Obamanation Re-election MegaThread

[Balta1701]

The US pays the second most of all countries on education. Money is not the problem.

This doesn't disagree with my previous statement.

[farmteam]

Oh, I see, so now you are acknowledging market forces do impact things. So if I then come back to the original claim that dramatically curtailing benefits and increasing workloads for teachers will wind up with worse quality teachers, where we have to play games like teaching standardized tests in order to deal with the fact that the well-qualified people don't go into that profession because it pays below market rates, everyone will agree with me.

 

And, if an executive is doing that to cut taxes for people who won't spend the money anyway, then that would mean that executive is effectively sabotaging his state/organization's future.

 

First of all, I couldn't be "now acknowledging" anything, as that was my first post in this thread. If you were trying to lump me in with AlphaDog's general argument, that would be unwise since I mostly disagree with him. I was solely pointing out that it's silly, in terms of Alpha's small business which were the terms your post used, to compare price-setting for a 1) for-profit, private entity which is using money generated by a pool of customers who chose to spend their money with his company with a 2) governmental body using money generated by a pool of people who don't directly choose to spend money on that service.

 

Of course the market affects things, and I agree lowering salaries/benefits lowers the quality that segment will attract. That still doesn't change the fact that the post of yours I was referencing posed, at best, a terribly phrased hypothetical.

[Balta1701]

That still doesn't change the fact that the post of yours I was referencing posed, at best, a terribly phrased hypothetical.

Which was, however, exactly what a number of states have done, cut back on education spending, cut back on teacher benefits, and use that money to fund upper income tax cuts. The fact that your jaw drops at how silly the concept is would be exactly the point.

[farmteam]

Which was, however, exactly what a number of states have done, cut back on education spending, cut back on teacher benefits, and use that money to fund upper income tax cuts.

 

And I agree with cutting back on those benefits and funding upper income tax cuts is loathsome!

 

Which STILL doesn't change the fact that your hypothetical, since it was in terms of Alpha's small business, was a poor one.

[EvilMonkey]

And I agree with cutting back on those benefits and funding upper income tax cuts is loathsome!

 

Which STILL doesn't change the fact that your hypothetical, since it was in terms of Alpha's small business, was a poor one.

That's because he was too busy moving the goal posts yet again with a lame hypothetical that he wasn't paying attention.

[Cknolls]

This doesn't disagree with my previous statement.

 

 

 

Stop the presses. The gov't misallocates resources.

[Balta1701]

That's because he was too busy moving the goal posts yet again with a lame hypothetical that he wasn't paying attention.

I see, you don't like my comparison between cutting wages to cut the price of a product for no reason and cutting education funding to cut taxes for people who are already paying less than they should be, so it's clearly a lame hypothetical with me not paying attention.

[EvilMonkey]

Oh, I see, so now you are acknowledging market forces do impact things. So if I then come back to the original claim that dramatically curtailing benefits and increasing workloads for teachers will wind up with worse quality teachers, where we have to play games like teaching standardized tests in order to deal with the fact that the well-qualified people don't go into that profession because it pays below market rates, everyone will agree with me.

 

And, if an executive is doing that to cut taxes for people who won't spend the money anyway, then that would mean that executive is effectively sabotaging his state/organization's future.

Benefits weren't curtailed at all, they just actually had to PAY something for them like the rest of the country. And asking them to pay 4% when most people who have insurance pay more than that is not asking a lot. So what's worse, having a job with insurance and paying 4%, or being unemployed with no insurance. Hmmmm.

[Balta1701]

Stop the presses. The gov't misallocates resources.

Like when it cuts taxes.

[Balta1701]

Benefits weren't curtailed at all, they just actually had to PAY something for them like the rest of the country. And asking them to pay 4% when most people who have insurance pay more than that is not asking a lot. So what's worse, having a job with insurance and paying 4%, or being unemployed with no insurance. Hmmmm.

So the total financial benefits were cut.

[EvilMonkey]

I see, you don't like my comparison between cutting wages to cut the price of a product for no reason and cutting education funding to cut taxes for people who are already paying less than they should be, so it's clearly a lame hypothetical with me not paying attention.

Wheter they cut taxes or not, the districts were still in the red, so money had to be saved somewhere. It was not all peaches and cream until some tax cut came along, the state, like almost all the rest, was floundering under massive debt brought on by idiotic representatives who caved in to union demands over and over again to create environments where the states just simply can't stay above water.

[EvilMonkey]

So the total financial benefits were cut.

You must get a workout with all the moving you do.

[Balta1701]

Wheter they cut taxes or not, the districts were still in the red, so money had to be saved somewhere. It was not all peaches and cream until some tax cut came along, the state, like almost all the rest, was floundering under massive debt brought on by idiotic representatives who caved in to union demands over and over again to create environments where the states just simply can't stay above water.

Great, so it's an emergency measure. So therefore, there's no reason for the cuts now that the economy is improving, and the extra fees can be removed right? Because that's always how it goes, they won't spend the $ taken away from the workers on new tax cuts.

[Balta1701]

You must get a workout with all the moving you do.

So, if you went back to your CEO days, and you told your employees they were out a thousand dollars a year or so for whatever reason, to cover some portion of the benefits they had before, but you told them "Hey, it's ok, it's not a benefit cut, you have nothing to worry about", it'd go over great, right?

[mr_genius]

So the total financial benefits were cut.

 

boo hoo

[Balta1701]

boo hoo

And that's why education stinks in this country.

[mr_genius]

And that's why education stinks in this country.

 

nope

[EvilMonkey]

So, if you went back to your CEO days, and you told your employees they were out a thousand dollars a year or so for whatever reason, to cover some portion of the benefits they had before, but you told them "Hey, it's ok, it's not a benefit cut, you have nothing to worry about", it'd go over great, right?

I HAVE cut their pay in the past when things were rough. Right after 9/11 when my business volume dropped about 60%, everyone took a cut. You need to face reality. Why do you think teachers shouldn't feel the pain of a state with no money, just like the rest of the people? The state had NO MONEY. They were broke, in the red. Unlike the Feds, they can't just print up money or sell magic unicorn poop on Ebay to get some. You keep throwing tax cuts in here to try and muddy things up, as if I was first of all in favor of those, and also as if those were the sole reason that the concessions were made. You are wrong on both. Cuts were going to be made regardless, so your constant throwing around of tax cuts is a red herring. There was a choice, massive layoffs or a SMALL paycut and start paying a VERY SMALL portion of their very generous benefits package. WHich would you take if faced with a prospect of losing your job? As a result of the changes, the state is now in better financial shape, and almost all the districts that were underwater are not at break even or better. You also brought up earlier that despite our massive overall funding of education that a bulk of it seems to not make it down to the teacher level. I will agree with you there that the top layers are bloated beyond recognition on many areas and needs to be addressed. But those layers are also core Democratic constituencies, so good luck with that.

[Balta1701]

I HAVE cut their pay in the past when things were rough. Right after 9/11 when my business volume dropped about 60%, everyone took a cut. You need to face reality. Why do you think teachers shouldn't feel the pain of a state with no money, just like the rest of the people? The state had NO MONEY. They were broke, in the red. Unlike the Feds, they can't just print up money or sell magic unicorn poop on Ebay to get some. You keep throwing tax cuts in here to try and muddy things up, as if I was first of all in favor of those, and also as if those were the sole reason that the concessions were made. You are wrong on both. Cuts were going to be made regardless, so your constant throwing around of tax cuts is a red herring. There was a choice, massive layoffs or a SMALL paycut and start paying a VERY SMALL portion of their very generous benefits package. WHich would you take if faced with a prospect of losing your job? As a result of the changes, the state is now in better financial shape, and almost all the districts that were underwater are not at break even or better. You also brought up earlier that despite our massive overall funding of education that a bulk of it seems to not make it down to the teacher level. I will agree with you there that the top layers are bloated beyond recognition on many areas and needs to be addressed. But those layers are also core Democratic constituencies, so good luck with that.

Everyone took a cut in this case...except the high level taxpayers, who got a nice tax cut. Which contributed to the state being in the red and having no money. Maybe not the biggest reason, but you can't say "The state had NO MONEY" when they found money for tax cuts.

 

But then, we demand teachers sacrifice, we demand workers sacrifice, but we never demand the rich sacrifice.

 

And then, things improve for the state, but the "Emergency sacrifices" stay in place. Tennessee is doing this one right now. Massive cuts to the education budgets over the last 3 years, financial situation now improving, first thing that happens...tax cuts.

[EvilMonkey]

[quote name='Balta1701' date='Feb 4, 2012 -> 01:26 PM' post='2545159'

And then, things improve for the state, but the "Emergency sacrifices" stay in place. Tennessee is doing this one right now. Massive cuts to the education budgets over the last 3 years, financial situation now improving, first thing that happens...tax cuts.

Kinda like toll roads here in Illinois, or the supposed 'temporary tax increase' that Quinn passed last year, that is supposed to end in a few years. yeah, it will end, sure. And I have a bridge to sell you. 67% increase and the state is still screwed.

 

Perhaps Tennessee could get more money from teachers by reducing the executives pay? Cut some from the admin budget, filter it down to the workers. No reason those CEO's should be paid so much.

[Balta1701]

Perhaps Tennessee could get more money from teachers by reducing the executives pay? Cut some from the admin budget, filter it down to the workers. No reason those CEO's should be paid so much.

That's one where you won't get any disagreement from me...but then, I'd apply that same standard to "Any CEO", and then I'd get hit with either "Gotta retain top talent" or "Now that's class warfare!".

[Heads22]

Lets quit acting like being a teacher is a normal job. It's not. You have one person responsible for the welfare of twenty plus children at a time while at the same time being expected to educate them for the real world.

 

As far as Obama, I'm going to vote for him, but it's a failure on the part of the Republican party that it doesn't look like he should lose. If it wasn't for the absolute dumpster fire that they have representing them at the top, they should be measuring drapes in the Oval Office.

 

I also get a kick out of people that use Obama's middle name as a scare tactic.

[EvilMonkey]

Lets quit acting like being a teacher is a normal job. It's not. You have one person responsible for the welfare of twenty plus children at a time while at the same time being expected to educate them for the real world.

 

As far as Obama, I'm going to vote for him, but it's a failure on the part of the Republican party that it doesn't look like he should lose. If it wasn't for the absolute dumpster fire that they have representing them at the top, they should be measuring drapes in the Oval Office.

 

I also get a kick out of people that use Obama's middle name as a scare tactic.

Let's quit acting like teachins is slave labor as well. The work 9 months out of the year, have better benefits than almost every other working sector and are as concerned about their own jobs as everyone else is. There are good teaching jobs and bad teaching jobs. For every inner city s***hole where the teacher should deserve triple as hazard pay there are cushy jobs where a gym teacher makes 200k. Get a payraise by going back to school and raising your degree. Tenure! WFT is THAT! Admin is bloated, pension are bloated and it is the fault of the politicians that voted them that way by kicking the can down the road. My mother worked in a school, a poor school district in fact. And while her pay was not on par with many others, her insurance was pretty damn awesome, and she paid very little for it. Due to the negotiations she also got sick days, which she was allowed to carry over. What other job gives you sick days and lets you carry them over if unused? And to accumulate them! She had a years worth of time she was able to cash in per her contract when she retired. I don't begrudge the teachers for asking for what they think they are worth and then some. You play by the rules. but the rules are changing. Economy sucks, job markets suck, and you have to do same or more with less. Private schools seem top produce as good an education if not more, for less money per student than public schools. Why is that?

[Balta1701]

Private schools seem top produce as good an education if not more, for less money per student than public schools. Why is that?

Really, I'd love to see data on that one. Charter schools overall are just as hit and miss as public schools from everything I've seen.

[StrangeSox]

Really, I'd love to see data on that one. Charter schools overall are just as hit and miss as public schools from everything I've seen.

They can also choose who they admit, which lets them avoid educating the expensive ones.