Fairweather

Love the way teachers are so hung up on the masters thing--as if it magically entitles them to additional $$$$ without additional contribution. "Why do I deserve an extra $$$$xxxx? Well, because I have a masters degree!" Again, what gives teachers the right to take more of my retirement savings? Maybe they should look at administration salaries and find "efficiencies" there. Does an elementary school principal justify $112,000/year?

More likely yours will carve into mine. In fact, you're trying to do just that.

I think a solo skier disappeared last year on the CD.

wonderful. the capitalist system is great in a number of arenas, especially ones where pushing out widgets is key. paying workers based on how many they can get out the door an hour is perfectly logical in many employment areas. human beings aren't really widgets though, and defining performance in the educational world is frought with difficulty - any given class of 30 kids i teach will have a very ride range of needs, many of which are hard to fashion a metric to - some kids need a brilliant professor type to push them to the pinnacle of Socratic introspection and maybe that can be measured in a meaningful way (ironically, i'm not sure the almighty socrates would agree though) - far more need guidance counselors, social workers, remedial tutors, reading coaches, psychologists, surrogate parents, patient listeners, etc. how do you create a simple, fair, easily explained test to measure that? how, in an environoment as ate-up by politics as any other profession, do you keep politics from creeping into the measurement technique? do you really assume that, if a patient dies, it's his doctors fault? should cops be retained only on the basis of how many tickets they write? is it the fire-fighters fault when he shows up to a building already burning? can every important job really boil down to something that's on a balance sheet? teachers and schools do need oversight and we should use metrics as part of that -graduation rates, students long-term outcomes in terms of college graduation and employment, ap/sat scores, community satisfaction, etc., these are all important things, but no single factor is prime, nor does any particularly get at the value of a single employee in the system. pretending otherwise is facile and foolish, the product of wishing the world was a much, much simpler place than it is. You're adhering to Barry Schwartz's/Kwame Appiah's version of a cosmopolitan, two system model here--and the flawed notion that each can each serve a particular niche independent of the other. If any additional money is to be found for teachers and classroom size, it's within the outlays for administration--not from taxpayers/small business owners who are already getting screwed. Are you telling me that it's somehow "fair" to come and take away 7.5% of a private citizen's retirement nest egg just so it can be redistributed to teachers who already have a generous pension plan? (Yet another benefit that no longer exists in the private sector.) As for "the politics" of performance ratings, well, welcome to the real world. I've got news for you: it's not always fair. But it is, in aggregate. Who the fuck are teachers to think they are somehow above it? In short, I have no problem with private-sector unions. Corporations can be assholes. But public-sector unions ought to be abolished. There is no cigar-smoking, money-counting, robber baron to be fought there. Plenty of laws to protect against poor practices. Let the market dictate teacher salaries based on supply and demand--and performance. It's the real world--and you have no right to insulate yourselves from it.

Oh - chiming in on the teacher pay thing, I can't imagine, by any stretch of the imagination, someone thinking that teachers are over-paid. I work in the private sector and have had 5 years with the feds - but that's now over 25 years in the private sector. My spouse with an MS in a science field left the private and went into teaching 18 years ago. While she doesn't regret it she says she doubled her hours and halved her pay going to teach. With an MS in her field and 18 years teaching she makes decent pay - but particularly if you figure it out on a per hour basis - even including the six week summer break - it's modest. Younger teachers, particularly with families are in a bit more of a pinch. The gravy train argument is a nice conservative fairy tale. How much does she make? Does her MS afford her added responsibilities e.g AP-level curricula development, student performance, etc? Frankly, teachers in hard sciences/mathematics should be paid more. Thank the union for her lack of salary respect. I hold an MA and I can assure you that my private sector pay remains tied to performance and results.

Those of us in the private sector had our last cost of living raise--never. Typically, we get pay increases based on performance. Maybe you should think about dumping that union of yours. Sounds like they're standing in the way of good pay for good teachers.

http://wwwb.thenewstribune.com/databases/school_pay/ Yes, the state schedule. Not really the complete picture--but then you already knew that. Know any teachers? Type their name into the salary finder. Pretty good chance they make more than your chart indicates. Life outside the glass dome.

I was in Oly on Saturday. There were bigger crowds for the dragon boat races.

Yeah, all the disgruntled stoners will suddenly get off the couch and march in the streets LOL 4000 pissed off (mainly) libturds managed to encircle the state capitol on Saturday...perhaps they just had an extra big bowl of Wheaties that morning? Yes, demanding tax increases from 30,40,50 thousand dollar a year workers so 60,70,80 thousand dollar a year teachers can get a bigger pay raise makes a lot of sense.

...kicking out the windows of the Nike Store--while wearing Nikes. Coordinating their rage against the corporate machine with locally hand-crafted i Phones. Their cavalry units ride bicycles that you and I cannot afford.

They are massing a flotilla of over 1000 kayaks as we speak!

Careful there, KK. A storm is coming!

Yes, but it took the 13th and, later, the 15th Amendments to codify his actions. In other words, a process. This was particularly important given the cynicism of Lincoln's order--freeing slaves in southern states he did not control at the time, and granting waivers to the union states of Deleware, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri. Hypocricy, IMO. In short, executive whim is no way to run a democracy. Wasn't then; isn't now.

Jim, I don't see anything even close to Obama's order on your list. In any event, the courts will decide soon enough. And the last mid-term already provided a preview of the American public's "enthusiasm" regarding this issue. So there's that. I understand that libtards, generally speaking, don't like the very concept of the nation-state. So it stands to reason that they stand behind their dictator-in-waiting re open borders. And it doesn't hurt their political map either, right?

Reagan signed a bill into law that was put on his desk by Congress. Tu comprendes la diferencia, amigo?

Yea, dumbshit, I'd say there is a big difference between pardoning the Thanksgiving turkey and effectively pardoning 11 million illegals. (Or, for that matter, imprisoning 100,000 Japanese.) Well done.

Wow, guess we don't need Congress anymore. Careful what you wish for.

The truth needs no support. It's all a matter of historical record. Unless all you read is the re-written history. Actually, um, nevermind.

OMG, I had no idea about any of this! Where did you learn all of this??? Ivan? TTK? Off? You guys really want to claim this guy?

Bring on the revolution, Special K! Enough of your tough-guy routine.

Capitalism, by its nature, chooses the latter. But the choice as I see it is similar, which is, "Who's gonna fuck me up the ass? The government? or the corporation?" While the corporation can make sure I starve or die lacking coverage for that one last medical test, the government has the guns and prisons.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/201 18 U.S. Code § 201 - Bribery of public officials and witnesses (2) being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for: (A) being influenced in the performance of any official act; (B) being influenced to commit or aid in committing, or to collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on the United States; or © being induced to do or omit to do any act in violation of the official duty of such official or person;

For your recollection, Ivan, here are the Congressional vote totals for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Looks like Democrats had a bigger problem with it than did Republicans: Totals are in "Yea–Nay" format: The original House version: Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%) Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%) Cloture in the Senate: Democratic Party: 44–23 (66–34%) Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%) The Senate version: Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%) Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%) The Senate version, voted on by the House: Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%) Republican Party: 136–35 (80–20%)