Riots in the streets 2008-2013 style.

[afj56]

i don't agree that the average teacher is underpaid...working less then 9 months a year + 10 sick days is an incredible deal.  Many teachers are done by 3pm and once a teacher has their curriculum established, it isn't very time consuming to tweak it every so often.  The top pay in California is 80-90k in many districts.  Average salary in CA is about 64K and in your home state of Maryland it is 58k...those numbers are from 2006.  When teachers can retire and earn 70k+ (Plus cost of living adjustments) for 30 years, I don't see that as sustainable, the public is getting fleeced. 

Fathertime,

I would have to agree to disagree.

afj56

[Researcher]

       The thing is that everyone in the private sector has been hurt. With unemployment as high as it is there are less people paying taxes so there is less money for teachers and other type workers. The truth is the whole country is going down as far as wages are concerned, largely because of globalization. Everyone is losing something and government employees are no better than the rest of us.Get ready to do with less.

      Researcher

[euforia51]

       The thing is that everyone in the private sector has been hurt. With unemployment as high as it is there are less people paying taxes so there is less money for teachers and other type workers. The truth is the whole country is going down as far as wages are concerned, largely because of globalization. Everyone is losing something and government employees are no better than the rest of us.Get ready to do with less.

Quite the truth, Researcher. I believe most know this however, it seems nobody is willing to take a hit or make a sacrifice for the greater good ... as I was trying to point out in my engineering vs. marketing post. Case in point with this teacher protecting the pension. Fooey! In the private sector, there is no protection. Take it or leave it buddy, it's going to get cut so the company can survive ... and you can keep your job tomorrow (if you're lucky). I sqawk about being entitled alot ... and this is another example. I hope this teacher isn't bringing this kind of attitude to the classroom and instilling it into the students ... that is just sad!

[fathertime]

Hey AFJ!  I'd like to see you refute some of the arguments made here by the other posters.  You seem like a nice enough guy, so I don't want you to feel like I'm trying to put you down personally.  Perhaps you can elaborate on what grade/subject you are teaching.  If there were a way to pay Excellent MATH/Science Teachers more, I might be ok with that, but it would have to come at a price to the other teachers.  These automatic yearly pay raises need to go, it has to be results based somehow.


Fathertime!

[robert angel]

Most Teachers I know have one or more graduate degrees, work at least 9+ hours each work day, then take another hour or so of work home with them. They also spend a substantial amount of their own money on students/school supplies and are very stressed out from all the totally screwed up kids in their classes. They haven't had a pay raise in at least three years, in fact many make less than they did five years ago, such as where I live.

If they 'only' have 2 or 3 'psychos' in a class of 25 to 35 kids, that's enough to make things very difficult, and mind you, if they utter a single curse word, as the students 'bless them out'  royally or God forbid, if the Teacher touches them physically, even to escort them out of class, that teacher is likely out of a job and quite possibly losing their teaching license if they don't resign. The kids hate and bait them mercilessly and they get very little support from most of the 'politically correct' people supposedly running the system and making 'discipline policies' and 'rubrics'.

If you want to compare private schools to public, you might as well compare the Sahara to Hawaii, although Hawaii, ironically, has about the worst public schools in the USA--even military familys are wary of going there--just because of their lousy schools.

There's a lot of misconceptions about public school Teachers out there. Yes, some areas get paid much higher than most, but regardless, the jobs in most PUBLIC schools are difficult at best and nobody working a classroom works anything like a 9 to 3 schedule, like so many think.

If you don't think so, try substitute teaching for a day or do....

[euforia51]

Robert, you make a compelling argument on behalf of the teachers. And speaking for myself, had we been presented with a more detailed description, like yours, for why teachers are under-paid instead of (and this coming from a teacher?) ...

I am a School teacher in Maryland, U.S.A.  I have worked for my benefits.  People need to think about a school teachers salary, which needs to be increased.  We are educating our future.

I for one would be more inclined to have some compassion because it shows you took the time to present a point that you really believed in. But to me, this opening volley in quote is weak at best. And with knowing as little as I know about politics even I could argue these points; which is sad (trust me).

I sometimes think it's best for me not to jump in on a thread mid-stream. Because I have a tendency to alienate myself from the popular opinion at large especially when I see alot of whining for no good reason. Life is tough some times. And just because you're a union backed employee doesn't mean you're entitled to have perks that your employer cannot afford ... especially when those perks are on the tax payer's dime.

FT is a good guy for inviting this teacher back to make a rebuttal to our arguments, and I'd like to see it myself. But given the first couple of zingers so far ... I'm not going to hold my breath.

[fathertime]

Most Teachers I know have one or more graduate degrees, work at least 9+ hours each work day, then take another hour or so of work home with them. They also spend a substantial amount of their own money on students/school supplies and are very stressed out from all the totally screwed up kids in their classes. They haven't had a pay raise in at least three years, in fact many make less than they did five years ago, such as where I live.

If they 'only' have 2 or 3 'psychos' in a class of 25 to 35 kids, that's enough to make things very difficult, and mind you, if they utter a single curse word, as the students 'bless them out'  royally or God forbid, if the Teacher touches them physically, even to escort them out of class, that teacher is likely out of a job and quite possibly losing their teaching license if they don't resign. The kids hate and bait them mercilessly and they get very little support from most of the 'politically correct' people supposedly running the system and making 'discipline policies' and 'rubrics'.

If you want to compare private schools to public, you might as well compare the Sahara to Hawaii, although Hawaii, ironically, has about the worst public schools in the USA--even military familys are wary of going there--just because of their lousy schools.

There's a lot of misconceptions about public school Teachers out there. Yes, some areas get paid much higher than most, but regardless, the jobs in most PUBLIC schools are difficult at best and nobody working a classroom works anything like a 9 to 3 schedule, like so many think.
 

Hello robert the angel, thank you for bringing up these bullet points which i've heard numerous times and am just not buying.
1.  the local high school here has 6 periods of 57 minutes each...each teacher is assigned 5 periods to work and one period of preparation...if you do the math you will see that is 4hours 45 minutes in the classroom I don't know ANY teachers here that stay after school for even an hour a day on average, unless of course there is a financial gain to it...i.e. coaching, paid tutoring, etc.
2.  teachers that have masters/doctorate degrees are automatically bumped up the pay scale pretty substantially so it makes sense that teachers do this for their own self-interest...quite a few of them do their own homework during the 1 hour break they receive during their teaching day.  i've never seen much of a difference between teachers with doctorate's and those without...if anything those without are less self-absorbed.
3.  teachers in high school or middle school often have 'student assistants' (T.A.'s) that do much of their busy work, running copies, grading certain papers, and recording in the gradebooks.
4.  Misbehaving students can be difficult for some teachers, but that is simply a hurdle that teachers are paid to try to deal with
5.  I don't see teachers buying copious amounts of money on buying supplies...my kids were always getting requests to bring a certain item...for example tissue paper or crayons....each student was given a certain thing to bring at the beginning of the year...
6.  perhaps things are different where you are from, but around here, teachers are getting yearly raises like clockwork, each year they move up the scale...

Of course there are exceptions to my points, but I think most of those points do hold water.  From my perspective teachers are NOT underpaid, and along with the rest of society they must take a pay decrease.

Fathertime!

[Jeff S]

Most Teachers I know have one or more graduate degrees, work at least 9+ hours each work day, then take another hour or so of work home with them. They also spend a substantial amount of their own money on students/school supplies and are very stressed out from all the totally screwed up kids in their classes. They haven't had a pay raise in at least three years, in fact many make less than they did five years ago, such as where I live.

If they 'only' have 2 or 3 'psychos' in a class of 25 to 35 kids, that's enough to make things very difficult, and mind you, if they utter a single curse word, as the students 'bless them out'  royally or God forbid, if the Teacher touches them physically, even to escort them out of class, that teacher is likely out of a job and quite possibly losing their teaching license if they don't resign. The kids hate and bait them mercilessly and they get very little support from most of the 'politically correct' people supposedly running the system and making 'discipline policies' and 'rubrics'.

If you want to compare private schools to public, you might as well compare the Sahara to Hawaii, although Hawaii, ironically, has about the worst public schools in the USA--even military familys are wary of going there--just because of their lousy schools.

There's a lot of misconceptions about public school Teachers out there. Yes, some areas get paid much higher than most, but regardless, the jobs in most PUBLIC schools are difficult at best and nobody working a classroom works anything like a 9 to 3 schedule, like so many think.

If you don't think so, try substitute teaching for a day or do....

This is about how hard teachers work, nor how much they get paid, nor whether or not they deserve benefits. Stress is part of just about every job these days. Knowing you can't be fired takes away an appreciable amount of stress business America has to deal with, too. However, the point here is about union rules and those footing the bill, the taxpayers, not having any say whatsoever in the process except to vote in people like Scott Walker, who do is doing exactly what he was elected to do. 

BTW, I'd love to try substitute teaching for a day or two. I have, and still do, teach at the college, adult school, and corporate level, even some in private K-12 level, have masters degree, have published more than a few books, scientific papers, hold numerous patents, and so on. But - don't have a teaching credential, so it would be illegal for me to even substitute teach public school in California.

[Researcher]

        I can understand teachers and anyone else not wanting to give anything up but it's coming. In the form of concessions by the unions or by layoffs. The way our economy is headed there is no way we can sustain things the way they are. If you want to see what your future looks like go to a third world country and find someone who is in the same occupation as you are here. That's your future, sooner or later.

      Researcher

[robert angel]

Fathertime, JeffS,

You're right in that what I'm talking about and where you come from and get your information, seem to be very different.

Teachers may have what you call 'preparation time', or in other places 'planning time' for one of the 4,5 or 6 periods that they have, depending on the school level and system they work in, but a lot of that is taken up by discipline refera ls that even though they go no where typically, are still required. Paper work protocols are always being changed and around here, they're revamping the discipline referral process, to make it more 'data driven' and making all the teachers take an entire day off to learn better how to deescalate verbal aggression, break up nasty fights w/o touching the kids, etc. If they don't try to break up a fight successfuly , they can be held legally responsible. If they touch a student in the process, they can lose their jobs.

At my son's school, although he's in 'a school within a school' taking advanced high school courses in the 8th grade, the teachers in his part of the school as well as most in the school's 'general population', stay after school at least 3 or 4 days a week, offering tutorial.

They create a disincentive to be real hard on discipline, as there are (for now anyway) five steps, each involving a layer of paperwork, such as phone calls to parents who often don't care, or in a militant way, side with the kids.

Then there are required behavior/contacts, meeting logs, etc., BEFORE you can send the child to the Principal. They have ISS 'in school suspension' in almost all cases, because out of school suspension raises red flags with the fed. govt.

Then they want to sugar coat any 'offenses' as if they have too many suspensions or 'high category' or repeating offenders, the school won't make the all so holy 'AYP' mark--AYP being adequate yearly progress and will be penalized financially, as well as in other ways.

This year, the Principal at my son's school had his finger broken in three places, while taking a cell phone away from a student. Teacher and staff get assaulted, their cars vandalized and are yelled at and cursed at quite often, but are told if they lose their composure and swear back in anger, they face termination. One kid told a Principal I know (he wasn't even in trouble at the time): "You know--if you even lay a FINGER on me, my momma's layer will sue you and we be living in YO house!"

The Principal who's hand was badly broken, didn't want to press charges, as it would effect AYP. AYP is also effected by standardized test scores and 95% of Special Education students are required to take the same tests, which are averaged into the entire schools and they're also in the regular education classrooms these days.

Some states realize how insanely  (although well intentioned) the federal govt's 'No child left behind' and the AYP system is, how out of touch with the day to day realities of teaching the 'lost kids of America'  are--how these polticians--who live in a world where they have their oown retirement plans, no social securiity concerns, a cherry picked, self designed health plan, with their own kids in private schools and even in these awful economic times, they are increasingly telling the feds to go to hell, keep their paltry percentage of money they provide and to leave them the hell alone.

As in just about any endeavor the federal govt. has tried to take over or strongly influence, the results have proven worse than before they 'intervened'.

If a school makes AYP, they then raise the bar even higher, making it all but impossible to achieve. Then when you miss AYP three years in a row--might be due to too many tardies and/or truancies, behavior problems or special ed. student's standardized test scores bringing the overall average down too much--ALL the teachers and staff--even the janitorial, must reapply for their jobs and typically, about 80% end up at other schools. Some are horrible teachers, who should be fired instead and many of those have graduate degrees they get paid extra for having, despite them basically coming from mail order, on-line college mills, and in fields such as 'administration' when they have never even applied for an Assistant Principal's job.

The issue of accepting sub standard college's graduate degrees and 'working out of field' yet being paid higher, is being remedied very quickly these days

In terms of step pay raises "every year', well in most states, IF you get them, they're only for the first TWELVE years and if you survive in the SAME system, you might get small raises at years 20 and 25-- IF you're lucky. How many jobs do you know that basically stop all but the smallest pay raises after 10 or 12 years?

Teacher retirement plans vary widely and the one's you read about are typically unusually sweet. In reality, you're typically 'vested' into a retirement plan after ten years, get two percent of your pay in retirement for each year and if you retire bfore thirty years or age sixty, you take substantial penalties. Plus, you typically pay at least half of the retirement deduction and also pay the typical, if not higher rate for health insurance.

In most states, after graduating, new teacher start with salaries in the low to mid $30,000 range, then might get 12 raises in the $1200 to $1400 range if they stay that long. We are spending many millions to bring business people into education, eliminating student teaching and many other 'requirements' such as a an education degree for them. 98% of them quit within two years..

Teacher assistants? Are you sure you're talking about public High--Middle (junior) and Elementary schools? here, we might have an occasional student Teacher, who has to be closely supervised and it takes more time doing all the paperwork for having them in their classrooms.

Yes, stress is part of any job and it seems that a lot of posters here feel they have similar stress levels--maybe even more than Teachers. I agree that by and large, Unions are more problematic than they are helpful these days.

I can't help but wonder how many weeks, or whole days most of us have spent 'in the trenches' of middle and high schools, and how many base their writings on that of newpaper letters to the editors and newpaper columnists--all written by folks who haven't spent a whole lot of time in the schools, besides maybe a 'guided tour' or two at schools forewarned ahead of time that 'visitors' would be coming by, after they'd been screened and signed in and given 'escorts'....

To the average taxpayer, things certainly look a lot different from 'the outside looking in' then they do from daily life on the inside. No--there are real problems at all levels and 'fixes' must be made. But typically the people complaining and most certainly the politicians making the changes, don't have a clue. In fact, those who complain the loudest are the ones who typically pay to send their kids to the most expensive, elitist private schools.

They are the often the same people, the same politicians, who watched the corrupt bankers and investement brokers set up the economic sham, betting against their own clients and nation in an unabridged orgy of greed, leading inevitably to economic disaster, who despite acting in a criminal manner, not a single one who having gone to prison in the past few years, beside Bernie Maddoff, who was basically a tool, using a small slice of the economic and celebrity elite as he ran his game. Who said there's no honor among thieves?

There is a real disconnect between the people in power and the public educational system in America today and too many people are being taken in with them along the way.

[Jeff S]

Yet again, this is not about how hard teachers work, nor what their job stresses are. These have nothing to do with the core issues. The whole thread is about unsustainability of government in its current incarnation. There is absolutely no question that the feds, states, and local governments cannot continue as they are - and you have to decide whether think the right thing to do is to make changes to bring it back to solvency, or to keep doing what has gotten us into the mess in the first place, continually increasing the size, scope and cost of government, as those footing the bill become less and less able to sustain the growth. If you think the former is the correct path, it can be fixed and you will receive a nice pension, if the latter, the system will collapse in our lifetimes, and no one will get anything.

The only way I can see being successful in the long run: http://www.voiceofoc.org/oc_coast/article_eeeea6c0-451b-11e0-8742-001cc4c03286.html

[Researcher]

     I have to agree with Jeff, this is about the downward spiral this country is in and how is the best way to the "bottom". You can have many teachers making less money with fewer benefits or you can have fewer teachers making the same as now and several laid off. We aren't going to "grow" our way out of this mess. The continuing unemployment rate is proof of that.

      Researcher

[ignorante]

As much as I dislike democrats, I dislike republicans even more. At least Clinton was starting to get us in shape financially.

  That's pretty funny.  He gets some minimal fiscal discipline forced upon him by a Republican Congress, and benefits from a tech driven stock market bubble driving up revenues, and he gets the blame.  Had things been different he also would have gotten the blame.  Presidents tend to get blamed for everything in the economy (especially "jobs") and the budget when the Office of President usually has nothing at all to do with any of it, and, to the extent any White House policy is effective, the lag time is measured in years and therefore is usually the fault of a prior President.

All I would like to see is a budget that is actually smaller than the year before.  Not cuts to growth.  A budget that is smaller, dollar for dollar, not adjusted for inflation or any other accounting tricks.


Social Security is unconstitutional and ought to be eliminated on that basis alone.  Nothing in the constitution authorizes Congress to pay retirees money.


Charity is not admirable if you are doing it with somebody else's money.

[fathertime]

     I have to agree with Jeff, this is about the downward spiral this country is in and how is the best way to the "bottom". You can have many teachers making less money with fewer benefits or you can have fewer teachers making the same as now and several laid off. We aren't going to "grow" our way out of this mess. The continuing unemployment rate is proof of that.

      Researcher

The teachers are trying to make sure that we 'grow our way out of this mess.   Follow my logic and let me know what you all think. 

The teachers unions realize that their bloated retirement system is in a death spiral.  They know they need more new teachers paying into the system in order to keep paying out these benefits.  The problem is that Americans are having fewer children, enter ILLEGAL ALIENS and their 8.8 children per family.  It is no coincedence that the teachers unions and lobbyists are some of the biggest supporters for illegal aliens.  It is no coincedence that school districts refuse to check immigration status of students.  The public school system retirement plans would collapse faster than a house of cards in a hurricane if all the illegal alien kids were yanked from public schooling.  We wouldn't need nearly as many teachers and the general public would save billions.  The teachers would rather support illegal activity and continue to support the degration of our social systems and society at large, in order to continue to prop up the corpse of their bloated benefit program.

Fathertime!

[fathertime]

Fathertime, JeffS,

 
 
In terms of step pay raises "every year', well in most states, IF you get them, they're only for the first TWELVE years and if you survive in the SAME system, you might get small raises at years 20 and 25-- IF you're lucky. How many jobs do you know that basically stop all but the smallest pay raises after 10 or 12 years?

Teacher retirement plans vary widely and the one's you read about are typically unusually sweet. In reality, you're typically 'vested' into a retirement plan after ten years, get two percent of your pay in retirement for each year and if you retire bfore thirty years or age sixty, you take substantial penalties. Plus, you typically pay at least half of the retirement deduction and also pay the typical, if not higher rate for health insurance.

In most states, after graduating, new teacher start with salaries in the low to mid $30,000 range, then might get 12 raises in the $1200 to $1400 range if they stay that long. We are spending many millions to bring business people into education, eliminating student teaching and many other 'requirements' such as a an education degree for them. 98% of them quit within two years..

 

Robert the Angel, I could write a novel refuting practically each of your points but lets just start out with a couple of them. 
Here is a quote from an article written yesterday, that shows teachers making up to 84% of their salary in retirement, for a total of over 75k..meaning their top salary is 90K...so how can that happen if teachers pay starts in the mid 30K range and they are only getting 1200 more each year?  How do they get from say 35k to 90k? 
Here is the quote from the article:

Many can even take home more in pensions than they netted while teaching.

CalSTRS' formula, which is based largely on employee salary, age and longevity, tends to reward retirement at age 61<MD+,%30,%55,%70>1/<MD-,%0,%55,%70>2. For example, a teacher who has worked for 35 years, making $90,000 in her final year, could retire at age 62 and reap a $75,600 annual pension - 84 percent of salary. Teachers can add to their pensions by "buying" additional years.



Read more: http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_17552652?source=rss#ixzz1FwfVoz1D

Fathertime!

[Jeff S]

Well the big fallacy to all of this growth model is that the costs soon outstrip all possible ways of raising revenue. Feeding the monster will consume all of the product the tax payers can create. In essence the parasite gets so big it kills the host, then without a host to feed it, the parasite quickly dies.

This is also the problem with raising taxes on "the rich." When the risk takers can't win by taking business risks, the capital goes to commodities, like gold, or debt instruments, like bonds, so there is no more wealth creation - so no more places to suck money out of.

There are only a few ways to create wealth, you can manufacture, mine, drill for oil, farm, raise animals, generate electricity, and not much more (I count artisans in the manufacturing world because they create products.) Those giving each other haircuts, selling each other insurance, teaching each other's kids, lending each other money, hanging around the firehouse waiting for a call, guarding those who don't play well with others, and so on, consume wealth. Someone has to create it for it to be available to consume. We can't seem to do enough in this country to discourage wealth creation. Manufacturing is out, mining and oil exploration are evil exploitation, how many nuclear power generation plants are going up? Even farming is discouraged - they shut off the water in California, and how many thousands of acres are off the productive market with no-grow and unsustainable ethanol subsidies.

If we continue down this path, surely the parasite will consume the host.  

[Researcher]

    Well put Jeff. That is it in a nutshell. The economic foundation of this country has been chipped away at so much that it can't support everything else. Our economy is like an Eco-system and our government is burning the rainforest and destroying the ozone!

        Researcher

[fathertime]

Well the big fallacy to all of this growth model is that the costs soon outstrip all possible ways of raising revenue. Feeding the monster will consume all of the product the tax payers can create. In essence the parasite gets so big it kills the host, then without a host to feed it, the parasite quickly dies.

This is also the problem with raising taxes on "the rich." When the risk takers can't win by taking business risks, the capital goes to commodities, like gold, or debt instruments, like bonds, so there is no more wealth creation - so no more places to suck money out of.

There are only a few ways to create wealth, you can manufacture, mine, drill for oil, farm, raise animals, generate electricity, and not much more (I count artisans in the manufacturing world because they create products.) Those giving each other haircuts, selling each other insurance, teaching each other's kids, lending each other money, hanging around the firehouse waiting for a call, guarding those who don't play well with others, and so on, consume wealth. Someone has to create it for it to be available to consume. We can't seem to do enough in this country to discourage wealth creation. Manufacturing is out, mining and oil exploration are evil exploitation, how many nuclear power generation plants are going up? Even farming is discouraged - they shut off the water in California, and how many thousands of acres are off the productive market with no-grow and unsustainable ethanol subsidies.

If we continue down this path, surely the parasite will consume the host.  

i'm going to have to agree with your post here jeff,

 but but but I thought our economy was all about selling pizzas to each other and visiting the salon....you mean there has to be something REAL to generate the wealth in the first place?? 
Isn't it amazing that people fail to get this basic point...our wealth must be created from the outside, a couple things that you left out would be tourism and exporting expertise just so long as those people bring their euros, yuan, rands, whatever back here to spend on haircuts, botox, new curtains, etc!
 Fathertime!

[robert angel]

Fathertime,

Re:

>>Many can even take home more in pensions than they netted while teaching.

CalSTRS' formula, which is based largely on employee salary, age and longevity, tends to reward retirement at age 61<MD+,%30,%55,%70>1/<MD-,%0,%55,%70>2. For example, a teacher who has worked for 35 years, making $90,000 in her final year, could retire at age 62 and reap a $75,600 annual pension - 84 percent of salary. Teachers can add to their pensions by "buying" additional years.<<

I don't know where you got your 'article' but if you're generalizing that the rest of the 49 states are like California by citing that article, you're wayyyy off base. If the rest of the nation was as screwed up financially as CA, I think we'd have all gone down the toilet some time back.

Sure there are a few other states, notably CN. NJ, NY and for a while there, MI, to give a partial listing that offer Teachers unusually sweet deals, pay and retirement wise, but they're more the exception than the rule. There are systems in a number of states that also are way 'over the top'--I think Madison and certainly Kenosha, in WI, come to mind.

Up until last year, Teachers in Georgia, which has an unusually solvent pension fund, got one and a half percent pension increases in January and July of every year, effectively when compounded, more than 3% a year. No matter how solvent the system, that sort of return, when many are collecting 20 or more years, is not only unreasonable, but unsustainable as well.

By the way, Fathertime, it's Robert, or Robert Angel--I'm far from being, as you put it: "robert the angel"--Angel is in fact part of my surname. I hope this thread isn't going to denigrate into being a petty, rather than substantive debate , with the derogatorycartoons and name calling that seem to crop up here all too often.

I respect other's rights to disagree civilly and in fact, I think that regarding this thread, there have been some excellent, salient points made on several fronts/subjects here. Damn that JeffS--it's hard to disagree with his logic! (although I still do to an extent--lol). Let's keep it above board!

[fathertime]

Fathertime,

Re:

>>Many can even take home more in pensions than they netted while teaching.

CalSTRS' formula, which is based largely on employee salary, age and longevity, tends to reward retirement at age 61<MD+,%30,%55,%70>1/<MD-,%0,%55,%70>2. For example, a teacher who has worked for 35 years, making $90,000 in her final year, could retire at age 62 and reap a $75,600 annual pension - 84 percent of salary. Teachers can add to their pensions by "buying" additional years.<<

I don't know where you got your 'article' but if you're generalizing that the rest of the 49 states are like California by citing that article, you're wayyyy off base. If the rest of the nation was as screwed up financially as CA, I think we'd have all gone down the toilet some time back.

Hello Robert the...I mean Robertangel,  I don't know why you are questioning where I got my 'article'  I linked the article directly to my quote, so all you have to do is hit the link.   It appears you are not disputing the content of my reference.  California public schools alone accounts for roughly 14% of the entire nation's school population.
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Articles/article.asp?title=California%20comparison
  If you start adding in states like NY NJ, and CN, you are no longer talking about a small % of teachers that are getting as you called it 'sweet' deals...
I have provided my evidence of a bloated teacher retirement system, which you are not denying, when you are able to provide a state statistic or link showing one, then we will be able to further this conversation.  What is truly entertaining is when I hear CA teachers and the union grumbling about not getting a fair shake, or not wanting to go back to the stone ages.  The union will never give anything back until they are forced to...a statewide meltdown should do the trick.
I don't know how you could disagree with JeffS's logic as it seems airtight to me, but why don't you say how it is you do or perhaps you would like to retract that statement?

Fathertime the Angel! 

[piglett]

we are all screwed....get used to it




pig

[Researcher]

we are all screwed....get used to it

pig

      Right you are piglet! This year the interest on our national debt will be 200 billion dollars. Over the next 10 years it will be over 900 billion dollars a year which rivals any large spending program we have. I'd say our huge debt is our biggest problem now and congress is debating whether or not to cut 60 or 20 billion out of the budget.That's chump change by comparison but I guess it's a start.


So, stick a fork in us, we are done!
                 
         




  Researcher

[Jeff S]

It can be fixed, but people need to understand the severity of the problem. Government in the US, throughout its history has consumed about 20% of the Gross National Product. At that level the parasite and host can live. Since 2008, the consumption of the government is sharply increasing and will exceed 40% by 2016 with no end in sight. This means by the end of Obama's term, if he survives 8 years, taxes will have to double while services actually decrease. Sound sustainable to you?

How many small businesses are solvent enough to have twice as much money confiscated from them as the do today? Even if they were, they'll have to lay off people to make up for the difference. If they lay off people, that's that many less people to sell their goods and services to, and that many more people sucking on the public tit in the form of unemployment insurance. Truth is, huge numbers will have to close their doors.

Just to give you an example of the severity, in 2007, the federal deficit for the year was 160 billion dollars, and Democrats were screaming bloody murder at how Bush the Horrible was responsible for such a huge deficit. In February 2010 alone (1 month) the deficit is 220 billion - way more than the entire year of 2007, with more in the works.

Obama's response? - a budget with 100 million in cuts out of 3.5 trillion, for this coming year. Do the math - If your budget was $2000 a month, a proportionate cut would be 6 cents. What? All the way down to 1999.94 - Wow, that's paring it to the bone. The Republican's response is at least 100 billion, 1000 times more, or $57 out of $2000, down to $1943. Still not enough. It needs to be way less than that, at least 25% this year and more next. Could your family survive with a 25% reduction in pay? Could you survive with $1500 instead of your usual $2000? You'd have to figure out how to. Much of America already has. Think the answer is to get more credit cards and max them all out? Of course not, so what sane person could possibly believe it's OK for the government to do it?

We're screwed if we don't do anything, but if we get on it, we can pull out of it. America has to wake up from the hopey changey thing and realize that the likes of Reid, Pelosi and Barney Frank do NOT have their best interests at heart, only their own power.

Who heard Michael Moore this weekend in support of his union brothers in Wisconsin say that America isn't broke - we have plenty of money? If that is the attitude of the masses - yep, we're screwed. My hope is that Americans are smarter than that.

[robert angel]

Fathertime,
Maybe we all could read a little closer.
Re your statement:

>>I don't know how you could disagree with JeffS's logic as it seems airtight to me, but why don't you say how it is you do or perhaps you would like to retract that statement?<<

And mine:

>>I respect other's rights to disagree civilly and in fact, I think that regarding this thread, there have been some excellent, salient points made on several fronts/subjects here. Damn that JeffS--it's hard to disagree with his logic! (although I still do to an extent--lol). Let's keep it above board! <<

In fact, I agree with a lot of what JeffS said--and what he says in general in fact. The guy doesn't even usually need to cite 'this and that' resource to make a compelling case --one that makes sense and makes you think, or sometimes in my case, 'rethink' my position. That's why I stated 'it's hard to disagree with his logic'. The guy makes sense in a logical way, without being over bearing.

Very obviously, a lot of people here don't like to rethink and/or change their position on a subject, while all the while the very same people are often trying very hard to get others to do just that and all too often, resorting to baiting and otherwise acting offensive to others, all in the hope of provoking further responses to a dialogue that as a result, typically goes nowhere but down hill.

When I said 'Damn that JeffS' --it's hard to disagree with his logic' I was admitting that sometimes I also occasionally have difficulty conceding ground on a topic and I was writing in 'tongue in cheek' style, and admitting as much, saying that Jeff makes some pretty compelling points. I'm pretty sure that JeffS saw it as such, although obviously not all of us did...

Also or the record, (isn't everything here forever 'on the record' and citable by some folks?--lol) the source you gave does have some pretty interesting information on not only California, but on the rest of the nation as well. More people should read and cross reference it.

I think that asking for retractions, or as some do, apologies, on behalf of other people, is generally sort of silly and usually a wasted effort on P-L anyway. It takes a lot of guts to apologize or make a retraction and even in the rare instances you do see them here, they usually kind of smell like someone's kissing up to someone, more than they're showing thought and integrity.

Now if JeffS feels I in anyway, shape or form was offensive to him, I'd read it closely and would very, very likely agree and act appropriately, although, retractions, never mind apologies, are exceedingly rare here.

For the record, I have said how Teacher pay, the way teacher pay scales are created (often based on degrees unrelated to their work) with many degrees from sub par 'colleges' that are more like on-line diploma mills and retirement plans that are, shall we say 'irrationally exuberant' and the federal govt's role in all of this--that these things, to mention just a few, are problematic. Belt tightening needs to be done across the board, and yes, that includes the school board.

Seeing how this post has gone the way most social-political threads tend to go here, with intolerance of others views, I'm pretty well done with it, unless something of an unnecessarily personal nature comes up and I feel that it needs to be addressed.

[robert angel]

Re:

      Right you are piglet! This year the interest on our national debt will be 200 billion dollars. Over the next 10 years it will be over 900 billion dollars a year which rivals any large spending program we have. I'd say our huge debt is our biggest problem now and congress is debating whether or not to cut 60 or 20 billion out of the budget.That's chump change by comparison but I guess it's a start.


So, stick a fork in us, we are done!
                 
And let's not forget that China ALONE holds 1.2 TRILLION dollars in redeemable US Treasury bonds. While they have a vested interest in the US economy not tanking, in otherwords, that our economies are presently 'co-dependent' to an extent, if a very unfortunate series of events occured, we could be in far worse shape than we already are.
         

]