Public Sector Union Beatdown Bloodbath Legismania 2011 Wisconsin-style

Lemur, I am dead serious. Public pay is going to be slashed. First support, then teachers, then Police, then the Military - in that order. Every agency can do more with less. Technology should be making the same crap levels of education cheaper per child, not more expensive. We are being hosed in every direction and Americans are starting to realize it. Khan Academy has helped me learn and retain more mathematical knowledge than any and all of my math teachers combined; all for the high price of a computer and the internet. 1 man, 2000 videos, public domain content and a great interface vs the insane cost of employing crap teachers around the country. The need for their jobs is coming to an end and they are screaming over a 4% pay cut. IMO, this reaction is sharpening the swords of the masses.

The future of the United States is deflation of income and inflation in technology. I believe that we are going to come to a point where peoples salaries stagnate or even go down year after year with exponential growth in technology being responsible for an overall increase in the standard of living. Get on board. If you realise that traditional growth was mostly illusory on the domestic level; salary increases being outpaced by inflation and based more on our increased in lving standards in relation to the rest of the world; then you can see how a growing and driven international standard of living will reduce or value in relation to it. I'm ok with it. One day, none of us will have anything to do because robots will be doing all of it for us. We will be volunteering for all of the jobs that we do now for crazy fees. SINGULARITY IS THE CHRISTIAN VIEW OF THE END OF TIMES AND HEAVEN ON EARTH BRINGING THE DEAD BACK TO LIFE... did I lose you? Stay with me.

I'll be honest here, I'm not very pro-union. I think a lot of what unions were instituted to fix has now been addressed in labor law. That said, I'm not terribly anti-union either.

Looks to me like a good argument can be made against public-sector unions. However, the way our Governor is going about it strikes me as ... ill-planned. Let's bust the teachers first? Really? And leave the police out and supposedly get around to them later? I don't believe it, not for a moment. Much more likely: Walker will succeed in busting the teacher's union, and then this whole "reform" process will grind to a halt. Net result: To hell with the teachers, but you, Mister Policeman, can have health care and a pension for the rest of you natural life. Thanks for voting Republican!

If I thought there were a realistic prospect of reform, I'd be much more generously inclined toward this experiment. But leaving the police and firefighters off the table turns it into a sexist little voyage of political payback.

-edit-

Okay, after your 10:05 edit your post became really epic. Respect!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

I'll be honest here, I'm not very pro-union. I think a lot of what unions were instituted to fix has now been addressed in labor law. That said, I'm not terribly anti-union either.

Looks to me like a good argument can be made against public-sector unions. However, the way our Governor is going about it strikes me as ... ill-planned. Let's bust the teachers first? Really? And leave the police out and supposedly get around to them later? I don't believe it, not for a moment. Much more likely: Walker will succeed in busting the teacher's union, and then this whole "reform" process will grind to a halt. Net result: To hell with the teachers, but you, Mister Policeman, can have health care and a pension for the rest of you natural life. Thanks for voting Republican!

If I thought there were a realistic prospect of reform, I'd be much more generously inclined toward this experiment. But leaving the police and firefighters off the table turns it into a sexist little voyage of political payback.

-edit-

Okay, after your 10:05 edit your post became really epic. Respect!

---

Ha! I think I may have convinced my father that I was insane when I started talking about Singularity. I read an article in Time magazine and a few more in the Economist and I'm sold.

Quote:

---

The backlash threatens to undercut one of the Democratic Party’s most stalwart backers — and upset a mutually beneficial relationship where the unions provided financial support and foot soldiers for Democratic campaigns, in return for political cover to protect their prerogatives in the U.S. Congress and state capitols across the nation.

The National Education Association, the largest teachers union, spent $40 million on the 2010 elections alone, making the union one of the largest outside funders of Democratic campaigns.

---

Oh yes, I remember now. The unions don't contribute so much directly as they use their mobilization ability to go out and drum up support. But I think unions can be allowed to do that. I mean, would you rather they strike?

Quote:

---

Obama’s education secretary Arne Duncan sounded surprisingly like the Republican governors when he told teachers unions and administrators at a conference Tuesday in Denver, “Clearly, the status quo isn’t working for children.”

---

Clearly the children aren't working.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

This is a critical point in American history. We can either bow to the unions, or take our fiscal future back. The GOP and the Obama Administration must work together to destroy the union stranglehold on America's children.

---

Stranglehold on America's children? :dizzy2:

It's just a union. What exactly is it that's been passed that shouldn't have been?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

The future of the United States is deflation of income and inflation in technology. I believe that we are going to come to a point where peoples salaries stagnate or even go down year after year with exponential growth in technology being responsible for an overall increase in the standard of living. Get on board. If you realise that traditional growth was mostly illusory on the domestic level; salary increases being outpaced by inflation and based more on our increased in lving standards in relation to the rest of the world; then you can see how a growing and driven international standard of living will reduce or value in relation to it. I'm ok with it. One day, none of us will have anything to do because robots will be doing all of it for us. We will be volunteering for all of the jobs that we do now for crazy fees.

---

So... Which political system do you consider can handle this change? :scholar:

Which political systems today existed 100 years ago? Not too many. Times change and political systems arise as a result of them. The U.S. government in 2010 is not the U.S. government in 1911. Our current monetary system is merely a carrot and stick encouraging labor and morale. What happens when we no longer need human labor and it can be done better by our developed automations? What will we need the current monetary system for? It will have to change. What if home prices and entertainment fell at the same time as our income did? Would we need raises if the fall in cost of living fell? It has always risen, but it doesn't have to forever.

I see home prices around the country continue to decline. Wages are declining. And yet, life is getting better. Investments can be made abroad for growth, but the vast majority of us will see a slide forever until we meet the rest of the world. It will feel like a fall merely because of our monetary system, but if standards of living for everyone have increased, it would be foolish to consider it a real "decline".

gut the opposition to our decline. speed up the process.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Lemur, I am dead serious. Public pay is going to be slashed. First support, then teachers, then Police, then the Military - in that order. Every agency can do more with less. Technology should be making the same crap levels of education cheaper per child, not more expensive. We are being hosed in every direction and Americans are starting to realize it. Khan Academy has helped me learn and retain more mathematical knowledge than any and all of my math teachers combined; all for the high price of a computer and the internet. 1 man, 2000 videos, public domain content and a great interface vs the insane cost of employing crap teachers around the country. The need for their jobs is coming to an end and they are screaming over a 4% pay cut. IMO, this reaction is sharpening the swords of the masses.

The future of the United States is deflation of income and inflation in technology. I believe that we are going to come to a point where peoples salaries stagnate or even go down year after year with exponential growth in technology being responsible for an overall increase in the standard of living. Get on board. If you realise that traditional growth was mostly illusory on the domestic level; salary increases being outpaced by inflation and based more on our increased in lving standards in relation to the rest of the world; then you can see how a growing and driven international standard of living will reduce or value in relation to it. I'm ok with it. One day, none of us will have anything to do because robots will be doing all of it for us. We will be volunteering for all of the jobs that we do now for crazy fees. SINGULARITY IS THE CHRISTIAN VIEW OF THE END OF TIMES AND HEAVEN ON EARTH BRINGING THE DEAD BACK TO LIFE... did I lose you? Stay with me.

---

I would just like to correct you on one thing.

Teaching can not be completely transferred over to technology. I get to listen in on a few committees as a student representative at my uni and all the professors in the committee I attend agreed that technology can only go so far to replace the human interaction that some people need. Kahn Academy is just absolutely fantastic, no doubt about that. But Kahn Academy is inherently restricted to what you can get out of a video (it doesn't change the explanation to a more simplistic view every time you watch the video as a teacher would if you were still confused about some concepts). MITOpenSource and Kahn Academy I think will allow those that are already motivated and/or interested and/or smart enough to go be able to gain this information on their own and further their education through technology. However, the demand for physical teacher-student interactions will never be replaced because the average student needs to ask questions, needs things clarified once if not multiple times. Technology should not be treated with the same philosophy that created No Child Left Behind. NCLB is a complete failure because it treats all students on an equal level, which even if you disregard the socioeconomic factors, anyone can tell you that not all brains are created equal. Just a fact of life. To treat technology as the same singular solution that will wash over all of education and make everything better is false as well.

That being said, the concept that in the future people will be volunteering to do things because things that "need" to be done will be done by robots is still applicable here. In this singularity future you have brought up, those that still require human interaction with teachers will be able to find those who have a passion for teaching, which is why many teachers are in it to begin with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Cause to my eyes, it sure looks like it's okay to go after the chicks who work in the schools, but leave the dudes out of it!

---

What world are you living in exactly Lemur?! That is one of the most desperate, ill-informed, generalizing statements that I have ever heard in my entire life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This bill is actually exactly what Wisconsin needs. The only thing I do not like is that a comprehensive overhaul of the education system is not on the table at the same time.
How is this? Instead of having a good-old-boys (I'm sorry Lemur, a good-old-girls) system, why don't they try evening out the pay of teachers. 40,000 a year (adjusting for inflation) is well above average, and considering how low the requirements of being a teacher are (If I remember correctly, you only need a 2.84 GPA to pursue an ED degree/intent at my Uni, as apposed to the 3.5X required for most other fields), and that you don't even need a bachelor's degree to teach, I honestly don't see why it should be any higher. (not to mention that a large part of the year many teachers will not be teaching)
If you lowered the pay to 40k for full-time teachers (with up to 10k incentive pay for those with better performance) a teacher, you would not have a bunch of teachers making peanuts and a bunch making outrageous salaries. Not only would they all make a decent salary, but you would probably be able to afford more teachers than you do under the current system. Also, make it illegal to refuse to hire someone on the basis of not being in a union. If you did that and only made them pay 5% of their benefits, you would probably save money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

What world are you living in exactly Lemur?! That is one of the most desperate, ill-informed, generalizing statements that I have ever heard in my entire life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This bill is actually exactly what Wisconsin needs. The only thing I do not like is that a comprehensive overhaul of the education system is not on the table at the same time.
How is this? Instead of having a good-old-boys (I'm sorry Lemur, a good-old-girls) system, why don't they try evening out the pay of teachers. 40,000 a year (adjusting for inflation) is well above average, and considering how low the requirements of being a teacher are (If I remember correctly, you only need a 2.84 GPA to pursue an ED degree/intent at my Uni, as apposed to the 3.5X required for most other fields), and that you don't even need a bachelor's degree to teach, I honestly don't see why it should be any higher. (not to mention that a large part of the year many teachers will not be teaching)
If you lowered the pay to 40k for full-time teachers (with up to 10k incentive pay for those with better performance) a teacher, you would not have a bunch of teachers making peanuts and a bunch making outrageous salaries. Not only would they all make a decent salary, but you would probably be able to afford more teachers than you do under the current system. Also, make it illegal to refuse to hire someone on the basis of not being in a union. If you did that and only made them pay 5% of their benefits, you would probably save money.

---

People are conflating the part of the bill teachers are rallying against so heavily (removing collective bargaining for the union) with the idea of cutting back on teacher salary. They are two different things here. The bill is bad because it strips the ability for the union to protect teachers, which is needed because teachers otherwise are going to get trampled by ignorant parents. Cutting back on salaries and/or asking to pay in 1-5% of their salary for the benefits they receive I agree might very well be a good thing for some states. Trying to strip teachers of the ability to organize and defend themselves? Not a good idea.

Also a couple of things to correct you on Vuk,

1. Since education is a state issue and not a federal issue, the point of what the qualifications are to teach are going to vary wildly across different states. Some states want higher GPAs than others, from what I can remember off the top of my head, California may actually require a college degree in the field you are planning to teach with the exception of those under the category of some education with a bunch of actual private industry experience.

2. This is partly a continuation of the first point, but sort of isn't since this does apply everywhere in some respects. The point you made regarding cutting the current salary and using that to hire more teachers, is mostly likely going to require more funding because of the rampant overcrowding there is. Right now I believe the average for California if not the country are classroom sizes of anywhere from 30-45 students (47 in one of my classes! The entire room was packed with chairs!). Ideally, it really should be about 20-25 students a class. Not only will you have to hire the extra teachers as well, but those teachers need classrooms, and there isn't enough space available right now to handle the overcrowding situation, so if you want to use the money to hire more teachers, you will need to find more money to build the classrooms needed for these teachers as well as the overhead expenses that go along with more buildings to maintain and operate. I am not saying this is an argument against reducing teacher salary or other cost cutting measures, I am simply just pointing out that the only real way of increasing the number of teachers in the amount that is needed is going to be more funding to support the expansion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

That being said, the concept that in the future people will be volunteering to do things because things that "need" to be done will be done by robots is still applicable here. In this singularity future you have brought up, those that still require human interaction with teachers will be able to find those who have a passion for teaching, which is why many teachers are in it to begin with.

---

Have you been to Khan Academy lately? Go there, create a profile and learn all of the math you've missed. I think the new math path is the future of scientific and mathematical education at the elementary and high school levels. It effectively makes teachers redundant. Get a room full of 50-100 kids with some low paid minders to make sure that they are doing their work and you will save a bundle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Have you been to Khan Academy lately? Go there, create a profile and learn all of the math you've missed. I think the new math path is the future of scientific and mathematical education at the elementary and high school levels. It effectively makes teachers redundant. Get a room full of 50-100 kids with some low paid minders to make sure that they are doing their work and you will save a bundle.

---

Yes I have. I have used it, I am not ignorant on its implications or potential. I think that it will be a useful tool for many students but that being said, it is a tool not a solution to every student's needs. Low paid minders can't answer the questions that students ask for higher level courses. All the TAs in uni are grad students for a reason.

Just listen to the video on the front page: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuMTSU9DcqQ

"I want it to become the operating system of the classroom for what goes on in the classroom where every student is allowed to work at their own pace and the teacher actually becomes more of a mentor or a coach."

So even the founder doesn't intend for his academy to make teachers obsolete.

So, Khan wants to be the educator. From what I understand, if he is the one doing the educating, that would cut down on the amount of educating that a teacher would need to do. Hence, if he did a good enough job at it, teachers would need to work less that the 8 months that they currently work, hopefully; A. lowering their compensation or B. Lowering their numbers. No more lesson plans, just tutoring. People do that in school, they are called tutors. Last time I was in school, they were unpaid, mostly a year or 2 ahead or volunteers.

Classic strategic speak. He wants to get the backing of teachers who will find it easier to use him than spending time writting a lesson plan. Like the trainer who trains a trainer in India, or the Barnes and Noble employee responsible for selling the Nook reader or the Insurance agent who automates his methods and has customers doing everything online or over the phone. They are buying the noose that will be used to hang them and it is beautiful. It is the future. Accellerate redundancy. Pedal to the metal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

So, Khan wants to be the educator. From what I understand, if he is the one doing the educating, that would cut down on the amount of educating that a teacher would need to do. Hence, if he did a good enough job at it, teachers would need to work less that the 8 months that they currently work, hopefully; A. lowering their compensation or B. Lowering their numbers. No more lesson plans, just tutoring. People do that in school, they are called tutors. Last time I was in school, they were unpaid, mostly a year or 2 ahead or volunteers.

Classic strategic speak. He wants to get the backing of teachers who will find it easier to use him than spending time writting a lesson plan. Like the trainer who trains a trainer in India, or the Barnes and Noble employee responsible for selling the Nook reader or the Insurance agent who automates his methods and has customers doing everything online or over the phone. They are buying the noose that will be used to hang them and it is beautiful. It is the future. Accellerate redundancy. Pedal to the metal.

---

I agree. All I am saying is that there will still be a need for teachers. Whether not they are tutoring or actually teaching is besides the point. All I am trying to say is that technology can't replace human interaction 100% of the time. I agreed with the original point that it will be volunteers in the future.

My point is that their racket is nearing a close. They hold back education. Unions will oppose the technology to better educate children because it is the inevitable downfall of unions and paid teachers. Cutting their benefits is the first step to gutting the teaching force. They need to go and we need to accellerate their decline with a suitable alternative at the earliest opportunity. I can't stand teachers because they are a reminder of the broken past and the impediment to our future. Some are well intentioned, but the vast majority of teachers are people who see dollar signs, big pensions, and huge vacations. Hell, I'm a local insurance agent and we are nearing a breaking point where our customers are starting to wake up and cut us loose. Rightfully so, imo. We are essentially useless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

My point is that their racket is nearing a close. They hold back education. Unions will oppose the technology to better educate children because it is the inevitable downfall of unions and paid teachers. Cutting their benefits is the first step to gutting the teaching force. They need to go and we need to accellerate their decline with a suitable alternative at the earliest opportunity. I can't stand teachers because they are a reminder of the broken past and the impediment to our future. Some are well intentioned, but the vast majority of teachers are people who see dollar signs, big pensions, and huge vacations. Hell, I'm a local insurance agent and we are nearing a breaking point where our customers are starting to wake up and cut us loose. Rightfully so, imo. We are essentially useless.

---

You are overestimating the trend. Give it another 20 years before the actual decrease starts to happen. It is unwise to accelerate trends, especially ones that impact society as fundamental as education because sometimes society isn't ready for it. The teachers will bring about their own deconstruction by adopting Kahn Academy for themselves in the class. But before that happens, you need teachers who actually used Kahn Academy earlier in their lives during college. Once those people are the majority of teachers, then things will start happening on a fast past in regards to your projection. But like I said, that will be another 15-20 years before that majority happens.

I don't understand the anger at teachers. The system in which they function in is broken and of the past, not the function of teaching itself. Kahn is a teacher, you are not angry at him.

EDIT: Also, you characterize teachers in a general negative light using descriptions that could be applied generically to any worker. If anything, more teachers are there by % because of a passion for teaching then the % of cubicle workers there because they love doing...cubicle work.

Sorry TuffStuffMcGruff, I meant economical system. My mistake. A simular question has intrigued me for years so I'm a bit curious about your thoughts on the subject.

And to be a bit more to the point. Can a free market system handle a large part of the working force being simply obsolete (aka not longer required for any important jobs)?

And do you think we're starting to approach this during your life time?

I love volunteer teachers. I wish that everyone was one (they are in reality). I hate the people who are paid to do it and throw temper tantrums when the people they are ripping off call them on it. Good points, though.

Ironside, I think that we are starting to approach this in our lifetime. I'm just a history major nobody, but the sheer number of people who seem to have exited the work force for good coupled with the likelihood that jobs won't be returning, coupled with the amazing willingness of people to volunteer their knowledge and assistance online, coupled with the obvious uselessness of most jobs, etc leads me to believe that the current system is failing. If you believe in exponential growth in technology, within the next 40 years we should have totally revolutionized the economy through automation. today we are talking about the realization that paid teachers serve a decreasingly useful purpose and their benefit is being clearly outweighed by their costs. Within 10 years, I suspect that attorneys and general practitioners will begin going through the same thing. As transparency increases, I would also imagine that the value of brands will decrease, eliminating usurious mark-ups of otherwise utilitarian commodities. Within 10 years we won't need to buy small parts because we will begin 3d printing them in the home. Within 20, the few of us who actually serve a traditional economic purpose won't need to travel to work due to insane increases in communication technologies (interactive holographic projections.). The future is limitless and it includes reduced manpower. Prepare to sit around simply consuming information for no other purpose than the faint hope that you will come up with something useful that a machine has skipped over, which will become increasingly unlikely. From there, watch Wall-e ;-)

I think that Capitalism is failing and a new economic system is growing.


Time Magazine on Singularity

Kurzweil on TED

3D Printing

Full color 3d demonstration

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

I love volunteer teachers. I wish that everyone was one (they are in reality). I hate the people who are paid to do it and throw temper tantrums when the people they are ripping off call them on it. Good points, though.

Ironside, I think that we are starting to approach this in our lifetime. I'm just a history major nobody, but the sheer number of people who seem to have exited the work force for good coupled with the likelihood that jobs won't be returning, coupled with the amazing willingness of people to volunteer their knowledge and assistance online, coupled with the obvious uselessness of most jobs, etc leads me to believe that the current system is failing. If you believe in exponential growth in technology, within the next 40 years we should have totally revolutionized the economy through automation. today we are talking about the realization that paid teachers serve a decreasingly useful purpose and their benefit is being clearly outweighed by their costs. Within 10 years, I suspect that attorneys and general practitioners will begin going through the same thing. As transparency increases, I would also imagine that the value of brands will decrease, eliminating usurious mark-ups of otherwise utilitarian commodities. Within 10 years we won't need to buy small parts because we will begin 3d printing them in the home. Within 20, the few of us who actually serve a traditional economic purpose won't need to travel to work due to insane increases in communication technologies (interactive holographic projections.). The future is limitless and it includes reduced manpower. Prepare to sit around simply consuming information for no other purpose than the faint hope that you will come up with something useful that a machine has skipped over, which will become increasingly unlikely. From there, watch Wall-e ;-)

I think that Capitalism is failing and a new economic system is growing.


Time Magazine on Singularity

Kurzweil on TED

3D Printing

Full color 3d demonstration

---

You forgot to mention that we have already reached the age where for all intents and purposes, anything that can be put in digital form is free. People don't pirate out of moral reasons, not economic.

When digital media is free and ubiquitous and all manufacturing/services is automated is within our lifetimes.

I am still struggling to see how lawyers and doctors will be able to keep up with demand. If we have everything that could be manufactured (basically money is not needed as much), a lot of doctors and lawyers are not going to be such. And I am pretty sure that those that will go through the work as a volunteer, will not be able to meet the demand.

Capitalism has a good chance of becoming more artificial and hollow, instead of being phased out completely.

From what I'm led to believe, haven't had the time to research it yet, Wisconsin teachers at job rate receive wage & health benefits worth about $89,000 per year plus a half pay pension. Not sure what the service time & age requirements for the half-pay pension are, probably 30 years service and 55 years old to retire. They contribute nothing toward the health benefits ($22,000 to 24,000 per year family plan) and nothing toward the half-pay pension. The Governor wants them to contribute 12.5% per year toward the health benefit & 5% toward their pensions. That's in line with many other state's public sector unions, mine included. It's reasonable and quite a good deal compared to the private sector without question.

Lem, I believe the Governor excluded the police & fire personnel from this for now because of the very likely threat to public safety. Closed schools isn't a good thing, but for the short term an inconvenience. Loss of police & fire protection, even in the short term, could be a real disaster, which is why most states allow collective bargaining for these departments in return for no strikes legislation. Most of the National Guard is probably being used, or will be soon, to man the state prisons if the corrections personnel strike.

I also know from experience that public sector union members only get the crumbs that fall from management's plate. If State leadership really wants to be honest about the need for "shared sacrifice" then they need to reduce staff & top-heavy redundent/useless management positions, perks like take home cars etc...patronage jobs for friends & family, double+ dipping on their pensions etc...contribute to their health care & pensions too. Cuts should start from the top on down, but never do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hosakawa Tito

The Governor wants them to contribute 12.5% per year toward the health benefit & 5% toward their pensions. That's in line with many other state's public sector unions, mine included. It's reasonable and quite a good deal compared to the private sector without question.

---

If our governor were only asking for bennie contributions and pay cuts and so forth, I don't think you'd see quite the level of pushback that's going on. Legislating that the union may exist, but may only negotiate pay raises, and those circumscribed by COL, makes the union irrelevant. And my impression was that the teachers' union, for all of its evils, does some valuable work to protect the teachers from the idiot parents. Now, I am firmly of the belief that the teacher' union should be reofrmed and perhaps even done away with, but this is not the way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hosakawa Tito

Lem, I believe the Governor excluded the police & fire personnel from this for now because of the very likely threat to public safety.

---

The funny thing is, nobody is even making an argument for it. Seriously, I have yet to hear or read anyone from the governor's office even trying to make a case for the selectivity of the union-busting. I'm a little bit disgusted. If the governor would like my support, he could, you know, put forward an argument. A rationale. Something. But what are we getting? Nada. We're just gonna bust the unions that we don't like and leave the others alone. Pathetic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hosakawa Tito

Cuts should start from the top on down, but never do.

---

100% agreement from this end. There's plenty of state and county level reform that could and should take place. But picking out one union, that trends Dem, and is largely female ... I dunno, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And to not even bother explaining or justifying the move ...

To clarify it is 12.5% of the health care cost ($2750 - $3000 based on the average you've provided) , not 12.5% of salary. 5% of salary for pension on the other hand (an average $4450). Average total cost for a family with one federal employee in the household would be around $7200 - $7450, is my math right? Essentially an ~8% pay cut for the average family (my math is probably wrong). This will save tax payers a truck load. I've heard that it was closer to a 4% cut.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

100% agreement from this end. There's plenty of state and county level reform that could and should take place. But picking out one union, that trends Dem, and is largely female ... I dunno, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And to not even bother explaining or justifying the move ...

---

I don't know, Lemur. That sounds like it could save alot of money for taxpayers to invest in more productive areas of education. The wages still sound awesome, don't they? I'm 26, make approx 40k with benefits included per year with a degree working 6 days per week in one of the most expensive areas of the country to live. Teachers work 8 months per year, get tons of holidays off, and have job security with the occasional blip like we are seeing. What do they really do? Aren't they really just glorified babysitters?

I fail to understand your argument that because the recent move targets teachers and not every other public union you arn't able to support it. Do you believe police are paid too well? Firemen? In NY and NJ we have started going after teachers. Everyone knows that police officers are about to be hit next. Abusive overtime, high-three manipulation to pad pensions. The abuses and the reaction are what spur movement against the organizations. I've been tryign to get a Federal job for closing in on 5 years now. I will work for half of that they are paying these people. I can assure you that employees are pulling their hair out because their free ride is over. I can only hope that they gut the pay and benefits enough that people will leave and make room for new jacks who will work harder for less.

Your argument sounds like if they don't take on all problems at once you won't support solving any problems. Don't bite off more than you can chew. Breaking the teachers union alone will pose the least resistance and create precedent to do it to others. do you believe that my argument is false or does it sound stupid? I've used every angle I could find. Please, let me know.

I do agree that top down approach to many organizations is where it should start. You need to be careful not to stop progress because it could be bigger. This is as big as I think they can handle right now. Calling more people into the opposition would be counter productive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

I don't know, Lemur. That sounds like it could save alot of money for taxpayers to invest in more productive areas of education. The wages still sound awesome, don't they? I'm 26, make approx 40k with benefits included per year with a degree working 6 days per week in one of the most expensive areas of the country to live. Teachers work 8 months per year, get tons of holidays off, and have job security with the occasional blip like we are seeing. What do they really do? Aren't they really just glorified babysitters?

I fail to understand your argument that because the recent move targets teachers and not every other public union you arn't able to support it. Do you believe police are paid too well? Firemen? In NY and NJ we have started going after teachers. Everyone knows that police officers are about to be hit next. Abusive overtime, high-three manipulation to pad pensions. The abuses and the reaction are what spur movement against the organizations. I've been tryign to get a Federal job for closing in on 5 years now. I will work for half of that they are paying these people. I can assure you that employees are pulling their hair out because their free ride is over. I can only hope that they gut the pay and benefits enough that people will leave and make room for new jacks who will work harder for less.

Your argument sounds like if they don't take on all problems at once you won't support solving any problems. Don't bite off more than you can chew. Breaking the teachers union alone will pose the least resistance and create precedent to do it to others. do you believe that my argument is false or does it sound stupid? I've used every angle I could find. Please, let me know.

I do agree that top down approach to many organizations is where it should start. You need to be careful not to stop progress because it could be bigger. This is as big as I think they can handle right now. Calling more people into the opposition would be counter productive.

---

The statement "everyone knows police are next." doesn't convince me one bit. Most of you guys probably never heard about this, but last year Southern California got all bent over a scandal breaking out about the City of Bell paying its City Council, City Attorney and Police Chief some of the highest politician salaries in the entire nation (including Congress) despite Bell only having a size of about 35,000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Ci...ry_controversy

Well the police chief basically faked being disabled (he has been publicly running marathons for the past 5 years) in order to not pay taxes on his pension which amounts to half of the $400,000 salary he got. This guy jumped from city to city apparently milking his way to the top ending up at Bell because they were the most corrupt with the city money. From the wikipedia entry: On February 14, 2008, it was revealed on CBS nighttime news that Adams had allegedly exchanged e-mails with the assistant city manager on how they were going to arrange his over $400,000 salary and how to hide that fact from the citizens. The email's contents were presented in a humorous manner regarding bilking the city. "I am looking forward to seeing you and taking all of Bell's money," Adams wrote, according to the memo.

Police in Southern California have a strong hold with politicians, they are the military of the city and state. Despite all the outrage, mostly everyone in my hometown start justifying why the police chief there deserved his money and blah, blah, blah. From what I hear it was same across most of Ventura County. Police don't take hits in salary in state and city government just as the military/defense budget hasn't even been looked at for cuts until these extreme cost cutting measures.

I will not be surprised one bit if this is a one time union hit. Oh and that police chief I just mentioned hasn't been arrested at all or even charged with wrong doing.

Ok. In NYC police were making a starting salary of 25k 4 years ago. They are now making 41k to start. I think this is reasonable. Sure, the pensions can be looked at, but these guys are in danger. Last year a guy opened up with a tek-9 in times square. There was more than 1 real bomb close call. Suffolk County PC should be dragged out of their police stations and lampooned publicly. Local Northport police should be brought up on charges. all things are not equal. Root out waste and corruption where you can find it. I am a Republican and I am sharpening my balde, I promise you. Maybe we don't all think the same way, but almost every Republican I know is waiting for the opportunity to gut public wages. Across the board - I promise. Play along with us for once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Removing benefits and cutting pay is the exact same thing, as "benefit" is simply another word for "wage".

In order to save money, they are making it less attractive to be a teacher. How will that encourage the good ones to stay, and the bad ones to leave, opposed to the other way around?

---

Yes, giving the teachers union and administrators more and more money over the past 30 years have done so well with America's public education system. /sarc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Ok. In NYC police were making a starting salary of 25k 4 years ago. They are now making 41k to start. I think this is reasonable. Sure, the pensions can be looked at, but these guys are in danger. Last year a guy opened up with a tek-9 in times square. There was more than 1 real bomb close call. Suffolk County PC should be dragged out of their police stations and lampooned publicly. Local Northport police should be brought up on charges. all things are not equal. Root out waste and corruption where you can find it. I am a Republican and I am sharpening my balde, I promise you. Maybe we don't all think the same way, but almost every Republican I know is waiting for the opportunity to gut public wages. Across the board - I promise. Play along with us for once.

---

I would love to trust you, but the internet and recent history has made this once naive teenager a bit more on the cynical side when it comes to Republicans asking us to "play along".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

Stranglehold on America's children? :dizzy2:

It's just a union. What exactly is it that's been passed that shouldn't have been?

---

The "just a union" that brought their students out of the classroom to assist in the protest? Yes, a stranglehold on the children is an appropriate term for this issue.
I'm a product of public education. One year in history in my junior year our history teacher let us watch "Cops" every day. My government teacher in my senior year did the same thing. In fact, I could have skipped senior high all together because it was a complete waste. Sure, some of responsibility is on me but when a "professional" teacher offers you the choice of watching TV or protesting over actually learning anything, what is a teen going to choose...
Its time to stop this notion of the "honorable" profession known as the public school teacher. The majority are no less than you average welfare leach except they go to work half the year, recieve an offensively large pension paid by the tax payers, and still the US goes lower every year in tests compared to other countries. #### the public school teacher.

Throw in the FD & PD but allow the union to continue to negotiate for everything, not just pay.

I think that will make everyone sufficently unhappy

I can't help by shake my head, these "demands" by the govener are putting no one over a barrell and are certainly not untennable. Sure no one likes tax increases or a pay cut but we are facing a serious budget shortfall and we are facing it everywhere.

I thought everyone was going to cut teh fat?

Asking these people for a pittance is not a big deal, granted it's more about the power than it is the money. There is always a power play somewhere. Granted it's hard to conjure up anger for someone who makes 60,000$ a year and who pays NOTHING in benifits when the average American makes 40,000 and has to pay both those things

Granted most of the teacher hate in this thread is lol, but at the end of the day this is something that needs to be done and can be done relatively painlessly

Edit:granted

I think this article tells a lot about what is going on. Watch the embedded video for the full argument.

http://www.politicususa.com/en/rache...isconsin-truth

This is about more than teacher pay.

It is about collective bargaining and Unions.

Allowing Police and Fire Fighters to bargain and not other public sector employees to do the same is unfair.

None are actually permitted to strike, though it is usually ignored.

Without some organization to represent employees they only have the rights to employment that the government says they have.

While I am dubious as to Public Sector Unions announcing support for political candidates, I don't think this whole plan is a good move.