The Cheddar Rebellion Part Three

[lotuspixie]

I always thought it was a salary deferment for future payout. (I.E. Instead of negotating for a salary of 40k a year, I negotiate for a salary of 35k with 5k going towards my pension plan.) It seems like instead of public employees getting an individual choice of what they could apply for their pension, they all agreed to put forward 5k towards it.

You're absolutely correct. And that is one of the reasons for all the outrage by public employees. People are accusing of them of somehow getting some special "gift" or "deal" above and beyond normal compensation, when this simply is not the case.

The actual title of this article is kind of deceptive, but the article itself is well worth reading:

Forbes explains public employee compensation

[Shryke]

Heh? I didn't slip it in -- I've said it before. The basic point is that you pay teachers what you need to pay them to keep enough qualified teachers, not based on some subjective belief as to what they're "worth".

So teacher preparation and certification are by far the strongest correlates? Not teacher compensation?

Didn't think so.

Please FLOW, can you try and drop the bullshit for once? Like seriously, you are really trying to divorce candidate quality from compensation? And trying to pretend that preperation and certification are not measures of the quality of a teacher? Really?

Teacher quality is directly related to teacher compensation. Unless you think we've already reached a saturation point where only those who just really don't want to teach aren't taking the job?

This is pretty basic shit FLOW. For a guy who loves to go on about the Free Market....

[Swordfish]

Just to point out for a moment that a somehwat similar bil is headed for passage in Ohio with a lot less fanfare.

Also, I'm a bit struck by the national outrage focused on Wisconsin given that a significant number of states have never allowed collective bargaining for public employees anyway, or make such bargaining permissible rather than mandatory (which has an effect similar to a ban), and nobody nationally seemed to care.

It's being orchestrated by the Obama campaign people.

No one can say they aren't good at what they do.

[C S]

The "appropriate" level of pay is determined by the market, not by some attempted objectification of "value" independent of ability to pay or other economic factors.

If pay for teachers is cut, and there is no appreciable diminution in the number of teachers or their quality, then they were overpaid. At least where I am, there is an incredible teacher glut and teaching graduates can't find jobs. Now if there is a teacher shortgage in Wisconsin, then districts that cut teacher pay will lose even more teachers, meaning that they weren't overpaid.

On the flip size, if teacher salaries are raised, you might have the benefit of increasing the caliber of person that chooses to pursue the teaching profession. Admittedly you might have even more of a glut of unemployed incompetent teachers. (A lawyer joke comes to mind, but I'll resist the temptation.)

The market often rewards those who provide a cheap inferior product that costs more in the long run. People are stupid that way. I'm a capitalist too, but the market ain't perfect.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Please FLOW, can you try and drop the bullshit for once? Like seriously, you are really trying to divorce candidate quality from compensation?

No, I'm not. At some point, a drop in compensation is going to result in a drop in quality. But it hasn't been established that we're at this point at all, and I strongly suspect that we're not. I sincerely doubt that Walker's legislation is going to result in a bunch of teachers fleeing education.

But look, people can disagree on whether or not that will happen. My point is THAT should be the issue that gets debated in terms of compensation. Are taxpayers paying more than the market would otherwise require, or not? People may answer that differently, but that's the question that should be asked.

And trying to pretend that preperation and certification are not measures of the quality of a teacher? Really?

I said nothing of the sort. My point was actually the opposite -- paying teachers more does not necessarily mean that you're going to get preparation and certification commensurate with that cost. Now, the teachers are telling us what a wonderful job they're doing already, right? So there doesn't seem to be a reason to pay them any more. And it is entirely possible we could pay them less without seeing any significant reduction in the quality of teaching.

Teacher quality is directly related to teacher compensation.

Perhaps directly, but certainly not linearly. That's the entire point. And if you want to adopt the whiny platitude that "nothing is more important than our children's education" as a rationale for opposing any cuts, then the same rationale should mean that we'd be better off paying teachers $5M/year.

Unless you think we've already reached a saturation point where only those who just really don't want to teach aren't taking the job?

I can't speak for other states. But I do know that some places have a huge glut in teacher supply. You could increase teacher compensation to 200,000 and probably get some more highly qualified teachers. The question is whether the marginal cost outweighs the marginal benefit. And again, people can disagree about that in this specific instance. But that's not what I hear the union arguing at all. I just hear "you're trying to hurt the middle class", not "we're going to leave teaching if you cut our pay or take away our bargaining rights.

[Swordfish]

On the flip size, if teacher salaries are raised, you might have the benefit of increasing the caliber of person that chooses to pursue the teaching profession.

Do you have any evidence to support this?

because we've seen some evidence indicating that it isn't the case.

I noticed this little tidbit that's been seemingly obscured and I don't know why. The bill has explicit language specifically exempting police, firefighter and state trooper unions from this. Aren't these jobs paid for by taxpayer money as well, and therefore also prone to abuse (real or perceived) by their unions? Or is the bill actually less about the budget shortfall (brought about, in part, by tax cuts from the more affluent section of the population), and the real motive is union busting, specifically unions from specific trades, which is why the bill has created protected classes of work?

Already been discussed.

The unions that are exempt, by and large, did not support him in the election.

I am confused as to why the Narrative is that public employees don't pay for their pension. I always thought it was a salary deferment for future payout. (I.E. Instead of negotating for a salary of 40k a year, I negotiate for a salary of 35k with 5k going towards my pension plan.) It seems like instead of public employees getting an individual choice of what they could apply for their pension, they all agreed to put forward 5k towards it.

Maybe because it's irrelevant.

Whether it's deferred compensation or a straight up benefit being paid by the state, it's still a significant part of the total compensation package that doesn't get reflected when only talking about salary.

I'm genuinely interested in how you make the determination that someone is overpaid or underpaid. Presumably, if you think it's a 'fact' that teachers are underpaid, you have some sense of what they should be paid, and exactly what factors justify any particular salary. Could you perhaps elaborate on this?

there was a whole other thread about this in which a lot of arguments were put forth about why teachers for the most part seem to be decently compensated.

Nothing was brought forth to support the notion that they are drastically underpaid but a lot of emotional appeals and accusations. Nothing really quantitative to support it was presented.

[The Progressive]

Already been discussed.

The unions that are exempt, by and large, did not support him in the election.

That's not terribly relevant given that their members are undeniably convervative and most often vote Republicans.

[C S]

Do you have any evidence to support this?

because we've seen some evidence indicating that it isn't the case.

Pure speculation as far as this specific case goes. Please share your evidence. If it was earlier in the thread, I missed it and would appreciate it if you could point me in the right direction.

[Swordfish]

Pure speculation as far as this specific case goes. Please share your evidence. If it was earlier in the thread, I missed it and would appreciate it if you could point me in the right direction.

I think it was actually in a previous thread. i didn't post it, someone else did.

I'll see if I can dig it up.

[awesome possum]

I KNOW you have the opinion that teachers are underpaid. What I'm curious about is what factors you've utilized to come to that conclusion. If you can't provide a meaningful explanation of your position, then your opinion isn't worth anything.

Counting off the top of my head, I know at least 20 teachers. Either the younger ones from my high school who I later became acquaintances with after the fact; ones I've attended college with; or ones I've met through my social life. Only one lives anywhere near "comfortable" and that's because she's got tenure after 30 years.

But according to Republicans, these people are the causes of some of our current budget and deficit problems?

I don't know what you're after here, and frankly I don't give a shit. The fact that you have Swordfish trying to back you up shows what a pointless argument it is you're trying to have.

[lokisnow]

The education system in the US is all about giving a sizable population that is banned from the workforce by federal edict something to do while the eligible workforce is working, not trying to make them into competent, intelligent adults.

fixed that for you, it's simpler to say move them in and out of doors, but that's more accurate. :)

Republicans will soon realize that the best way to bust unions is to repeal the anti-business child labor laws and the anti-business mandatory education laws! Those laws and regulations are HURTING our economy and keeping COUNTLESS industries from being profitable. The free market would fix it, if we'd take away those anti-children regulations and let them help out mom and dad by earning an income instead of being an economic dead weight! Down with regulation! Down with our Socialist Anti-Child laws and regulations, Give more freedom to Children!

[Swordfish]

Counting off the top of my head, I know at least 20 teachers. Either the younger ones from my high school who I later became acquaintances with after the fact; ones I've attended college with; or ones I've met through my social life. Only one lives anywhere near "comfortable" and that's because she's got tenure after 30 years.

But according to Republicans, these people are the causes of some of our current budget and deficit problems?

I don't know what you're after here, and frankly I don't give a shit. The fact that you have Swordfish trying to back you up shows what a pointless argument it is you're trying to have.

See, I KNEW you'd eventually say my name.

:cool4:

[NestorMakhnosLovechild]

Counting off the top of my head, I know at least 20 teachers. Either the younger ones from my high school who I later became acquaintances with after the fact; ones I've attended college with; or ones I've met through my social life. Only one lives anywhere near "comfortable" and that's because she's got tenure after 30 years.

But according to Republicans, these people are the causes of some of our current budget and deficit problems?

I don't know what you're after here, and frankly I don't give a shit. The fact that you have Swordfish trying to back you up shows what a pointless argument it is you're trying to have.

What I'm after is a straightforward answer to my question. You seem to believe there is some independent, quantifiable way of determining what someone (at least if that someone is a teacher) should be paid. If you don't believe that, I can't imagine how else you could make the statement that teachers are "overpaid." I'm just asking you to put your cards on the table and tell me what analysis you are using to make the determination that teachers are overpaid. That's it. I don't know how straightforward I can be. You made a claim, I'm asking you to justify it. Simple.

Your obsession with Republicans is duly noted - it's just irrelevant to the issue. I'm not a Republican (although even if I was, it would have no impact on what I'm asking and to dismiss my position on such a ground would be a clear ad hominem) and I don't particularly appreciate Republican politics. Your attempts to evade the question with glib non-answers and absurd attacks on other Boarders ("you're wrong because XYZ is trying to defend your position" is just another ad hominem) are doing nothing for your credibility.

[awesome possum]

See, I KNEW you'd eventually say my name.

:cool4:

Oh, did I say Swordfish? I often confuse that word and another word that has another meaning but rhymes with swoosh rag.

What I'm after is a straightforward answer to my question. You seem to believe there is some independent, quantifiable way of determining what someone (at least if that someone is a teacher) should be paid. If you don't believe that, I can't imagine how else you could make the statement that teachers are "overpaid." I'm just asking you to put your cards on the table and tell me what analysis you are using to make the determination that teachers are overpaid. That's it. I don't know how straightforward I can be. You made a claim, I'm asking you to justify it. Simple.

Your obsession with Republicans is duly noted - it's just irrelevant to the issue. I'm not a Republican (although even if I was, it would have no impact on what I'm asking and to dismiss my position on such a ground would be a clear ad hominem) and I don't particularly appreciate Republican politics. Your attempts to evade the question with glib non-answers and absurd attacks on other Boarders ("you're wrong because XYZ is trying to defend your position" is just another ad hominem) are doing nothing for your credibility.

Let me put it in as simple terms as I can, because I'm sick and cranky that I'm stuck at work for three more hours and just don't give a rats ass right now:

I wouldn't give a tin can full of infant shit for what you're after or what you think. Take your alt and go fuck with someone else.

[NestorMakhnosLovechild]

Let me put it in as simple terms as I can, because I'm sick and cranky that I'm stuck at work for three more hours and just don't give a rats ass right now:

I wouldn't give a tin can full of infant shit for what you're after or what you think. Take your alt and go fuck with someone else.

So... you can't justify your position?

[Swordfish]

Oh, did I say Swordfish? I often confuse that word and another word that has another meaning but rhymes with swoosh rag.

Loose hag?

Tarboush Bag?

Squoosh Flag?

Whoosh Tag?

Am i getting close?

:smoking:

So... you can't justify your position?

Nestor meet awesome possum.

awesome possum, this is Nestor.

[TerraPrime]

[mod hat]

Please try to stay on topic, folks.

[/mod hat]

[Shryke]

As an amusing note, even Rasmussen can't cook Walker's numbers anymore:

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Wisconsin voters shows that just 39% favor weakening collective bargaining rights and 52% are opposed. At the same time, 44% support a 10% pay cut for all state workers. Thirty-eight percent (38%) are opposed. That’s partly because 27% of Wisconsin voters believe state workers are paid too much and 16% believe they are paid too little. Forty-nine percent (49%) believe the pay of state workers is about right.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_state_surveys/wisconsin/wisconsin_poll_support_for_budget_cutting_not_for_weakening_collective_bargaining_rights

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/03/rasmussen-poll-almost-six-in-ten-wisconsin-voters-disapprove-of-gov-walker.php

In the poll, 57% of respondents said they disapprove of Walker's job performance -- including 48% who say they strongly disapprove. Meanwhile, only 43% said they approve of the job Walker is doing.

Also interesting to note -- the overwhelming opposition from people with children in Wisconsin public schools. Sixty-seven percent of people in that demographic disapprove of Walker, including 54% who strongly disapprove.

[awesome possum]

So... you can't justify your position?

To an alt who appears to be trolling me? No, I won't. Goodbye.

[awesome possum]

Seriously, it could just be the raging sickness inside me causing a near stage of angry delirium, or I could just be an asshole, but I read this and wondered for a moment why we can't be this awesome to the criminals in charge of our corporations:

BHUBANESHWAR, India — Indian police detained two people after an angry mob of fired workers burned to death a senior executive of a steel factory, an official said Friday.

After learning they were laid off, about a dozen workers attacked a vehicle carrying Radhey Shyam Roy as he was leaving the factory in eastern Orissa state on Thursday, dousing the Jeep with gasoline and setting it on fire, said police Superintendent Ajay Kumar Sarangi.

...

Incidents of industrial violence are common in India, where workers often target executives in cases of wage disputes and job losses.

In 2008, scores of dismissed employees of an Italian manufacturing company, Graziano Transmissioni India, used iron rods and wooden sticks to beat to death the company's local chief executive officer on the outskirts of New Delhi.