Libtards on Parade: Alcoholism, Corruption, Murder

[ivan]

performance in the real-world of education is pretty simple, and not something that my or any other teachign union i'm aware of gets in the way of - showing up to work on time and sober, keeping your hands off the product, responding promptly and in an informed fashion to requests from parents/principals/colleagues/etc, treating kids fairly and equally, etc. - these are no-brainers - but again, test scores don't get at those basics.

[Fairweather]

I hold an MA and I can assure you that my private sector pay remains tied to performance and results.

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.

 

 

[glassgowkiss]

FW, unless your parents paid for private school, it is utterly hypocritical to benefit from the system, and then turn around and deny the very same opportunity to the very next generation.

Just to use your capitalistic principles. For one- class sizes have steady increased, reaching in some cases over last few years. So on that token, teachers should be paid more, as they have to do more teaching "per unit". Essentially if you need to increase your work output, you should be compensated accordingly.

[ivan]

But public-sector unions ought to be abolished. There is no cigar-smoking, money-counting, robber baron to be fought there.

odd - your constant mistrust of government would indicate otherwise - why would a strident capitalist cum congressman shed this curmudgeonly behavior exactly?

 

your claim of a "generous pension plan" flies in the face of plenty of public pensions that have gotten the chop over the past few years - i have to have confidence that the promises will be kept when it comes time as, as said, i can't save independently, but do you not think i'm setting myself up for a massive failure by assuming the people of your political persuasion won't carve into it w/ a chainsaw when they get the opportunity?

[Fairweather]

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

[Buckshot]

40 teachers in little old Ephrata make over $70K per year:

http://data.spokesman.com/salaries/schools/2013/62-ephrata-school-district/employees/

 

[Jim]

Well kinda true. You are counting their base salary, stipends, and INSURANCE. Stipends are given for extra work - say if a teacher coaches a team or leads some other extra curricular program or club -- are you saying they shouldn't be paid more for doing more? I thought this was what the merit system was about.

 

Just for kicks I looked up one of the teachers who makes more than $70k. A Masters and 16 years experiences with a base salary of $62k. Insurance/benefits is valued at almost $10k. Yea - posh.

[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?

[Jim]

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?

 

Well, that's how it works in private industry. When I hire a new staff person if they have a Masters they have a higher base salary. So now were dodging off into the land of "administration".

 

Interesting. I'm not hearing you whine about the Pentagon "administrators" and their programs, which make the school system finances pencil dust in comparison. What a bunch of crock.

[Fairweather]

Of course you're comparing federal spending to federal spending. I would be very, very surprised if combined government spending for education (state, fed, local) didn't dwarf defense outlays. Show me numbers.

[Fairweather]

In any event, we're talking state taxes here, Jim. A crock? Try to stay on task.

[JasonG]

yes, but this is NOT what collapsed the market. What collapsed the whole thing were Magnatar trades combined with default credit swaps, which administration refused to regulate. Essentially 2003- 2006 was a steady buildup of this massive ponzi scheme.

 

Ha. A lot of very smart economists are still debating this. It isn't that simple, and there is plenty of blame to to go around.

[Jim]

In any event, we're talking state taxes here, Jim. A crock? Try to stay on task.

 

Since it's your argument - how about you come up with some evidence that what we are spending on education is just wasteful. These are cute little anecdotes about over-paid elementary school principals. And the specific one you posted, her base salary is $95k. So yea, given the hours they put in all year long and the responsibilities they have - yea, it seems to correspond to their job.

 

Somehow - that teachers are just cruising along and have a great pension is, well, a lie. If my spouse makes it to 20 years of teaching she'll be eligible for a whopping $17k year pension. AND her SS benefits will be scaled back accordingly because she gets a pension.

 

I think most teachers would agree that central administration is a bit daunting and would benefit from efficiencies. But then again - so would Microsoft. Large organizations, no matter what, are inherently run by humans, who are flawed.

 

You are not taxed very much on the state, local, or federal level. Get over it already.

[Fairweather]

 

You are not taxed very much on the state, local, or federal level. Get over it already.

 

Stunning libtard arrogance on display here. You have no clue re my taxes. And now teachers have the audacity to agitate for a 7.5% tax on capital gains? When it's possible to fund education without any tax increases? I think that's called "greedy math." And no, it's not about the kids.

 

Thank God Republicans control the state Senate.

 

 

[Jim]

 

You are not taxed very much on the state, local, or federal level. Get over it already.

 

Stunning libtard arrogance on display here. You have no clue re my taxes. And now teachers have the audacity to agitate for a 7.5% tax on capital gains? When it's possible to fund education without any tax increases? I think that's called "greedy math." And no, it's not about the kids.

 

Thank God Republicans control the state Senate.

 

 

Yawn

 

Really. You can come up with another unsubstantiated tirade. Quite uncreative to keep recycling this one. Given you have time to while away here - I'll assume you're middle to upper-middle class in Wa. Given that - yea, your taxes are low. Show me otherwise.

[Fairweather]

Wow, talk about biases and assumptions!

[Jim]

I'm a data driven kinda guy. So rather than just reving up the again and again, why don't you just walk us through a few facts and figures to support the argument that you are unduly burdened?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

It's been a fact for decades that teachers are not paid exhorbitant salaries. And let's not forget they work 9 months of the year, not 12.

 

People who go into teaching know what they are going to get in terms of pay and do it anyways. The endless whining about this gets old. If you want to go for money, pick a different career.

 

Why is it that teachers aren't paid more? Do we not value them like other developed nations?

 

And hour wise they work more than 9 months. It's between 50 and 60 hrs week. I have a couple teacher friends. Coming back from Smith on a Sunday with one of them, he asked me to drive. Then he graded papers for 2 hours.

 

 

Other nations have school 12 months a year, not 9. Are you factoring that in?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

You are not taxed very much on the state, local, or federal level. Get over it already.

 

Stunning libtard arrogance on display here. You have no clue re my taxes. And now teachers have the audacity to agitate for a 7.5% tax on capital gains? When it's possible to fund education without any tax increases? I think that's called "greedy math." And no, it's not about the kids.

 

Thank God Republicans control the state Senate.

 

 

FW, I'll bet Jim thinks 25%-30% of your income in taxes is "low", 'cos libtards believe in socialism, and would like to see the aggregate tax rate around 50-60% for all the peons in the middle class.

 

And I am talking about all taxes in the aggregate: federal income, real estate, utilities taxes, gasoline, cigarettes and alcohol, sales tax and so on and so on and so on

[Fairweather]

I'm a data driven kinda guy. So rather than just reving up the again and again, why don't you just walk us through a few facts and figures to support the argument that you are unduly burdened?

 

You've already admitted that your spouse's teaching job pays well. The argument that taxes ought to be raised on the rest of us so she can be paid even more is yours to make. You haven't even come close.

[Jim]

[

 

FW, I'll bet Jim thinks 25%-30% of your income in taxes is "low", 'cos libtards believe in socialism, and would like to see the aggregate tax rate around 50-60% for all the peons in the middle class.

 

And I am talking about all taxes in the aggregate: federal income, real estate, utilities taxes, gasoline, cigarettes and alcohol, sales tax and so on and so on and so on

 

I guarantee you are paying nowhere near 30% of your income in taxes. Show us some numbers dude - otherwise it's more emergency arm waving

[Jim]

I'm a data driven kinda guy. So rather than just reving up the again and again, why don't you just walk us through a few facts and figures to support the argument that you are unduly burdened?

 

You've already admitted that your spouse's teaching job pays well. The argument that taxes ought to be raised on the rest of us so she can be paid even more is yours to make. You haven't even come close.

 

I think I said "adequate" not well. With a Masters degree in Science and close to 20 years experience in teaching and 16 yrs in a science field - yea $65k isn't so bad given the structure of the teaching field. Given she'll put in an average of 60 hours each week for the school term (including breaks) and then goes in over the summer to peck away at lesson planning and collaboration, her average hourly pay is getting close to minimum wage.

 

AND, as I said before, pay isn't the issue for teachers I know. It's the support of the system for teacher aids, special needs kids (which private schools won't touch), English as a second language help, and size of classes. They are a sturdy bunch -

 

OK - so now you can give me the breakdown - what your gross family income, level of deductions, and tax paid. We can use the standard assumptions on state sales tax from the tax tables, and can easily calculate the levee costs of your jurisdiction. So I'm willing to listen to some stepwise presentation - otherwise it's the usual

 

"I don't want to pay taxes" Stamp feet. Repeat.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

[

 

FW, I'll bet Jim thinks 25%-30% of your income in taxes is "low", 'cos libtards believe in socialism, and would like to see the aggregate tax rate around 50-60% for all the peons in the middle class.

 

And I am talking about all taxes in the aggregate: federal income, real estate, utilities taxes, gasoline, cigarettes and alcohol, sales tax and so on and so on and so on

 

I guarantee you are paying nowhere near 30% of your income in taxes. Show us some numbers dude - otherwise it's more emergency arm waving

 

You are fucking kidding me right? I'm going to post my personal income here for fodder from the douche buckets and shitheels that crawl out from their rocks repeatedly to snipe and shit everywhere in spray - you know the LCD forum on a climbing web site.

 

BTW, your "guarantee" fails. Because your *ASSUMPTIONS* are faulty.

 

[Jim]

Hmmm. I gave you some financials as you inquired about my spouse's salary. WTF is the big deal?

 

You are the one crying bloody murder via taxes - it's bullshit. There is no way you are paying 30% in taxes. Most folks with a house and kids are getting plenty of deductions - even the federal standard deduction is dang generous. I'm guessing your realized tax obligations are floating around 15% or so as most middle class folks.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Hmmm. I gave you some financials as you inquired about my spouse's salary. WTF is the big deal?

 

You are the one crying bloody murder via taxes - it's bullshit. There is no way you are paying 30% in taxes. Most folks with a house and kids are getting plenty of deductions - even the federal standard deduction is dang generous. I'm guessing your realized tax obligations are floating around 15% or so as most middle class folks.

 

In the past, say, 5-10 years ago, I paid 12-15% in Federal Income Tax obligations alone. I pay much more now.

 

As for my point it was that ALL taxes combined are what matters, and I count Medicare/etc deductions that I pay and from which I will derive no benefit. That's a tax. So are gasoline taxes, property tax, sales tax, utilities - everything. 0.5% here, 1.0% there - nickel and dimed to death which easily will run up to 25% for someone in the middle class to upper middle class. Sales tax alone is almost 10% in WA and if you spend 25% of your annual income on taxable items that's 2.5%. I also count "use fees" which should be paid out of my taxes but are just another trick the gov't employees to suck out money from the citizens. Ditto for GoCard fees to cross the 520 and other taxes - whether called that or not.