yokkels came out to vote for McCain just because they were voting against a black guy.

[Latrinsorm]

Isn't it true that as a race a lesser percentage of blacks vote? A lot more came out just because they were voting for a black guy.In 2004, 60.0% of the black citizen population voted. In 2008, this number was 64.7%, surpassing the previous high (since 1978) of 60.6% set in 1984. As the popular adage goes, "Ain't nobody blacker than Walter Mondale."

Also seeing increases in percentage of citizen population voting were Asians and Hispanics, with Asians experiencing the highest relative increase.

There is almost no difference between the voting % of black and white populations in Presidential elections.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/socdemo/voting/publications/historical/index.html

[Parkbandit]

In 2004, 60.0% of the black citizen population voted. In 2008, this number was 64.7%, surpassing the previous high (since 1978) of 60.6% set in 1984. As the popular adage goes, "Ain't nobody blacker than Walter Mondale."

Also seeing increases in percentage of citizen population voting were Asians and Hispanics, with Asians experiencing the highest relative increase.

There is almost no difference between the voting % of black and white populations in Presidential elections.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/socdemo/voting/publications/historical/index.html

So, almost 5% more black Americans voted in 2008 that didn't vote in 2004... or almost 2 million more.

Isn't that exactly what Carl was saying?

[Latrinsorm]

Carl's assertion was that a lot more came out "just because they were voting for a black guy". I demonstrated that unusually high black citizen turnout has occurred in the past for extremely white guys, calling into question his characterization of these voters' motives. I also pointed out that blacks did not experience the largest relative increase of any one racial group, offering an alternative motive: people of all races were energized by a charismatic candidate.

[Keller]

Isn't that exactly what Carl was saying?

That was one of his very jumbled thoughts. I think.

[Parkbandit]

Carl's assertion was that a lot more came out "just because they were voting for a black guy". I demonstrated that unusually high black citizen turnout has occurred in the past for extremely white guys, calling into question his characterization of these voters' motives. I also pointed out that blacks did not experience the largest relative increase of any one racial group, offering an alternative motive: people of all races were energized by a charismatic candidate.

If you attempted to prove they didn't vote "just because they were voting for a black guy"... you failed more than he did.

[Carl Spackler]

That was one of his very jumbled thoughts. I think.

Actually it was very clear. I stated I think more blacks came out to vote for Obama because he was black.

[Back]

Actually it was very clear. I stated I think more blacks came out to vote for Obama because he was black.

Captain Obvious?

[Parkbandit]

Captain Obvious?

Yea, that's what I thought.. but then we had Latrinsorm try to disprove it... which was hilarious.

[AnticorRifling]

I wonder if just as many yokkels came out to vote for McCain just because they were voting against a black guy.

They'd vote for him regardless because they love them some rifles. Wait.....that means....oh screw you Keller!

[Back]

It all makes sense. He wants to cripple education in his state so he can keep people stupid enough to vote him into office again. Thats fucking brilliant actually.

[Parkbandit]

It all makes sense. He wants to cripple education in his state so he can keep people stupid enough to vote him into office again. Thats fucking brilliant actually.

Irony.

[AnticorRifling]

Is Illinoissssssssss going thru the same shit right now? I hadn't heard anything about it.

[Parkbandit]

Is Illinoissssssssss going thru the same shit right now? I hadn't heard anything about it.

Why do you have to swing at all the meatballs pitched right down the middle of the plate?

[Warriorbird]

They'd vote for him regardless because they love them some rifles. Wait.....that means....oh screw you Keller!

"Obama's taking our guns!" might be the best thing Obama ever did for the small business/gunshop owner.

[AnticorRifling]

"Obama's taking our guns!" might be the best thing Obama ever did for the small business/gunshop owner.

The run on ammo, or more specifically primers, was the worst part of it. It was a nightmare finding primers at a resonable price, it's still bad but it's getting better.

[NocturnalRob]

The run on ammo, or more specifically primers, was the worst part of it. It was a nightmare finding primers at a resonable price, it's still bad but it's getting better.
Did you already go through your Y2K stockpile?! You must not have planned ahead.

[AnticorRifling]

Did you already go through your Y2K stockpile?! You must not have planned ahead.

During Y2K all of my ammo was purchased by the tax payers.

[Keller]

Actually it was very clear. I stated I think more blacks came out to vote for Obama because he was black.

That was half of it, at least.

[Kembal]

That's because capital gains taxes have exactly NO exclusions, addenda, loopholes and other things. If you invest in X shares of stock and they pay a dividend of Y dollars, you pay capital gains tax rate on Y dollars.

Yes, there are all kinds of accounting tricks you can play about other capital gains taxes and profit vs loss in business and so on but when you come down to it, there aren't exclusions and dependents and minimum earned income credits and so on for reducing capital gains tax burden.

If you believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Hint: Look up Section 1256 of the tax code.

[Keller]

That's because capital gains taxes have exactly NO exclusions, addenda, loopholes and other things. If you invest in X shares of stock and they pay a dividend of Y dollars, you pay capital gains tax rate on Y dollars.

Yes, there are all kinds of accounting tricks you can play about other capital gains taxes and profit vs loss in business and so on but when you come down to it, there aren't exclusions and dependents and minimum earned income credits and so on for reducing capital gains tax burden.

Where do you come up with this shit?

I guess all these people sitting around me billing out between $565 and $950 per hour are just helping people figure out how to maximize their earned income tax credit.

You have said some retarded things in the past, but this might have topped them all. I can't believe I almost missed it.

[Alfster]

(WEAU) - In an 18-1 vote, the Wisconsin Senate approved bill to strip public employees of collective bargaining rights

Republican state senators found a way to move forward and kill collective bargaining for public employees, without Democrats present.

Republicans stripped all financial elements from governor walker's proposal.

That's because the whole bill involved financial matters.

In that instance, the Senate must have 20members ready to vote because it's a fiscal matter and deals with taxpayer money.

But splitting the bill into separate pieces allowed them to pass the collective bargaining parts of the bill, without the need for any more lawmakers to be present.

Many protestors were outside the Capitol. And during the vote, they were being let in.

Since the vote is now over, the Capitol has once again closed.

Watch for updates all evening on WEAU.com.

[Alfster]

Just more proof that this wasn't about the money.

[Tgo01]

Just more proof that this wasn't about the money.

What was it about then?

[Warriorbird]

What was it about then?

Removing a source of Democratic support. Producing the funds to maintain tax cuts (which have pretty much failed for all Republican state governors lately). Softening up public schools by constant funding cuts to prepare the way for charter schools profiteering off the system.

[Tgo01]

Removing a source of Democratic support. Producing the funds to maintain tax cuts (which have pretty much failed for all Republican state governors lately). Softening up public schools by constant funding cuts to prepare the way for charter schools profiteering off the system.

Ah, conspiracy theories.

[Alfster]

The general population right now seems....irate.

Even Republican supporters are running.

[Warriorbird]

Ah, conspiracy theories.

Right, right, because political parties aren't in the business of electioneering.

They've never been.

[Tgo01]

Right, right, because political parties aren't in the business of electioneering.

They've never been.

No, you're right. This is all about Republicans trying to weaken Democratic support. Just like the auto bailouts were all about Democrats strengthening their support.

[Warriorbird]

No, you're right. This is all about Republicans trying to weaken Democratic support. Just like the auto bailouts were all about Democrats strengthening their support.

Why exactly did the governor refuse to bargain after the union agreed to the cuts?

Why were the cuts specifically targeted at unions who hadn't voted for him?

Why is the governor drafting new spending and tax cuts yet cutting education?

It's Virginia, part 2, where the governor got elected and has turned around and crafted a 'surplus' out of shafting education. I pity the idiot teachers who voted for McDonnell in Virginia.

Sure, he might be a simple honest politician who works on just one level, but then again, Congress as a group might also learn to levitate and work on team building exercises.

Given the level of "unions are bad" that's been expressed in the current return us to the 1890's campaign by the Republican Party and Fox et al, unions are low hanging fruit.

It's also a way to bullshit out of actually reforming his state's educational system.

[Alfster]

http://www.wiseye.org/

[Tgo01]

Why were the cuts specifically targeted at unions who hadn't voted for him?

That kind of sums up your whole position doesn't it?

[Warriorbird]

That kind of sums up your whole position doesn't it?

Not really. But you also want to believe that the Governor's solely acting to cut spending.

Some highlights


State aid to schools would plummet by $834 million, or 7.9%, while districts would be prevented from raising property taxes.

He prevents localities from making up shortfalls. He's effectively introduced a sequel to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978) . That's one of the primary fiscal measures that contributed to California's current economic death spiral and the tremendous decline of their education system.

...and


The budget, however, also includes some areas of investment. Walker wants to put $5.7 billion into the state's transportation system.

...and bunches of tax cuts. Because tax cuts will totally solve current economic issues and bring in more revenue. Oh, wait, they haven't since the bubble popped.

[Tgo01]

Let me guess, the transportation union backed him during the election?

[Warriorbird]

Let me guess, the transportation union backed him during the election?

Amusingly enough...

http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/108064274.html

and what exactly do the Koches produce again? Something that works well in cars.

But I understand. Governor Walker is not like every other politician in the country. He acts solely with the state's fiscal and educational welfare in mind.

[Tgo01]

But I understand. Governor Walker is not like every other politician in the country. He acts solely with the state's fiscal and educational welfare in mind.

No no, this is all making a lot of sense. I'm just curious though, is the teacher union in this fight to take a stand against this tyrannical Republican oppression who is bent on weakening Democratic support and paving the way for charter schools to make a profit off the situation? Or are they just in the fight because they want to keep their pension funds and near immunity from being fired?

[Warriorbird]

No no, this is all making a lot of sense. I'm just curious though, is the teacher union in this fight to take a stand against this tyrannical Republican oppression who is bent on weakening Democratic support and paving the way for charter schools to make a profit off the situation? Or are they just in the fight because they want to keep their pension funds and near immunity from being fired?

I see. You're in this discussion because you don't understand academic freedom. I understand that tenure bothers most non academics deeply. It isn't even part of the discussion here. I actually think that there ought to be more provisions to fire teachers for cause. That's one of the actual educational reforms that's being dodged.

Do you have retirement benefits? How would you feel if you lost them arbitrarily to pay for tax cuts?

[Tgo01]

I see. You're in this discussion because you don't understand academic freedom. I understand that tenure bothers most non academics deeply. It isn't even part of the discussion here. I actually think that there ought to be more provisions to fire teachers for cause. That's one of the actual educational reforms that's being dodged.

Do you have retirement benefits? How would you feel if you lost them arbitrarily to pay for tax cuts?

Ah, so this is all about money.

Also I used to work for a company that did cut into the pension fund. I didn't work there long enough for it to affect me though. Guess it only makes national headlines, gets the attention of the president and leads to protests on the state capital when it happens to government employees though.

[Parkbandit]

Do you have retirement benefits? How would you feel if you lost them arbitrarily to pay for tax cuts?

Who paid for the teacher's retirement benefits? Taxpayers.

Who paid for my retirement benefits? Me.

[Warriorbird]

Who paid for the teacher's retirement benefits? Taxpayers.

Who paid for my retirement benefits? Me.

I see. So you think that their retirements are 100% taxpayer funded.

When you worked for Hilton did they not contribute?

Do you want to strip the retirement plans of all other state workers too? Or is it just teachers for some reason? What would that be?

[Parkbandit]

We need to put MORE money into teachers unions... because they are producing results!


The number of schools labeled as "failing" under the nation's No Child Left Behind Act could skyrocket dramatically this year, Education Secretary Arne Duncan said Wednesday.

The Department of Education estimates the percentage of schools not meeting yearly targets for their students' proficiency in in math and reading could jump from 37 to 82 percent as states raise standards in attempts to satisfy the law's mandates.

The 2002 law requires states to set targets aimed at having all students proficient in math and reading by 2014, a standard now viewed as wildly unrealistic.

"No Child Left Behind is broken and we need to fix it now," Duncan said in a statement. "This law has created a thousand ways for schools to fail and very few ways to help them succeed."

Duncan presented the figures at a House education and work force committee hearing, in urging lawmakers to rewrite the Bush-era act. Both Republicans and Democrats agree the law needs to be reformed, though they disagree on issues revolving around the federal role of education and how to turn around failing schools.

A surge in schools not meeting annual growth targets could have various implications. The most severe consequences — interventions that could include closure or replacing staff — would be reserved for those schools where students have been failing to improve for several consecutive years.

Duncan said the law has done well in shining a light on achievement gaps among minority and low-income students, as well as those who are still learning English or have disabilities. But he said the law is loose on goals and narrow on how schools achieve them.

"We should get out of the business of labeling schools as failures and create a new law that is fair and flexible, and focused on the schools and students most at risk," Duncan said.

Russ Whitehurst, director of the Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institute, said some states and districts have dug themselves into a hole by expected greater gains in the final years.

"The reality is coming home that you can't essentially demonstrate very little progress for ten years and then expect all of your progress to occur in the last two or three years," Whitehurst said.

He said some states believed improvement would accelerate as students advanced, creating a "snowball effect," while others put off the heavy lifting to avoid the consequences.

Daria Hall, Education Trust's K-12 policy director, said it was also important to distinguish between schools that don't meet the annual growth benchmark for one year, versus those who have failed to do so for two consecutive years and are labeled as being "in need of improvement."

Both distinctions could mean vastly different outcomes in terms of how many schools are subject to which interventions. The Department of Education was not able to provide data breaking down how many of the 82 percent would be failing to meet yearly goals for one year, versus consecutive years.

Hall said there are many ways states can meet their annual achievement benchmarks, and questioned whether the 82 percent figure took them all into consideration. Amy Wilkins, Education Trust's vice president for government affairs and communications, also noted that schools which are struggling are given various options — contesting Duncan's assessment that the law is tight on means and loose on goals.

"There is an objective finish line with annual finish line targets for everybody," Wilkins said.

Paul Manna, a professor focusing on education policy at the College of William & Mary, noted that while there are specified goals, what is considered "proficient" in math and reading varies by state.

He said the rising number of schools not meeting the benchmarks could become unmanageable.

"There's no way given the resources, the personnel available, to do what would be required, that they'd be able to do it," Manna said.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gPmjfDMN5nHOpeSIZYLwkVfKAHGQ?docId=c7dc0757a fd54b5ca2836c00de44535f

[Warriorbird]

Ah. Right. Let's post an article with a bunch of quotes from charter school advocates and somebody who makes her money off selling standardized testing based fear (a distant relative of mine I might add). Yeah. If you were to attempt something with NAEP numbers, maybe I'd buy it (and those are admittedly not good...you actually could make an argument there). What you've posted is the educational equivalent of a hideously flawed and biased political source. You still need to study harder. You should be better informed as a parent.

No Child Left Behind doesn't really make the unions look bad.

[Parkbandit]

I see. So you think that their retirements are 100% taxpayer funded.

It's not 100%, I think I heard the number 95% being thrown around. With the negotiations this year, that number might be in the 80% area now.



When you worked for Hilton did they not contribute?

They contributed $.50 on the dollar up to 6%. I contributed 10% to my 401K. Do the math.


Do you want to strip the retirement plans of all other state workers too? Or is it just teachers for some reason? What would that be?

I want public employee benefits and pay be more in line with private employee benefits and pay.

[Parkbandit]

Ah. Right. Let's post an article with a bunch of quotes from charter school advocates and somebody who makes her money off selling standardized testing based fear (a distant relative of mine I might add). Yeah. If you were to attempt something with NAEP numbers, maybe I'd buy it (and those are admittedly not good...you actually could make an argument there). What you've posted is the educational equivalent of a hideously flawed and biased political source. You still need to study harder. You should be better informed as a parent.

No Child Left Behind doesn't really make the unions look bad.

82% of schools are failing. I don't think it makes the teacher unions look good.

[Warriorbird]

82% of schools are failing. I don't think it makes the teacher unions look good.

Here's an area where I disagree with Obama. He backs No Child Left Behind. It's STILL not funded properly. The standards are still extremely hazy. NAEP numbers are what you need to judge if you want to judge America versus the rest of the world.

Obama's Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, makes a tremendous amount of money off of charter schools.

Education Trust? Makes money off selling "solutions" to public schools.

Do you see where there might be some problems with your article?

I actually think you DO have something of an argument. Just not with that. At all.

Wisconsin ranks 1st out of all 50 states. 98% of it's students pass. Aw, snap, that union must not be quite so bad after all.

[Alfster]

Wisconsin ranks 1st out of all 50 states. 98% of it's students pass. Aw, snap, that union must not be quite so bad after all.

Unfortunately, not for long.

[Tgo01]

Unfortunately, not for long.

I hear a teachers union is what makes students excel at school.

[Warriorbird]

I hear a teachers union is what makes students excel at school.

I hear education cuts and forbidding the counties to make up the difference are what make students excel at school. Oh wait. That just gives you California.

[Tgo01]

I hear education cuts and forbidding the counties to make up the difference are what make students excel at school. Oh wait. That just gives you California.

This isn't about money remember?

[Warriorbird]

This isn't about money remember?

The implication being the addition of forbidding property tax increases to meet the shortfalls implies that it's even more disingenuous. Keep up, even though I know your efforts to are also disingenuous.

[Tgo01]

The implication being the addition of forbidding property tax increases to meet the shortfalls implies that it's even more disingenuous. Keep up, even though I know your efforts to are also disingenuous.

Right, I forgot, his plan to destroy public schools in favor of profiteering charter schools.

[Warriorbird]

Right, I forgot, his plan to destroy public schools in favor of profiteering charter schools.

What exactly does a locality do, long term, if they can't raise the primary means of paying for public schools? Throw a chilling effect on the folks best capable of explaining the issue, too. That helps.


EDIT:

As an update to PB thinking I somehow need him for validation...

"The state contributes 95%! ZOMG!" was way off. The employee gives 5% of their salary. The state gives 6%. This is higher than many private retirement packages, but not nearly what PB was trying to claim.

[Parkbandit]

As an update to PB thinking I somehow need him for validation...

"The state contributes 95%! ZOMG!" was way off. The employee gives 5% of their salary. The state gives 6%. This is higher than many private retirement packages, but not nearly what PB was trying to claim.

Do you have a source? I was looking, but with all the www.unionssuck.com and wwwunionsareawesome.com, I couldn't find a credible source to find out what it actually was.

And all I am looking for is that public jobs match up with private jobs in both salaries and benefits.

[AnticorRifling]

Did we ever figure out what's going on in Illiniosssss?

[Warriorbird]

Do you have a source? I was looking, but with all the www.unionssuck.com and wwwunionsareawesome.com, I couldn't find a credible source to find out what it actually was.

And all I am looking for is that public jobs match up with private jobs in both salaries and benefits.

Go look on the Wisconsin Retirement System website. Shocker. Terribly laid out, but took me about 5 minutes for an unrelated discussion of it.

[Parkbandit]

As an update to PB thinking I somehow need him for validation...

"The state contributes 95%! ZOMG!" was way off. The employee gives 5% of their salary. The state gives 6%. This is higher than many private retirement packages, but not nearly what PB was trying to claim.

http://walker.wi.gov/journal_media_detail.asp?locid=177&prid=5625

·Public employers contributed almost $1.37 billion to the state’s pension fund in 2009, while employees contributed about $8 million, or about 0.6%. (LFB paper 84 Wisconsin Retirement System, Table 28)

·From 2000 to 2009 taxpayers spent about $12.6 billion on public employee pensions, during the same period public employees contributed $55.4 million. (LFB paper 84 Wisconsin Retirement System, Table 28)

·Wisconsin taxpayers currently make nearly a 100% payment for the employee portion of the public sector pension contribution. Illinois and Indiana taxpayers contribute the entire employee portion as well, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota and Ohio pay 0% of the employee contribution. (State Budget Office Memo 2-9-11)

·Public employees in Wisconsin are vested in the retirement system immediately, while in Illinois it takes 8 years, 10 years in Indiana, 4 years in Iowa, 10 years in Michigan, 3 years in Minnesota, and 5 years in Ohio. (State Budget Office Memo 2-9-11)

[Warriorbird]

Curiously enough... the employee contribution is different for teachers vs public workers as a whole. But teachers are somehow the ones targeted.


Employee-Required Contribution (Deposited in your WRS account)
Employer-Required Contribution (Deposited in the WRS employer reserve)

General Employees and Teachers
5% of salary
6% (includes 1.2%
benefit adjustment contribution)

University pays almost all of it. State teachers the schools do not.

[Stanley Burrell]

Keller's avatar man, this is a lot, of stuff, that maybe I didn't read. A lot. Of.

So, I ask ... you, Warriorbandit:

What would Jimmy Hoffa do?

[IorakeWarhammer]

didn't they breach security at that capitol building in Wis. and now it's like swarming w/ protesters?

[Warriorbird]

Keller's avatar man, this is a lot, of stuff, that maybe I didn't read. A lot. Of.

So, I ask ... you, Warriorbandit:

What would Jimmy Hoffa do?

Get buried in a stadium, yo.

[Stanley Burrell]

Get buried in a stadium, yo.

I knew it.

Also, is this recent union business worse than what happened in California (to teachers) where their income was just truncated by legislation? I kind of forgot how that whole thing even went, but teachers; again, seem to be at the crux of these more recent events? So yeah, is this the worstest?

I don't see it as a big deal, but I feel like I should be irrationally paranoid about it.

[Tgo01]

What exactly does a locality do, long term, if they can't raise the primary means of paying for public schools? Throw a chilling effect on the folks best capable of explaining the issue, too. That helps.

Aren't charter schools non-profit public schools funded by the government? So how is cutting public school funding going to allow these charter schools to take over and make a huge profit?

[crb]

Curiously enough... the employee contribution is different for teachers vs public workers as a whole. But teachers are somehow the ones targeted.



University pays almost all of it. State teachers the schools do not.

People hate teacher unions and government forced monopolies because it affects us.

I don't really give a shit about the performance of the DMV, I never need to go there.

But my kids do go to school (or will, when they get older). I care about that.

I believe competition begits innovation and performance in all things. Teachers unions fight against competition within schools (such as between two teachers for one job) and against competition between schools (their stances against vouchers or charter schools).

That a lack of competition is a bad thing is the reason we have laws against monopolies. This basic premise doesn't take a day off just because we're talking about a Democratic campaign cash cow.

[Warriorbird]

Unfortunately, none of them have any statistically reliable evidence to back this up.

Competition also begets cost cutting. Is that how you want your children treated?

Charter schools are for profit. Who benefits the most out of a business that's for profit? The customers or the stockholders?

"Yes, I'd like my child to have the Walmart education."

[Tgo01]

Unfortunately, none of them have any statistically reliable evidence to back this up.

Competition also begets cost cutting. Is that how you want your children treated?

Charter schools are for profit. Who benefits the most out of a business that's for profit? The customers or the stockholders?

"Yes, I'd like my child to have the Walmart education."

Everything I've read up on says charter schools are funded by public dollars and are non profit. The only thing I found is some charter schools hire for profit businesses to help manage the school.

Oh, I also found opinion pieces from doomsayers claiming charter schools are all for profit and put making a profit ahead of giving students an education.

[Warriorbird]

Everything I've read up on says charter schools are funded by public dollars and are non profit. The only thing I found is some charter schools hire for profit businesses to help manage the school.

Oh, I also found opinion pieces from doomsayers claiming charter schools are all for profit and put making a profit ahead of giving students an education.

How exactly do Amway executives make money from Amway salespeople? They provide all their training materials. I know you're not too obtuse to get it.

The CREDO study

http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/National_Release.pdf

83% do the same or no better than public schools.

On the other hand, if you're in Indiana (Anticor?), I'd suggest that the charter schools there are pretty solid:

http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/INPressReleaseMarch92011.pdf

A big issue with charter schools as a whole is that their quality is WILDLY uneven. They also manage to conveniently avoid most of the NCLB requirements that make many states (Though, not, curiously enough, Wisconsin) look bad.

[Tgo01]

How exactly do Amway executives make money from Amway salespeople? They provide all their training materials. I know you're not too obtuse to get it.

Ah I see. Yet more conspiracy theories. So the governor wants to cut public funding for schools (which means he's cutting Charter school funding) so Charter schools can take over and make a huge profit (even though they are non-profit) by...what exactly are you saying now? They're making a profit by providing training materials and advice to the government in how to set up a Charter school?

[Warriorbird]

Ah I see. Yet more conspiracy theories. So the governor wants to cut public funding for schools (which means he's cutting Charter school funding) so Charter schools can take over and make a huge profit (even though they are non-profit) by...what exactly are you saying now? They're making a profit by providing training materials and advice to the government in how to set up a Charter school?

Two of the people in the particular article originally referenced are part of for profit companies devoted to the charter school movement. I'm not exactly how American capitalism is a conspiracy theory.

But... by all means. It's all about healing the world! It's totally a happy world you live in. Cling to it.

[Tgo01]

Two of the people in the particular article originally referenced are part of for profit companies devoted to the charter school movement.

That's not really answering my question. How are charter schools making a profit? If I read this article is it going to explain it? Or will I just be wasting my time because it's not in there anywhere and it's just something you read into it?

Also a lot of students who go to Charter schools are minorities or come from low income families and here you are rallying against Charter schools. What's wrong man, don't want minorities or low income students to receive an education?

[Carl Spackler]

That's not really answering my question. How are charter schools making a profit? If I read this article is it going to explain it? Or will I just be wasting my time because it's not in there anywhere and it's just something you read into it?

Also a lot of students who go to Charter schools are minorities or come from low income families and here you are rallying against Charter schools. What's wrong man, don't want minorities or low income students to receive an education?

If they educate them they might not believe the democratic bullshit they're continually fed to keep them under the liberal thumb.

[Warriorbird]

That's not really answering my question. How are charter schools making a profit? If I read this article is it going to explain it? Or will I just be wasting my time because it's not in there anywhere and it's just something you read into it?

Also a lot of students who go to Charter schools are minorities or come from low income families and here you are rallying against Charter schools. What's wrong man, don't want minorities or low income students to receive an education?

Profit is typically made through the ability to provide nearly all the materials through limited sourcing RE charter schools.

The biggest "success" of the charter school movement, RE: minorities, the Harlem Success Academy, costs more per student than the New York City public schools do.

EDIT:

In the end, how do I know? Like many things I don't agree with... I'm making money off of for profit education stocks.

http://nextupnetwork.typepad.com/nextedu/ might be helpful.

Note the companies that've gone through mergers through these guys:

http://www.nextadvisorsllc.com/

[Warriorbird]

If they educate them they might not believe the democratic bullshit they're continually fed to keep them under the liberal thumb.

I can't wait to hear what teachers are teaching to "keep minorities under the liberal thumb."

[Kembal]

That's not really answering my question. How are charter schools making a profit? If I read this article is it going to explain it? Or will I just be wasting my time because it's not in there anywhere and it's just something you read into it?

Also a lot of students who go to Charter schools are minorities or come from low income families and here you are rallying against Charter schools. What's wrong man, don't want minorities or low income students to receive an education?

Charter schools, unless they're well developed and have a lot of resources (some of them, not all), cannot develop their own education and training materials. They need to buy them from someone else. That someone else is a for-profit company in most cases.

So it works like this: Government cash flows to charter school, charter school pays usually higher cost for materials than what it costs the state to develop or purchase, for-profit company makes significant profits. Rinse and repeat.

[Tgo01]

Charter schools, unless they're well developed and have a lot of resources (some of them, not all), cannot develop their own education and training materials. They need to buy them from someone else. That someone else is a for-profit company in most cases.

So it works like this: Government cash flows to charter school, charter school pays usually higher cost for materials than what it costs the state to develop or purchase, for-profit company makes significant profits. Rinse and repeat.

So it's not the schools themselves that are making these supposed obscene profits, it's who they outsource their work to? Not quite the same argument as Charter schools are for-profit organizations that value making money at the expense of the students education.

How does cutting public school funding fit into this grand scheme of Charter school 'profiteering'?

[Warriorbird]

So it's not the schools themselves that are making these supposed obscene profits, it's who they outsource their work to? Not quite the same argument as Charter schools are for-profit organizations that value making money at the expense of the students education.

How does cutting public school funding fit into this grand scheme of Charter school 'profiteering'?

How is it different if the same people run both?

"Oh, we do need to put more funds into education! Those public schools are so bad. We can be innovative conservative supporters of business for the 21st century. Let's build some charter schools! See! We really love education minus oversight and teacher's unions."

[Tgo01]

How is it different if the same people run both?

The same people run Charter schools and the companies they resource their work out to?


"Oh, we do need to put more funds into education! Those public schools are so bad. We can be innovative conservative supporters of business for the 21st century. Let's build some charter schools! See! We really love education minus oversight and teacher's unions."

No oversight? Many Charter schools have a contract with the state that they will be shut down if their students do not perform well. Normal public schools stay open even if their students perform horribly.

[Warriorbird]

The same people run Charter schools and the companies they resource their work out to?

In Arne Duncan's case, yes. (Oh snap, I just criticized an Obama Administration official!)



No oversight? Many Charter schools have a contract with the state that they will be shut down if their students do not perform well. Normal public schools stay open even if their students perform horribly.

Awful convenient saying how bad public schools perform on NCLB when nearly 3/4 of charters don't have to test under NCLB.

I hedge my bets though. Go on continuing to believe that they're doing it "for the kids" or "for the budget" and I'll keep on making money on the sector. Ah, capitalism. It's super moral.

Those bad bad teachers unions! It's all their fault!

[Tgo01]

Awful convenient saying how bad public schools perform on NCLB when nearly 3/4 of charters don't have to test under NCLB.

I haven't even mentioned No Child Left Behind.


Those bad bad teachers unions! It's all their fault!

What's their fault now?

[Warriorbird]

I haven't even mentioned No Child Left Behind.



What's their fault now?

Parkbandit did quite prominently, as did Arne Duncan in the article.

NAEP testing is problematic because many charters don't last long enough for it to be really significant. That's another problem I have with them.

[Deathravin]

http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/reference/9.1.80.html


They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost. They remind us that freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.

[Parkbandit]

Parkbandit did quite prominently, as did Arne Duncan in the article.

One trick pony, at it again. So out of 113 of my posts in this thread, I linked an article that mentioned testing results of NCLB. How exactly is that mentioning it "quite prominently" again?

Seriously, Captain Hyperbole, time to hang up the tights and cape...

[Warriorbird]

One trick pony, at it again. So out of 113 of my posts in this thread, I linked an article that mentioned testing results of NCLB. How exactly is that mentioning it "quite prominently" again?

Seriously, Captain Hyperbole, time to hang up the tights and cape...

I'm sorry that you haven't studied this very much.

The ENTIRE article was based on the notion that because of poor NCLB results teachers' unions were problematic.

Of course you posted it without looking at Wisconsin's rankings too (they're #1 for now).

You live in extremes so much you can't understand when folks aren't using them. It must be difficult.

[Tgo01]

The ENTIRE article was based on the notion that because of poor NCLB results teachers' unions were problematic.

Of course you posted it without looking at Wisconsin's rankings too (they're #1 for now).

Doesn't the US as a whole do poorly on tests compared to the rest of the world? Saying a state is first compared to the rest of the states isn't really saying a whole lot.

[Warriorbird]

Doesn't the US as a whole do poorly on tests compared to the rest of the world? Saying a state is first compared to the rest of the states isn't really saying a whole lot.

Which is the point I actually suggested he make. Our NAEP scores are low. Unfortunately, it's very difficult to get reliable NAEP data on charters, given as most of them end up closing before it makes any sort of sense.

[Parkbandit]

I'm sorry that you haven't studied this very much.

The ENTIRE article was based on the notion that because of poor NCLB results teachers' unions were problematic.

Of course you posted it without looking at Wisconsin's rankings too (they're #1 for now).

You live in extremes so much you can't understand when folks aren't using them. It must be difficult.

So 1 out of 113 posts I made in this thread equates to "prominently" in your mind... awesome.

Either you are still playing the retarded role of Captain Hyperbole, or you simply don't understand the definition of the word "prominently".

[Warriorbird]

So 1 out of 113 posts I made in this thread equates to "prominently" in your mind... awesome.

Either you are still playing the retarded role of Captain Hyperbole, or you simply don't understand the definition of the word "prominently".

I don't know. I considered it more actually debatable than your attempts at sniping.

[~Rocktar~]

Bet you thought I had forgotten this, huh? It's more likely, that you wish I had forgotten it. Stop dodging.


You just suggested that cutting funds would somehow make education "more efficient." If the only goal is reducing the state budget deficit, why not accept the union agreeing to the financial terms? It isn't the only goal, clearly.

And what does it not being the only goal have to do with anything? The original question follows in case you forgot. There is ample proof that reducing retirement contributions will cut costs, you have implied many times that more pay will improve the system, my question was simple, prove it.


Where's the proof that paying more will do anything to improve the system?

Then there was this gem of an exchange:



Quote:Why are tax cuts for corporations more valuable than properly paying for education?

Why are the two mutually exclusive in your mind? Why do you nearly always focus on attacking others and punishing "the rich" rather than actually addressing the glaring problems with the systems in place? Why do you chose this form of action in all cases even when it is and has been proven ineffective in virtually all cases regarding government run programs at all levels and for all purposes?

To which you replied with this lovely distraction, again dodging the question.


I don't see not making tax cuts as "punishing" the rich or even attacking them. Not making tax cuts actually helps states avoid becoming California, with no revenue AND massive expensives. Privatization is fundamentally a failure in nearly every aspect.

Your only response to my question was your erroneous assertion that you don't see not making tax cuts as punishing the rich. I didn't ask about tax cuts, I asked why you thought the two must be mutually exclusive and why you always move to attack those you see as "rich". I also didn't mention anything about privatization. Obviously I am asking too much for you to focus on the question and not spout a bunch of vitriolic bullshit as a distraction with no backing.

Lastly, we have the lovely retort to the exchange:



Quote:Is punitively attacking groups that did not politically support you a good way for a state governor to govern?

Is bankrupting the country to reward those unions that supported you politically a good way for the President to run the country?

To which you replied:


The biggest boost to unions in recent times is Citizens United vs FEC which was enacted by a whole bunch of Republican Supreme Court justices. Whoops. If you mean the specifically automotive bailout? There's one with much worse results and not just Democratic fingerprints all over it.

Which has nothing what so ever to do with what I asked and again is simply spewings in an attempt to distract.

So again, I put it to you directly and simply:

Where's the proof that paying more into the current education system will do anything to improve the system or results?

Why do you nearly always focus on attacking others and punishing "the rich" rather than actually addressing the issue at hand? Why do you chose this form of action in all cases even when it is and has been proven ineffective regarding government run programs at all levels, for all purposes and in virtually all cases ?

If attacking groups that didn't support your election politically isn't, in your view, a good way to run a state, then why is bankrupting a country to support the groups/unions that did support your election a good way to run the country?

[Warriorbird]

Bet you thought I had forgotten this, huh? It's more likely, that you wish I had forgotten it. Stop dodging.



And what does it not being the only goal have to do with anything? The original question follows in case you forgot. There is ample proof that reducing retirement contributions will cut costs, you have implied many times that more pay will improve the system, my question was simple, prove it.



Then there was this gem of an exchange:



To which you replied with this lovely distraction, again dodging the question.



Your only response to my question was your erroneous assertion that you don't see not making tax cuts as punishing the rich. I didn't ask about tax cuts, I asked why you thought the two must be mutually exclusive and why you always move to attack those you see as "rich". I also didn't mention anything about privatization. Obviously I am asking too much for you to focus on the question and not spout a bunch of vitriolic bullshit as a distraction with no backing.

Lastly, we have the lovely retort to the exchange:



To which you replied:



Which has nothing what so ever to do with what I asked and again is simply spewings in an attempt to distract.

So again, I put it to you directly and simply:

Where's the proof that paying more into the current education system will do anything to improve the system or results?

Why do you nearly always focus on attacking others and punishing "the rich" rather than actually addressing the issue at hand? Why do you chose this form of action in all cases even when it is and has been proven ineffective regarding government run programs at all levels, for all purposes and in virtually all cases ?

If attacking groups that didn't support your election politically isn't, in your view, a good way to run a state, then why is bankrupting a country to support the groups/unions that did support your election a good way to run the country?

Nobody asked to pay more. The union actually agreed to the pay cut provisions. You might have missed that amidst flipping out. I didn't think that was even in dispute. They didn't agree to giving up collecting bargaining, yet Walker refused to even accept any hint of compromise and ultimately merely passed the provision removing collective bargaining.

The cuts came amidst the notion that an "emergency" 100+ million was needed or else jobs would have to be removed. Then, however, Walker passed a provision that prevents counties from doing any funding measures to address those job losses... and the fact that, minus his tax cuts, the funds would not have been needed.

Much like with Parkbandit it might help you to study a timeline of events that didn't come from a conservative news aggregator.

[~Rocktar~]

Nobody asked to pay more. The union actually agreed to the pay cut provisions. You might have missed that amidst flipping out. I didn't think that was even in dispute. They didn't agree to giving up collecting bargaining, yet Walker refused to even accept any hint of compromise and ultimately merely passed the provision removing collective bargaining.

Again, you did not answer the question. You have heavily implied throughout this thread that paying more is needed to improve education, and you can't back it up. This isn't "flipping out" this is rational debate and holding you accountable for your diarrhea of the mouth.


The cuts came amidst the notion that an "emergency" 100+ million was needed or else jobs would have to be removed. Then, however, Walker passed a provision that prevents counties from doing any funding measures to address those job losses... and the fact that, minus his tax cuts, the funds would not have been needed.

No, the provision is there to not raise taxes, an economic suicide pill in this environment. Not able to raise taxes does not equal being prevented from doing anything. Again, dodge away and spew while having nothing to back it up.


Much like with Parkbandit it might help you to study a timeline of events that didn't come from a conservative news aggregator.

Much like most children when faced with a question of self incrimination, you need to stop trying to dance, dodge, avoid and distract and simply admit that you have been spewing bullshit right and left, have not one shred of real argument, debate or evidence to back it up and just want to raise taxes on "the rich" to assuage your guilty, self loathing, Liberal/Socialist conscience in a time honored tradition of tax and spend death spiral.

[Warriorbird]

Not less does not equal more. Shall I repeat it five more times?

Tax cuts have actually FAILED on a state level during this crisis.

I clarified but you're trapped in talk radio land. I'm sorry you're not able to get outside your siege mentality.

Good luck. Maybe someday you can actually reach political pragmatism. I think the Republican Party is going to have an internal war between folks with an intellectual basis and the rest of you all. It'd serve you better if you made peace but I certainly won't mind if you don't.

[~Rocktar~]

Not less does not equal more. Shall I repeat it five more times?

Tax cuts have actually FAILED on a state level during this crisis.

I clarified but you're trapped in talk radio land. I'm sorry you're not able to get outside your siege mentality.

Good luck. Maybe someday you can actually reach political pragmatism. I think the Republican Party is going to have an internal war between folks with an intellectual basis and the rest of you all. It'd serve you better if you made peace but I certainly won't mind if you don't.


Still no answer.

You can color me not surprised.

[Firestorm Killa]

Not less does not equal more. Shall I repeat it five more times?

Tax cuts have actually FAILED on a state level during this crisis.


I am curious as to how tax cuts have failed since we have had no Tax cuts. Yes they extended the Bush Tax rates, but it's not a tax cut when rates remain the same. Actually technically during the crisis tax's have gone up. Especially on energy(right now we pay an average of $1 in taxes for ever gallon of gas) and because of inflation(essentially a hidden tax).

[Parkbandit]

I don't know. I considered it more actually debatable than your attempts at sniping.

You may have just identified your problem. You create a debate position that was never there so, in your mind, you can actually "win" the debate. Take it to the extreme and you can beat it!

Unfortunately for you, no one is suggesting anything close to the extreme you are posting..

No one is "prominently" mentioning the NCLB. In fact, you have probably mentioned it more than anyone.

No one is suggesting that we go back to the 1890's prior to unions.

No one is suggesting we force people to become Republicans.

No one is suggesting that billionaires have it so bad.


You have a problem.. it's been identified... at least try to not look so foolish.

[AnticorRifling]

People hate teacher unions and government forced monopolies because it affects us.

I don't really give a shit about the performance of the DMV, I never need to go there.

But my kids do go to school (or will, when they get older). I care about that.

I believe competition begits innovation and performance in all things. Teachers unions fight against competition within schools (such as between two teachers for one job) and against competition between schools (their stances against vouchers or charter schools).

That a lack of competition is a bad thing is the reason we have laws against monopolies. This basic premise doesn't take a day off just because we're talking about a Democratic campaign cash cow.

You realize the union allows the teachers a voice in picking out things like curriculum otherwise they're get a vanilla set of books. So they'll lose that ability to tailor education based upon what they're seeing in their environment. What works for demographic A might not be the best choice for demographic C.

I don't like charter schools as they operate right now because of several loop hole advantages they get compared to public schools so if they want my money they should follow the same rules. Until they require ALL their teachers to have a license and proper education/continued education (that's the biggest issue there are others) they shouldn't be getting funding when the public schools are requiring it.

I still believe the biggest problem with education is the parents. If you aren't working with your kids from 0-5 it's your fault they are behind and fucked. Blaming the teachers is the easy out for people who don't want to believe their lack of involvement, discipline and education is the reason their kids a waste of space. We see it on a daily basis you send home a note concerning a kids progress/performance/attitude/etc and get no response until that note says "retention" then holy shit why aren't you teaching my perfect, wonderful, snowflake baby it must be YOUR fault....If I ever brought a note home from school it was answered on the spot because my parents gave a damn.

The pussification of America has some nasty effects, education is just now starting to see it.

[Warriorbird]

You realize the union allows the teachers a voice in picking out things like curriculum otherwise they're get a vanilla set of books. So they'll lose that ability to tailor education based upon what they're seeing in their environment. What works for demographic A might not be the best choice for demographic C.

I don't like charter schools as they operate right now because of several loop hole advantages they get compared to public schools so if they want my money they should follow the same rules. Until they require ALL their teachers to have a license and proper education/continued education (that's the biggest issue there are others) they shouldn't be getting funding when the public schools are requiring it.

I still believe the biggest problem with education is the parents. If you aren't working with your kids from 0-5 it's your fault they are behind and fucked. Blaming the teachers is the easy out for people who don't want to believe their lack of involvement, discipline and education is the reason their kids a waste of space. We see it on a daily basis you send home a note concerning a kids progress/performance/attitude/etc and get no response until that note says "retention" then holy shit why aren't you teaching my perfect, wonderful, snowflake baby it must be YOUR fault....If I ever brought a note home from school it was answered on the spot because my parents gave a damn.

The pussification of America has some nasty effects, education is just now starting to see it.

Your kids are going to be just fine. Excellent post.

[Deathravin]

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml


On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the full text of which appears in the following pages. Following this historic act the Assembly called upon all Member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and "to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories."

Article 23.

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

[Back]

Is there a parallel of similarity with Wisconsin and the NFL?

[~Rocktar~]

You realize the union allows the teachers a voice in picking out things like curriculum otherwise they're get a vanilla set of books. So they'll lose that ability to tailor education based upon what they're seeing in their environment. What works for demographic A might not be the best choice for demographic C.

I don't like charter schools as they operate right now because of several loop hole advantages they get compared to public schools so if they want my money they should follow the same rules. Until they require ALL their teachers to have a license and proper education/continued education (that's the biggest issue there are others) they shouldn't be getting funding when the public schools are requiring it.

I still believe the biggest problem with education is the parents. If you aren't working with your kids from 0-5 it's your fault they are behind and fucked. Blaming the teachers is the easy out for people who don't want to believe their lack of involvement, discipline and education is the reason their kids a waste of space. We see it on a daily basis you send home a note concerning a kids progress/performance/attitude/etc and get no response until that note says "retention" then holy shit why aren't you teaching my perfect, wonderful, snowflake baby it must be YOUR fault....If I ever brought a note home from school it was answered on the spot because my parents gave a damn.

The pussification of America has some nasty effects, education is just now starting to see it.


While I agree with a lot of what you have said here, I would like to point out that a lot of public schools have unlicensed teachers and those without the necessary continuing education due to the general shortage of qualified teachers. In addition, I am pretty sure that just because you have a license and continuing eduction as a teacher, it doesn't prevent you from being a scumbag, derelict or retired in place.

[AnticorRifling]

While I agree with a lot of what you have said here, I would like to point out that a lot of public schools have unlicensed teachers and those without the necessary continuing education due to the general shortage of qualified teachers. In addition, I am pretty sure that just because you have a license and continuing eduction as a teacher, it doesn't prevent you from being a scumbag, derelict or retired in place.

I will agree with you on the fact that having the teachers license and continued education part but I've yet to see an unlicensed teacher in a public school. Does that mean they don't exist? No, of course not, since I haven't been to every public school in America but I would bet my next two pay checks that the percentage of unlicensed teachers is far, far less in public schools as compared to public schools.

[Firestorm Killa]

Does that mean they don't exist? No, of course not, since I haven't been to every public school in America but I would bet my next two pay checks that the percentage of unlicensed teachers is far, far less in public schools as compared to public schools.

In public schools as compared to public schools? makes no sense. But whatever. I take it to mean private vs public. Private education is better imho anyways. No bias on history usually. I remember when I attended public school and one of my teachers swore up and down that Lincoln was a Democrat. Lol.

Anyways here is some news from Wisconsin on the unions. Apparently they are threatening small businesses to join them or else.
http://www.620wtmj.com/shows/charliesykes/117764004.html?blog=y

[Carl Spackler]

In public schools as compared to public schools? makes no sense. But whatever. I take it to mean private vs public. Private education is better imho anyways. No bias on history usually. I remember when I attended public school and one of my teachers swore up and down that Lincoln was a Democrat. Lol.

Anyways here is some news from Wisconsin on the unions. Apparently they are threatening small businesses to join them or else.
http://www.620wtmj.com/shows/charliesykes/117764004.html?blog=y

Fucking scumbags.

[Parkbandit]

Anyways here is some news from Wisconsin on the unions. Apparently they are threatening small businesses to join them or else.
http://www.620wtmj.com/shows/charliesykes/117764004.html?blog=y


In the event that you cannot support this effort to save collective bargaining, please be advised that the undersigned will publicly and formally boycott the goods and services provided by your company. However, if you join us, we will do everything in our power to publicly celebrate your partnership in the fight to preserve the right of public employees to be heard at the bargaining table. Wisconsin’s public employee unions serve to protect and promote equality and fairness in the workplace. We hope you will stand with us and publicly share that ideal.


Excellent example of what's wrong with unions today.

[Warriorbird]

Chances of

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Xn_O-mM2sFk/SQD1wVGtehI/AAAAAAAAB6I/ETVtJ6tZzjc/s400/todd.JPG?

EDIT:

Hmm. The bank executives were Walker's second largest source of campaign funds. The bank also got a large amount of TARP money (still unpaid) and is hardly the small business it is touted as in the spiral of the conservative blogosphere.

[Parkbandit]

Chances of

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Xn_O-mM2sFk/SQD1wVGtehI/AAAAAAAAB6I/ETVtJ6tZzjc/s400/todd.JPG?

EDIT:

Hmm. The bank executives were Walker's second largest source of campaign funds. The bank also got a large amount of TARP money (still unpaid) and is hardly the small business it is touted as in the spiral of the conservative blogosphere.

So, you contend that the letter is fabricated?

[Warriorbird]

So, you contend that the letter is fabricated?

That would be a no. I do contend that the people who claimed it was sent to a small business (Nobody here, and not TheBlaze, even....just some talk radio types) are full of shit, however. These folks got close to 2 billion from the bailout.

[Alfster]

http://www.unitedwisconsin.com/

[~Rocktar~]

I think this is an excellent explanation of the situation in Wisconsin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4oJlseUFCI

BTW, what is with the chick that got beat up, was that supposed to have happened at a protest or something?

[Firestorm Killa]

That would be a no. I do contend that the people who claimed it was sent to a small business (Nobody here, and not TheBlaze, even....just some talk radio types) are full of shit, however. These folks got close to 2 billion from the bailout.

The link I posted with the letter was from a local news station. Sorry you can't click to read that it wasn't the blaze.

[Parkbandit]

That would be a no. I do contend that the people who claimed it was sent to a small business (Nobody here, and not TheBlaze, even....just some talk radio types) are full of shit, however. These folks got close to 2 billion from the bailout.

So, you are debating something that no one else here is debating?

Do you agree with the tactic that is being used here by unions?

[Warriorbird]

So, you are debating something that no one else here is debating?

Do you agree with the tactic that is being used here by unions?

I understand that you think they should

A. not have collective bargaining

B. simply give up

For some reason I'm not so sure they see it that way. I also rather doubt they're seriously considering any of our input into the matter.

Personally, I'd have focused more of the appeal on citizens of Wisconsin. But, then again, going after a politician's largest donors is pretty time honored in politics as a whole.

[Parkbandit]

I understand that you think they should

A. not have collective bargaining

B. simply give up

For some reason I'm not so sure they see it that way. I also rather doubt they're seriously considering any of our input into the matter.

Personally, I'd have focused more of the appeal on citizens of Wisconsin. But, then again, going after a politician's largest donors is pretty time honored in politics as a whole.

Why did you bother quoting me if you weren't going to answer the question:

Do you agree with the tactic that is being used here by unions?

[Warriorbird]

Why did you bother quoting me if you weren't going to answer the question:

Do you agree with the tactic that is being used here by unions?

I'm sorry that you have difficulty with reading comprehension. I said that I'd have focused my effort in a different area. But, unlike you and Backlash, I don't think I'm a pundit. I'm not going to second guess folks who are essentially professional political strategists too hard. I think they'd be better suited attempting to mobilize angry parents to do the work, but I see why they'd choose that route too.

Locally, the high school that will close (due to Bob McDonell's effort to slash education) is a huge black eye to Republicans, especially when his sister teaches in the area. But, then again, none of them can protest even larger cuts than Wisconsin, because they've never been allowed collective bargaining or any sort of freedom. They don't have a union to back them up.

"But, but, unions are doing mean things to Wisconsin's biggest bank!"

[Parkbandit]

I'm sorry that you have difficulty with reading comprehension. I said that I'd have focused my effort in a different area.

LULWUT?

You can't answer a simple question?

That's hilarious.



But, unlike you and Backlash, I don't think I'm a pundit.

Please link me a quote of me claiming that I am a pundit.

Oh, one trick pony... at it again.

FYI: I'm pretty sure you could actually find quotes of me making fun of Backlash for making such a claim... so it's actually the direct opposite of what you suggest.

PS - You don't have to be a pundit to know the difference between right and wrong... you just have to have the smallest amount of courage. It's not even that difficult, given the union bosses probably don't read this forum.



I'm not going to second guess folks who are essentially professional political strategists too hard.

Hilarious x2 You don't want to second guess them.. but have no problem second guessing anyone you disagree with. Awesome.


I think they'd be better suited attempting to mobilize angry parents to do the work, but I see why they'd choose that route too.

One thing unions do... agitate and organize.

[Warriorbird]

Again, I'm sorry about your comprehension trouble. If it were MY call I'd have focused more on parent mobilization. It isn't though, and I live in a state where unions are largely forbidden, so I don't really have a frame of reference for judging their strategy.

[Parkbandit]

Again, I'm sorry about your comprehension trouble. If it were MY call I'd have focused more on parent mobilization. It isn't though, and I live in a state where unions are largely forbidden, so I don't really have a frame of reference for judging their strategy.

It was a simple yes or no question.

Either you believe that blackmailing a company (even if it's an evil bank... ala Backlash) to bend to your political wishes is right or it's wrong.

Pretty simple.

[Warriorbird]

So you consider that blackmail? Tell us more, councilor.

[Parkbandit]

So you consider that blackmail? Tell us more, councilor.

If the union's demands aren't met by the businesses they sent this fax/mail to, then the union will boycott the businesses.

What else would you call that?

[Warriorbird]

It doesn't deal with the revelation of personal information so it is not blackmail. Boycotts are not unlawful, so it is not extortion.

[Firestorm Killa]

It doesn't deal with the revelation of personal information so it is not blackmail. Boycotts are not unlawful, so it is not extortion.

So you agree with government sector unions boycotting private businesses? Funny. You do know most Private sector unions have come out against public sector unions as well right?

Just so you know this also happened in Russia just before the communist revolution there.

EDIT: It is unlawful for public sector unions to strike which is essentially what the teacher's union up in there in Wisconsin did.

[Parkbandit]

It doesn't deal with the revelation of personal information so it is not blackmail. Boycotts are not unlawful, so it is not extortion.

So what would you call it? And is it wrong or right to do?

Two very simple questions.

[Warriorbird]

I'd call it 'a boycott.'

They have a long history in America. In this free country people can choose not to buy things because a company performs actions that displease them.

I understand you're not a big fan of individuals resisting companies but it's hardly like the first time this has ever happened.

I mean, you're almost suggesting that people HAVE to bank at M&I at this point. That sounds almost... Obaman.

[Parkbandit]

I'd call it 'a boycott.'

They have a long history in America. In this free country people can choose not to buy things because a company performs actions that displease them.

I'm fine with the individual doing that. I'm not fine with a union doing it for the sole purpose of extortion, as in this case.




I understand you're not a big fan of individuals resisting companies but it's hardly like the first time this has ever happened.

You really are a one trick pony.

Show me where I've not been a big fan of individuals resisting companies? One day, you will learn to debate people for their actual stands.. not for stands you have created in your mind.



I mean, you're almost suggesting that people HAVE to bank at M&I at this point. That sounds almost... Obaman.

One trick pony^2

Show me where I came remotely close to suggesting that people have to bank at M&I.

Is it that difficult for you to actually debate someone without resorting to creating their viewpoint?

You have a good imagination.. but a terrible grasp of reality.

[Warriorbird]

I'm deeply surprised that you think boycotts ought to be illegal. I mean you really proved that I was off the mark there.

Would a boycott not have to involve more than one person to be effective?

[Firestorm Killa]

I'd call it 'a boycott.'

They have a long history in America.

Private sector unions yes. Public sector less then 50 years. There is a big difference between the two. The public sector unions are more like a political entity trying to impose their views on everyone else(Typically Communism see AFL-CIO and SEIU for examples of this), by boycotting politicians, even though they are a minority of the population. Essentially they make public policy through the Democraps and in exchange the democraps get 'donations'.

[Alfster]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/13/wi-repub-lives-outside-district-with-mistress-says-wife/


el o el

[Warriorbird]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/13/wi-repub-lives-outside-district-with-mistress-says-wife/


el o el

Ha ha ha.

[Parkbandit]

I'm deeply surprised that you think boycotts ought to be illegal. I mean you really proved that I was off the mark there.

Would a boycott not have to involve more than one person to be effective?

Where did I post that I believe that boycotts ought to be illegal?

Seriously, is it an English problem or is your imagination so over active that you get confused with the actual debate points?

Stop being a retarded, one trick pony.

[Warriorbird]

Where did I post that I believe that boycotts ought to be illegal?

Seriously, is it an English problem or is your imagination so over active that you get confused with the actual debate points?

Stop being a retarded, one trick pony.


I'm fine with the individual doing that. I'm not fine with a union doing it for the sole purpose of extortion, as in this case.

Extortion IS illegal.

So far we pretty much have you throwing a lot of insults to the extent of your limited "yay corporations! boo individuals banding together!" point of view. I didn't actually expect more. The rest is pretty much in your head. I'm glad it makes you happy.

[Parkbandit]

Extortion IS illegal.

I murdered a fly today. That's murder. Murder is illegal. ZOMG I WANT TO LEGALIZE MURDER!!!



So far we pretty much have you throwing a lot of insults to the extent of your limited "yay corporations! boo individuals banding together!" point of view. I didn't actually expect more. The rest is pretty much in your head. I'm glad it makes you happy.

You made the comment that if I stopped "insulting" you that you would stop fabricating my positions.

That hasn't happened yet, dumbfuck.

[Warriorbird]

I've seen a curious lack in actual stands and a vast amount of concern trolling. You're seemingly for the governor's plan to remove collective bargaining (curiously it occurred without the budget cut, which I assume both of us would be for) yet you somehow feel that unions will still have a reason to exist yet then when one uses a relatively traditional tactic in America it is "extortion."

And unions are apparently "bad" yet the union here is presently the number 1 state in the country by the very benchmark you posted in this thread so I'm hardly convinced.

What are your actual positions?

[Parkbandit]

I've seen a curious lack in actual stands and a vast amount of concern trolling. You're seemingly for the governor's plan to remove collective bargaining (curiously it occurred without the budget cut, which I assume both of us would be for) yet you somehow feel that unions will still have a reason to exist yet then when one uses a relatively traditional tactic in America it is "extortion."

And unions are apparently "bad" yet the union here is presently the number 1 state in the country by the very benchmark you posted in this thread so I'm hardly convinced.

What are your actual positions?

Why don't you do what you do.. just make them up? Perhaps the reason you can't seem to remember mine are because you are too busy creating them in your imagination?

My positions are clearly articulated throughout this thread and through many others threads on this forum. I've never been shy to say I think unions had their place in our history, but now are nothing more than a fundraising arm of the DNC. PS - That's double for public employee unions.

[Atlanteax]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/13/wi-repub-lives-outside-district-with-mistress-says-wife/

el o el

Ooohh... "Persuasion Partners" ... mistresses are probably adept at that...

[Atlanteax]

This seems to sum up the situation in Wisconsin...

http://cagle.com/working/110311/asay.jpg

[Firestorm Killa]

Teacher's union leader calling Wisconsin a 'revolution', wants to learn from socialists, and being Republican is a pathology. Can we say communists? I know you can Warriorbird.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiIAltQphcI&feature=player_embedded

[crb]

Boycotts should be legal, and they are a legitimate way of expression opinions.

However... I also think business owners should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. That would be the flip side of the same coin, alas...

The fact is if some big liberal group said "We're boycotting McDonalds for xyz" a big conservative group would announce a campaign to eat at Mcdonalds 3 times a week. In the end it is more bark than bite.

Now the shit that was done with Prop 8 in california, that intimidation, vandalism, etc. That is pretty much terrorism (defined as politically motivated violence meant to spread fear), and needs to be stopped.

[Warriorbird]

Teacher's union leader calling Wisconsin a 'revolution', wants to learn from socialists, and being Republican is a pathology. Can we say communists? I know you can Warriorbird.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiIAltQphcI&feature=player_embedded

Nah. I'd say pretty much standard partisan hackery.

Don't forget that Republicans are the party that suggested that Democrats are "Islamofascists."

Having actually seen the wreckage of Communism up close it's something far different entirely. Every time people lay a false charge of it it's a "Fuck you." to the people who really suffered.


However... I also think business owners should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. That would be the flip side of the same coin, alas...

I'm sort of anti segregation. If the customer violates reasonable posted rules though, I'm all in favor of pretty broad exclusions.

[Firestorm Killa]

Nah. I'd say pretty much standard partisan hackery.

Don't forget that Republicans are the party that suggested that Democrats are "Islamofascists."

Having actually seen the wreckage of Communism up close it's something far different entirely. Every time people lay a false charge of it it's a "Fuck you." to the people who really suffered.



I'm sort of anti segregation. If the customer violates reasonable posted rules though, I'm all in favor of pretty broad exclusions.

Oh so you were there during the communist revolution in Cuba, or Russia, or china. doubtful.

[AnticorRifling]

I heard the wreckage only happened during the revolutions and there was no lasting damage/wreckage to witness. Excellent post FK...

[Deathravin]

http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/RallT/2011/RallT20110314_low.jpg

[Atlanteax]

Odd, you do not see the general public criticizing rescue workers...

[AnticorRifling]

They only want to blame teachers so they don't get blamed for being fail parents.


I went to a public forum last night it was state senators, representatives, folks from the DoE, teacher's union, etc. There was some good discussion from both sides of the aisle and I was please at the display of cooperation if nothing else (I had to leave a bit early to pick up the kids and get them in bed so I'm not sure how it ended).

[Firestorm Killa]

I heard the wreckage only happened during the revolutions and there was no lasting damage/wreckage to witness. Excellent post FK...

Perhaps I should clarify a bit. There was wreckage throughout the entire history of communism, but the communist revolutions started with the unions calling for revolutions etc. Just like the unions are doing now, not just in Wisconsin, but other states as well. You see this when Andy Stern former head of SEIU saying 'Workers of the World unite.' the Communist Slogan. And of course Trumpka head of the AFL-CIO calling for revolutions etc. Here is just a little bit of Trumpka stuff.
http://www.red-alerts.com/intel/afl-cio-president-trumpka-outlines-unions-revolutionary-communist-plan/

[AnticorRifling]

Wow that site is a turd. It bothers me when people get their information from sites like that. Sweet ads for stocking up on water and MREs though.

[Firestorm Killa]

Odd, you do not see the general public criticizing rescue workers...

It's not the Workers people are talking about. It's not the teachers. Unions are a private business, it is their bosses and people who work in the union itself. When people say unions they are not talking about those who pay dues for membership.

[AnticorRifling]

It's not the Workers people are talking about. It's not the teachers. Unions are a private business, it is their bosses and people who work in the union itself. When people say unions they are not talking about those who pay dues for membership.

Really? Because people seem to focus a lot on what the workers get out of that union so I think what you're saying is a dangerous assumption of what people get up in arms about.

[Firestorm Killa]

Wow that site is a turd. It bothers me when people get their information from sites like that. Sweet ads for stocking up on water and MREs though.

Well just bing Richard Trumpka and alot will come up. You also get some links on his meeting last year with the Communist party usa. But hey I am sure you keep up on this stuff.

[Firestorm Killa]

Really? Because people seem to focus a lot on what the workers get out of that union so I think what you're saying is a dangerous assumption of what people get up in arms about.

It's the unions and politicians(Democrats most noticibly) that bargained for those benefits and salaries that the teachers and other public employees get that taxpayers can't afford to pay. Essentially the public employees were lied to.

[AnticorRifling]

I would keep up on it but my foil hat is in the cleaners.

[Firestorm Killa]

I would keep up on it but my foil hat is in the cleaners.

It does not surprise me that you would defend public sector unions. To each their own.

[AnticorRifling]

It's the unions and politicians(Democrats most noticibly) that bargained for those benefits and salaries that the teachers and other public employees get that taxpayers can't afford to pay. Essentially the public employees were lied to.

When they are bargained for they are done so with understanding of the budget and how it will be impacted. It's when the monies are collected and then sent to other programs then boom hey we can't pay what we budgeted for it's clearly because the unions over extended us...

It's less to do with public employees and more to do with the inability to be accountable from both sides of the aisle. Or are you still convinced it's only THEM that's doing it wrong but WE...WE is flawless?

[Gan]

I would keep up on it but my foil hat is in the cleaners.


The cleaners called while you were out...


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_3o69DLFcCMA/SxR2bNiq2VI/AAAAAAAADCg/V-xqYQb5arA/s400/tin+foil.JPG

[Carl Spackler]

When they are bargained for they are done so with understanding of the budget and how it will be impacted. It's when the monies are collected and then sent to other programs then boom hey we can't pay what we budgeted for it's clearly because the unions over extended us...

It's less to do with public employees and more to do with the inability to be accountable from both sides of the aisle. Or are you still convinced it's only THEM that's doing it wrong but WE...WE is flawless?

In my opinion, this is over extended.

I'm using my town as an example. Teachers here are only required to work 31 hours per week; 10 minutes before the day starts and 10 after it is over (only 25 hours 25 minutes of face-to-face time with pupils). I know some teachers will stay late, but in my experience many didn't want to be bothered for very long at the end of the day. This translates to working 1,135 hours per year over 183 days. The average teacher salary is $62,562. The national average for all professions over the past 5 years has been 1792 hours per year.

Also, teachers here pay nothing towards their health insurance which costs the district over $15,000 per teacher (MI Average: $11,300.) These benefits are extended to the teachers after their retire at a maximum of 18% of the cost of the plan.

Doing some simple math. If you include their health care coverage teachers here, make on average $77,562 per year. That's not bad for working 1,135 hours over 183 days.

I wouldn't be complaining if I was a teacher.

Data: http://www.mackinac.org/12484

[Carl Spackler]

Just found some data on WI teachers

Take Milwaukee School District teachers for instance. The average salary of an MSD teacher is $56,095. Their average fringe benefits are $30,202.

I downloaded the spreadsheet with this data from here: http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/dataondemand/33534649.html


The numbers in these sources differ a bit. Either way, they're shocking.

A little more numbers on wisconsin from WSJ http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703408604576164290717724956.html

I'm sorry, but whoever bargained with the union for this stuff had to be a democrat.

[AnticorRifling]

In my opinion, this is over extended.

I'm using my town as an example. Teachers here are only required to work 31 hours per week; 10 minutes before the day starts and 10 after it is over (only 25 hours 25 minutes of face-to-face time with pupils). I know some teachers will stay late, but in my experience many didn't want to be bothered for very long at the end of the day. This translates to working 1,135 hours per year over 183 days. The average teacher salary is $62,562. The national average for all professions over the past 5 years has been 1792 hours per year.

Also, teachers here pay nothing towards their health insurance which costs the district over $15,000 per teacher (MI Average: $11,300.) These benefits are extended to the teachers after their retire at a maximum of 18% of the cost of the plan.

Doing some simple math. If you include their health care coverage teachers here, make on average $77,562 per year. That's not bad for working 1,135 hours over 183 days.

I wouldn't be complaining if I was a teacher.

Data: http://www.mackinac.org/12484


Now take that time worked and factor in time home grading papers ( I know my wife spends hours each night going through paperwork, tests, etc. not only grading but making suggestions, corrections, notes, etc. then updating the required documentation [grade books]) then factor in weekend time spent in the class room doing prep work for the next week. Things like lesson plans, copying materials, building workbooks, etc. Then factor in all the after school meetings with parents, factor in the time spent doing project research for things for their classes to do, planning field trips, etc.

Here my wife DOES pay for insurance and her district is paid well below state average but they rank in the top 1-4 for performance.

I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't complain as a teacher because, like me, you'd quit. No way in hell you're going to put up with some other parents shit bird of a disrespectful kid for 30k a year.

Also take that salary and reduce it by what's spent on school supplies to make the class room function, just because the budget gets cut doesn't mean a good teacher is going to stop trying to provide the best education possible for his/her class.

You would complain. Pretty damn hard.

The biggest bitch I have with both sides is the lack of accountability pushed on the parents. The children are the raw material handed to the teachers so they can craft educated and worthwhile members of society. Penalize the fuck out of those that turn in turd material.

[AnticorRifling]

I'm sorry, but whoever bargained with the union for this stuff had to be a democrat.

Or a teacher.

I'm not a democrat but I like taking care of my fire department, my police department, and my teachers.

[Carl Spackler]

Or a teacher.


So, mostly likely a democrat.




I'm not a democrat but I like taking care of my fire department, my police department, and my teachers.

I think I illustrated, at least here, they're pretty damn well taken care of.

[AnticorRifling]

I think I illustrated, at least here, they're pretty damn well taken care of.

In your opinion because you think they work X hours (based on some very vague assumptions and some "simple" math) and you found where they make Y amount but I gave you actual first hand accounts that prove that what you illustrated doesn't really work.


Don't get me wrong I'm against most of the things unions stand for but I do like some of the things they do, I do wish there was a way the shit birds weren't under the protective umbrella but I don't wish it so much that you fuck over the good teachers.

[Warriorbird]

Wisconsin also ranks #1 in NCLB performance. If they perform the best does their pay seem quite so flawed?

[AnticorRifling]

Wisconsin also ranks #1 in NCLB performance. If they perform the best does their pay seem quite so flawed?

That's crazy talk. Almost like approving a tax hike to build a stadium but pay teachers? Boo to that.

[Carl Spackler]

In your opinion because you think they work X hours (based on some very vague assumptions and some "simple" math) and you found where they make Y amount but I gave you actual first hand accounts that prove that what you illustrated doesn't really work.


Don't get me wrong I'm against most of the things unions stand for but I do like some of the things they do, I do wish there was a way the shit birds weren't under the protective umbrella but I don't wish it so much that you fuck over the good teachers.

You gave one example. It sounds like your wife does care about the students and their performance and I commend her for that. Sounds like I would want her to teach my kids any day. I wish my teachers had been that dedicated. However it was my experience that teachers were on cruise control and doing 'just enough' to get by.

However, my numbers were not vague, that is the requirement that teachers here have to work as stated in their contract. Now, I'll start assuming. Assuming teachers have 25 hours of face-time with students, and roughly another 6 hours in time they're required to be at work but not with students. That makes for 41 hours worked that week, which isn't that much. God forbid they do 3 hours a night and work 46 hours in a week.

I also don't completely buy-in to the dealing with crappy students and parents. Many people have to deal with miserable bosses, employees, co-workers, customers etc. Sure it may be a pain but it's part of the job.

[Carl Spackler]

I think teacher's compensation as it stands, in most cases is fine. My solution to education problems is for the elimination of tenure as we know it. Teacher's (and administrators) should be graded by students, parents, administrators and peers. Maybe as often as every year. Pay would be commensurate with education and performance, with small increases based on time.

Doing this we could weed out the teachers who perform poorly, keeping and rewarding the teachers who are great at their job.

[AnticorRifling]

I think teacher's compensation as it stands, in most cases is fine. My solution to education problems is for the elimination of tenure as we know it. Teacher's (and administrators) should be graded by students, parents, administrators and peers. Maybe as often as every year. Pay would be commensurate with education and performance, with small increases based on time.

Doing this we could weed out the teachers who perform poorly, keeping and rewarding the teachers who are great at their job.



I agree with you that compensation as it stands is fine. That means don't reduce it.

Your solution has a problem. Classes are full of kids. How many factors go into a kid's ability to do well? How many things outside the control of the teacher go into the kid's ability to retain information, take a test, actually get what's being taught or even care about being there? You want to grade teachers then grade the parents and have it balance each other. It won't happen, parents won't allow themselves to be blamed as a factor in their kid, let's call him Johhny, being a day dreaming emo paste eater who can't count past potato.

What your solution would do is burn out the good/great teachers and you'd still see bad teachers that are part of the good ol'boy club sticking around.

[Carl Spackler]

I agree with you that compensation as it stands is fine. That means don't reduce it.

Your solution has a problem. Classes are full of kids. How many factors go into a kid's ability to do well? How many things outside the control of the teacher go into the kid's ability to retain information, take a test, actually get what's being taught or even care about being there? You want to grade teachers then grade the parents and have it balance each other. It won't happen, parents won't allow themselves to be blamed as a factor in their kid, let's call him Johhny, being a day dreaming emo paste eater who can't count past potato.

What your solution would do is burn out the good/great teachers and you'd still see bad teachers that are part of the good ol'boy club sticking around.


Let's have tryouts for students... You either make the A squad or the B squad.... just kidding.

[Carl Spackler]

I don't know if my solution would burn teachers out. There has to be a way to make them accountable for their work.

Maybe you throw out the top 10% of their class and bottom 10% and look at the kids in the middle, how are they performing?

The same being that you would throw out the top 10% of reviews and the bottom 10% of their reviews to see what people were saying about the teachers.

How do you prevent, as you said the shit birds, from being protected by the umbrella?

[AnticorRifling]

You gave one example. It sounds like your wife does care about the students and their performance and I commend her for that. Sounds like I would want her to teach my kids any day. I wish my teachers had been that dedicated. However it was my experience that teachers were on cruise control and doing 'just enough' to get by.

However, my numbers were not vague, that is the requirement that teachers here have to work as stated in their contract. Now, I'll start assuming. Assuming teachers have 25 hours of face-time with students, and roughly another 6 hours in time they're required to be at work but not with students. That makes for 41 hours worked that week, which isn't that much. God forbid they do 3 hours a night and work 46 hours in a week.

I also don't completely buy-in to the dealing with crappy students and parents. Many people have to deal with miserable bosses, employees, co-workers, customers etc. Sure it may be a pain but it's part of the job.

My example would actually be most, if not all, of the teachers at her school, it's why they are ranked as high as they are and why their graduation rate is 98%, why they meet AYP year after year and why they continue to be a 4 star (out of 4 star) school.

You listed the minimum requirements correct. Now looking at your math 41 hours is greater than 40, 46 is greater than 40. That's the standard work week, not bankers hours, 40 hours. So right there based on your assumptions they're doing more.

Many people do have miserable bosses, employees, co-workers, customers, etc. I've worked in the defense sector, the private sector, and the public sector, small companies and very large companies. That's great, but when they ask for a raise you (the general you not the Tsoran you) aren't yelling that they are asking for too much. I've yet to work a job that was as annoying, to me, as spending time in a class room with other people's undisciplined children. The time I volunteered to teach math in a middle school close to my duty station sucked ass, that teacher deserved a medal.

If my employees acted like that I'd fire them, but you can't do that, no child left behind. If my customers want one on one consultations, special training, additional support, etc. they pay for it either in maintenance dollars or in specific consult fees.

We're both arguing extremes which is the norm for topics like this but the sad reality is we don't need to cater to the extremes we need to address and take care of the norm. Don't make your policy changes based on your worst cases, make it based on your best cases and if your worst cases can't step up it's time to change/remove them. Making changes to just weed out the worst will burn out the best and then you're just throwing the baby out with the bath water (this was put in there to make posters as old as PB feel hip).

[AnticorRifling]

I don't know if my solution would burn teachers out. There has to be a way to make them accountable for their work.

Maybe you throw out the top 10% of their class and bottom 10% and look at the kids in the middle, how are they performing?

The same being that you would throw out the top 10% of reviews and the bottom 10% of their reviews to see what people were saying about the teachers.

How do you prevent, as you said the shit birds, from being protected by the umbrella?

I honestly don't know. Which is part of the problem, it seems people want to throw a blanket solution over a specific problem which results in covering the good with the bad. If we can do strategic air strikes instead of carpet bombing maybe we should consider doing the same with our "reform".

[crb]

Now take that time worked and factor in time home grading papers ( I know my wife spends hours each night going through paperwork, tests, etc. not only grading but making suggestions, corrections, notes, etc. then updating the required documentation [grade books]) then factor in weekend time spent in the class room doing prep work for the next week. Things like lesson plans, copying materials, building workbooks, etc. Then factor in all the after school meetings with parents, factor in the time spent doing project research for things for their classes to do, planning field trips, etc.

Here my wife DOES pay for insurance and her district is paid well below state average but they rank in the top 1-4 for performance.

I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't complain as a teacher because, like me, you'd quit. No way in hell you're going to put up with some other parents shit bird of a disrespectful kid for 30k a year.

Also take that salary and reduce it by what's spent on school supplies to make the class room function, just because the budget gets cut doesn't mean a good teacher is going to stop trying to provide the best education possible for his/her class.

You would complain. Pretty damn hard.

The biggest bitch I have with both sides is the lack of accountability pushed on the parents. The children are the raw material handed to the teachers so they can craft educated and worthwhile members of society. Penalize the fuck out of those that turn in turd material.

Parents, in the end, are the customer. Once you start thinking it of a customer relationship maybe your attitude will change.

Why not support vouchers. If shitty public schools really are the best option, you've nothing to fear from vouchers. Parents will try them, realize how good they had it before, and apologize to all the efficient and hard working teachers they previously criticized.



I kinda agree with David Brooks here (no conservative, mind you):

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/opinion/22brooks.html



The more difficult question is whether Walker was right to try to water down Wisconsin’s collective bargaining agreements. Even if you acknowledge the importance of unions in representing middle-class interests, there are strong arguments on Walker’s side. In Wisconsin and elsewhere, state-union relations are structurally out of whack.

That’s because public sector unions and private sector unions are very different creatures. Private sector unions push against the interests of shareholders and management; public sector unions push against the interests of taxpayers. Private sector union members know that their employers could go out of business, so they have an incentive to mitigate their demands; public sector union members work for state monopolies and have no such interest.

Private sector unions confront managers who have an incentive to push back against their demands. Public sector unions face managers who have an incentive to give into them for the sake of their own survival. Most important, public sector unions help choose those they negotiate with. Through gigantic campaign contributions and overall clout, they have enormous influence over who gets elected to bargain with them, especially in state and local races.

As a result of these imbalanced incentive structures, states with public sector unions tend to run into fiscal crises. They tend to have workplaces where personnel decisions are made on the basis of seniority, not merit. There is little relationship between excellence and reward, which leads to resentment among taxpayers who don’t have that luxury.

[AnticorRifling]

Parents are the supplier not the customer. If you honestly think you're the customer I weep for your children.

Vouchers are fine as long as they are used to go to other public schools, my only beef with vouchers is taking public money and giving it to private schools. Especially when the bill (here in Indiana) in it's current form says after X days of eval. if the kid doesn't seem to be a good fit the kid can be removed from the private school and returned to the public school but the money is not returned.

I have no problem with vouchers going from district to district other than seeing the rapid decline of an inner city school and the quick over crowding of a small rural school. Small classes, small buildings, small community are great assets in my opinion.

[Carl Spackler]

My example would actually be most, if not all, of the teachers at her school, it's why they are ranked as high as they are and why their graduation rate is 98%, why they meet AYP year after year and why they continue to be a 4 star (out of 4 star) school.

You listed the minimum requirements correct. Now looking at your math 41 hours is greater than 40, 46 is greater than 40. That's the standard work week, not bankers hours, 40 hours. So right there based on your assumptions they're doing more.

Many people do have miserable bosses, employees, co-workers, customers, etc. I've worked in the defense sector, the private sector, and the public sector, small companies and very large companies. That's great, but when they ask for a raise you (the general you not the Tsoran you) aren't yelling that they are asking for too much. I've yet to work a job that was as annoying, to me, as spending time in a class room with other people's undisciplined children. The time I volunteered to teach math in a middle school close to my duty station sucked ass, that teacher deserved a medal.

If my employees acted like that I'd fire them, but you can't do that, no child left behind. If my customers want one on one consultations, special training, additional support, etc. they pay for it either in maintenance dollars or in specific consult fees.

We're both arguing extremes which is the norm for topics like this but the sad reality is we don't need to cater to the extremes we need to address and take care of the norm. Don't make your policy changes based on your worst cases, make it based on your best cases and if your worst cases can't step up it's time to change/remove them. Making changes to just weed out the worst will burn out the best and then you're just throwing the baby out with the bath water (this was put in there to make posters as old as PB feel hip).

You bring up a great example of the pussification of America. Let's give teachers the tools to do their jobs. If the kid is a problem throw his/her ass out. If the kid doesn't want to learn, odds are they're going to be a disruption, they don't belong there. Let the disciplinarian discipline.

But now we aren't talking about budgeting.

[Gan]

Parents are the supplier not the customer. If you honestly think your the customer I weep for your children.

Vouchers are fine as long as they are used to go to other public schools, my only beef with vouchers is taking public money and giving it to private schools. Especially when the bill (here in Indiana) in it's current form says after X days of eval. if the kid doesn't seem to be a good fit the kid can be removed from the private school and returned to the public school but the money is not returned.

I have no problem with vouchers going from district to district other than seeing the rapid decline of an inner city school and the quick over crowding of a small rural school. Small classes, small buildings, small community are great assets in my opinion.

I would love to see vouchers qualify for use for private schools.

I'm currently being forced to pay for a shitty education system (HISD) that I do not use on top of private tuition for my son at an institution where I know he's getting a quality education in a great environment.

[~Rocktar~]

I agree with you that compensation as it stands is fine. That means don't reduce it.

Your solution has a problem. Classes are full of kids. How many factors go into a kid's ability to do well? How many things outside the control of the teacher go into the kid's ability to retain information, take a test, actually get what's being taught or even care about being there? You want to grade teachers then grade the parents and have it balance each other. It won't happen, parents won't allow themselves to be blamed as a factor in their kid, let's call him Johhny, being a day dreaming emo paste eater who can't count past potato.

What your solution would do is burn out the good/great teachers and you'd still see bad teachers that are part of the good ol'boy club sticking around.

You misspelled Johnny, lets get a rope, a post and some brush to burn the evil one.

[AnticorRifling]

You misspelled Johnny, lets get a rope, a post and some brush to burn the evil one.

It's almost like it was done on purpose for the luls.

[crb]

Parents are the supplier not the customer. If you honestly think you're the customer I weep for your children.

Vouchers are fine as long as they are used to go to other public schools, my only beef with vouchers is taking public money and giving it to private schools. Especially when the bill (here in Indiana) in it's current form says after X days of eval. if the kid doesn't seem to be a good fit the kid can be removed from the private school and returned to the public school but the money is not returned.

I have no problem with vouchers going from district to district other than seeing the rapid decline of an inner city school and the quick over crowding of a small rural school. Small classes, small buildings, small community are great assets in my opinion.

Don't weep for my children, they'll have a great life. Two rich educated white parents, green grass, clean air, etc.

But make no mistake, parents are the customer. Which doesn't necessarily mean that every parent cares, they don't. But the parents that do care, they expect better.

[AnticorRifling]

Don't weep for my children, they'll have a great life. Two rich educated white parents, green grass, clean air, etc.

But make no mistake, parents are the customer. Which doesn't necessarily mean that every parent cares, they don't. But the parents that do care, they expect better.

I didn't realize the parents hide to be white for them to do well...RACIST!!!


The parents that do care, they provide better material because they work with the product. OH SNAP

I hate you I'm supposed to be finishing a query but this is more interesting.

[Warriorbird]

In my opinion, this is over extended.

I'm using my town as an example. Teachers here are only required to work 31 hours per week; 10 minutes before the day starts and 10 after it is over (only 25 hours 25 minutes of face-to-face time with pupils). I know some teachers will stay late, but in my experience many didn't want to be bothered for very long at the end of the day. This translates to working 1,135 hours per year over 183 days. The average teacher salary is $62,562. The national average for all professions over the past 5 years has been 1792 hours per year.

Also, teachers here pay nothing towards their health insurance which costs the district over $15,000 per teacher (MI Average: $11,300.) These benefits are extended to the teachers after their retire at a maximum of 18% of the cost of the plan.

Doing some simple math. If you include their health care coverage teachers here, make on average $77,562 per year. That's not bad for working 1,135 hours over 183 days.

I wouldn't be complaining if I was a teacher.

Data: http://www.mackinac.org/12484

I'm not sure how well you'd do, especially given the current no risk attendance policy favoring climate matched with the standardized test focus.

If you include healthcare coverage most professional people make a solid salary. There's a requirement of a minimum of 40 hours worked for teachers, locally, however. Combine that with assessment and form requirements and I'd say most on average push into the middle 50s when you consider planning time and grading time. I'm not sure the fact that you're in the bastion of extreme unionization makes you standard. You're also a Republican there, so you're likely to perceive it as even worse than it is.

Do you really think paying teachers less is going to improve the education system? Vouchers are going to actively reduce the funds available to improve this system. Charter schools don't do any better than public ones, for the most part, and the best ones (Geoffrey Canada's efforts in Harlem) actually cost MORE than public schools.

I certainly see the appeal of accountability. The problem is that the only test that's anywhere near valid nationally and internationally (NAEP) is only given every 5 years. Clinton/Bush/Obama have bought in super heavily to NCLB and it is an unrelenting disaster.

[Parkbandit]

As long as their pay/benefits match private teacher pay/benefits.. I'm all for it.

[EasternBrand]

Don't weep for my children, they'll have a great life. Two rich educated white parents, green grass, clean air, etc.

Who needs love when you've got money, right?

[Deathravin]

Dane County judge halts collective bargaining law (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/118242109.html)

What teachers make (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxsOVK4syxU)

[Parkbandit]

Looks like the Dems will be forced to flee again to avoid doing their jobs?

[Firestorm Killa]

I would love to see vouchers qualify for use for private schools.

I'm currently being forced to pay for a shitty education system (HISD) that I do not use on top of private tuition for my son at an institution where I know he's getting a quality education in a great environment.

Vouchers would turn privates schools shitty too. All vouchers would do it get the federal government's foot into the door. The best way to handle public schools is to get rid of the Department of Education, and put them back into the hands of the local and state governments. Since the federal take over of public schools the learning has gone done and drop out rate has shot up.

[Warriorbird]

If a state want to they can opt out of the 10% of total funding the feds provide. Only one state has. Conservatives will QQ, but they don't actually want to fund education at the state level for the most part. I respect Nebraska for having the balls that the rest CLAIM to have.

[~Rocktar~]

If a state want to they can opt out of the 10% of total funding the feds provide. Only one state has. Conservatives will QQ, but they don't actually want to fund education at the state level for the most part. I respect Nebraska for having the balls that the rest CLAIM to have.

The problem is, that while you get to opt out of the federal funding, you don't get to opt out of the federal taxing to support that funding. If a state could opt out of the funding and be totally out of reach for federal meddling AND be able to stop it's citizens from being taxed that amount of money in exchange, I bet you would see a lot more states opting out.

[Warriorbird]

Nebraska, curiously enough, is doing pretty damn well.

[~Rocktar~]

Nebraska, curiously enough, is doing pretty damn well.

Nebraska, curiously enough, is a state that exports more material goods to other states than it imports and who's economy is not intellectual capitol or service based. Anyone that exports more than they import can support higher taxes. Other states are not so well positioned.

[Warriorbird]

Their taxes (other than cigarettes) aren't notably high. They just budget better.

[Tsa`ah]

Their taxes (other than cigarettes) aren't notably high. They just budget better.

Na ... it probably has more to do with the state, collectively, having no federal tax liability. Or rather ... not having a history of actually contributing to the federal coffers, but rather getting everything they pay and then 10% on top of it.

Nebraska doesn't really have any balls. Their stand on federal contributions is a joke ... because they're essentially a welfare state.

How hard would it be to keep up with your utilities and service bills if the providers sent you a check for 10% and more above the amount of the original bill?

[Parkbandit]

TALLAHASSEE -- The Florida House delivered a major blow to public employee unions Friday, approving a bill that would ban automatic dues deduction from a government paycheck and require members to sign off on the use of their dues for political purposes.

Democrats and Republicans fought over the legislation for just under two hours. Democrats and labor unions have accused conservatives of "union-busting" and said the bill was more about political payback than public policy. Unions have typically been big backers of Democratic candidates.

Rep. Chris Dorworth, R-Lake Mary, the House sponsor of the legislation, said this was simply the state's movement to get out of the dues deduction business and let the unions take care of it.

"It's a bill that empowers membership of labor unions," Dorworth said.

The measure, HB 1021, passed by a 73-40 vote, with three Republican lawmakers siding with the Democrats.

Florida is a "right to work" state, which means a worker is not forced to join a union. But many public employees do so, and state employers typically withhold union dues from workers' paychecks. A portion of those dues is set aside by their unions for education, community action — and political contributions.

Democrats argued that Republicans are simply trying to take out their political opponents.

"It's about silencing the opposition. That's not democratic," said Rep. Richard Steinberg, D-Miami Beach.

During the last general election cycle, the statewide teachers' union gave more than $3.4 million in campaign contributions, mostly to Democrats. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees doled out nearly $1.4 million, much of it directly to the state Democratic Party. And the AFL-CIO and other labor groups gave hundreds of thousands of dollars more.

For the past few weeks, labor groups have been actively campaigning against the bill and testifying against it in legislative committee meetings, but the Republican majority was largely united in pushing the bill through the House.

"This bill aims to do nothing more than silencing dissent," said Florida Education Association President Andy Ford. "The lawmakers who voted for this bill have signaled their desire to use the power of government to single out and attack the hardworking men and women who serve Florida in public employment."

The Senate version of the bill, sponsored by Sen. John Thrasher, R-St. Augustine, has one more committee stop before it makes it to the floor.

Republicans have denied Democrats' accusations that the bill is a political attack, saying the legislation was designed to get government out of the political process since it would no longer be collecting dues for organizations that sometimes do political work. And people who decide they don't want their dues used for political purposes can say no, Republican lawmakers argued.

"If you want your money --your money-- you get to keep it," said Rep. Carlos Lopez-Cantera, R-Miami.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/fl-bill-bans-automatic-union-dues-20110325,0,1209569.story

Heh.

[Warriorbird]

Much more defensible than what went down in Wisconsin.

[Alfster]

Meh. The shit here has now stalled in the court system. It technically passed, but was then labeled unconstitutional.