Teachers

[George Gervin's Afro]

My wife has taught for over 20 years in Texas and loves her job. She works long hours and buys supplies out of our budget for her classroom that is not covered by her alloted funds. She loves her kids and works her ass off everyday. She hasn't gotten a raise in 3 years while the state cuts in education funding that cost jobs and increases her workload.

She is tired of being berated by the Fox News crowd for all of the problems in public schools. She is offended and realizes that many of her critics don't know what in the f*ck they are talking about.

She has come to despise republicans even though she is not a political person who never votes. She despises Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and the likes for the continous lies they perpetuate about her profession.

Now we have teachers giving their lives up for their students in Sandy Hook and Moore, Oklahoma. Considering we have many on this board who blame teachers for the ills in public schools, maybe tragedies like this will make you pieces of crap realize that most teachers aren't lazy nor are they in it for the vacation.

Those republicans can go to hell.

Good job teach.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Fuck you. We need to fund the oil industry and give generous tax incentives to corporate interests.

[baseline bum]

Every tax dollar to Boeing is sacred

[Wild Cobra]

So?

Many of us haven't seen a raise for a few years.

I don't know about your state, but in many places, teachers are overpaid for the work required. Teachers have a far better benefits package than most tax payers supporting their salaries. Most government employees unions get over on the government too easily because the government doesn't have the same bottom line businesses have. Need more money? Just siphon more from that tax payers...

I'm sorry, until teachers accept the fact that they are over compensated for their jobs, I have no sympathy for their whining.

[CosmicCowboy]

Teachers can't turn shit into gold. Crap kids into the system = crap kids out of the system. Not the teachers fault.

[TeyshaBlue]

So?

Many of us haven't seen a raise for a few years.

I don't know about your state, but in many places, teachers are overpaid for the work required. Teachers have a far better benefits package than most tax payers supporting their salaries. Most government employees unions get over on the government too easily because the government doesn't have the same bottom line businesses have. Need more money? Just siphon more from that tax payers...

I'm sorry, until teachers accept the fact that they are over compensated for their jobs, I have no sympathy for their whining.

Over compensated? Could you say anything stupider than that?

[TeyshaBlue]

Over compensated? Could you say anything stupider than that?

Make the case for overcompensation or GTFO.

[TeyshaBlue]

My wife has taught for over 20 years in Texas and loves her job. She works long hours and buys supplies out of our budget for her classroom that is not covered by her alloted funds. She loves her kids and works her ass off everyday. She hasn't gotten a raise in 3 years while the state cuts in education funding that cost jobs and increases her workload.

She is tired of being berated by the Fox News crowd for all of the problems in public schools. She is offended and realizes that many of her critics don't know what in the f*ck they are talking about.

She has come to despise republicans even though she is not a political person who never votes. She despises Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and the likes for the continous lies they perpetuate about her profession.

Now we have teachers giving their lives up for their students in Sandy Hook and Moore, Oklahoma. Considering we have many on this board who blame teachers for the ills in public schools, maybe tragedies like this will make you pieces of crap realize that most teachers aren't lazy nor are they in it for the vacation.

Those republicans can go to hell.

Good job teach.

Unless you are co-opting her for this particular rant, she's got to realize there are a shit ton of republican teachers too. Should they go to hell as well?


Or are you/she refering to a particular subset?

[TeyshaBlue]

I always laugh my ass off when I hear "3 month vacation".

[tlongII]

I have no problem with teachers getting raises. The problem is all of the waste in the school administration. There is also a thing called PERS here in Oregon. Public Employee Retirement System. Budgets for many state initiatives continually get chopped because no one will do anything about the ridiculous PERS amounts being paid to retirees.

[clambake]

So?

Many of us haven't seen a raise for a few years.

I don't know about your state, but in many places, teachers are overpaid for the work required. Teachers have a far better benefits package than most tax payers supporting their salaries. Most government employees unions get over on the government too easily because the government doesn't have the same bottom line businesses have. Need more money? Just siphon more from that tax payers...

I'm sorry, until teachers accept the fact that they are over compensated for their jobs, I have no sympathy for their whining.

u got a shitty union, huh?

[TeyshaBlue]

I have no problem with teachers getting raises. The problem is all of the waste in the school administration. There is also a thing called PERS here in Oregon. Public Employee Retirement System. Budgets for many state initiatives continually get chopped because no one will do anything about the ridiculous PERS amounts being paid to retirees.

Don't know about Oregon, but in Texas we have the TRS, Teacher Retirement System. Teachers in Tx pay into this fund, and they are not allowed to pay into Social Security.

[baseline bum]

Over compensated? Could you say anything stupider than that?

You haven't heard what he'd do with his rifle at the border if it was legal?

[baseline bum]

I always laugh my ass off when I hear "3 month vacation".

Why is that? Because as a teacher you put in more than 40 hour weeks in the school year?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So?

Many of us haven't seen a raise for a few years.

I don't know about your state, but in many places, teachers are overpaid for the work required. Teachers have a far better benefits package than most tax payers supporting their salaries. Most government employees unions get over on the government too easily because the government doesn't have the same bottom line businesses have. Need more money? Just siphon more from that tax payers...

I'm sorry, until teachers accept the fact that they are over compensated for their jobs, I have no sympathy for their whining.

You work for a union shop and don't want to leave the place because of your pay and job security. It's cool for you but not for teacher's unions? I guess you only don't like the unions that don't help you out.

[tlongII]

Don't know about Oregon, but in Texas we have the TRS, Teacher Retirement System. Teachers in Tx pay into this fund, and they are not allowed to pay into Social Security.

You can read about it here. (http://newswithviews.com/guest_opinion/guest92.htm) The article was written in 2006 so the figures cited are out of date. The salaries are much higher now and the problem is probably even worse than it was predicted to be.

[Spurminator]

It still blows my mind that teachers have to buy their own supplies.

[TeyshaBlue]

Why is that? Because as a teacher you put in more than 40 hour weeks in the school year?

No. The common misconception is since there is no school in summer, teachers get 3 months off. Unless, like most teachers, you work another couple of weeks at the end of school, then take a few weeks off unless you work a second job over the summer, then a month before school starts, you're back in the classroom getting everything ready for the next year. I usually got 3 weeks if I was lucky. It was different for me because, as a band director, we always had summer band a month prior to school starting. But when I'd show up at school, there were always teachers in their rooms getting things in place for the coming year.

[baseline bum]

No. The common misconception is since there is no school in summer, teachers get 3 months off. Unless, like most teachers, you work another couple of weeks at the end of school, then take a few weeks off unless you work a second job over the summer, then a month before school starts, you're back in the classroom getting everything ready for the next year. I usually got 3 weeks if I was lucky. It was different for me because, as a band director, we always had summer band a month prior to school starting. But when I'd show up at school, there were always teachers in their rooms getting things in place for the coming year.

Thanks for the detailed reply. I always figured it was maybe an extra week at the end of the year for grading, exit interviews, textbook review, etc. and maybe 2 weeks before the school year started for lesson planning with administrators, classroom prep, buying equipment, and so on.

[spursncowboys]

My wife has taught for over 20 years in Texas and loves her job. She works long hours and buys supplies out of our budget for her classroom that is not covered by her alloted funds. She loves her kids and works her ass off everyday. She hasn't gotten a raise in 3 years while the state cuts in education funding that cost jobs and increases her workload.

She is tired of being berated by the Fox News crowd for all of the problems in public schools. She is offended and realizes that many of her critics don't know what in the f*ck they are talking about.

She has come to despise republicans even though she is not a political person who never votes. She despises Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and the likes for the continous lies they perpetuate about her profession.

Now we have teachers giving their lives up for their students in Sandy Hook and Moore, Oklahoma. Considering we have many on this board who blame teachers for the ills in public schools, maybe tragedies like this will make you pieces of crap realize that most teachers aren't lazy nor are they in it for the vacation.

Those republicans can go to hell.

Good job teach.
I haven't seen the segments where the reporters blame teachers, but I definitely understand the frustration when your job is politicized. She's a great person for putting money after helping others. She must be a good person to deal with your crap! :toast

[Nbadan]

WC needs to go spend a year at a high need public school to see what teachers really go through and then ask himself if $45K is really enough for the 80 hour work week, the disrespectful, unmotivated kids, the constant scrutiny from administrators, the mountains and mountains of paperwork, the legal responsibilities *teaching is one of the only professions where you can go to jail for messing up on your job...spending anywhere from $100-200 of personal money per month for work supplies, the responsibility of a squeaky clean personal image...helicopter parents...20 minute lunches....and now... having to save the kids from guys with guns and tornadoes..

[Wild Cobra]

Make the case for overcompensation or GTFO.
Medical coverage:

Is her copay over $100 a month for the coverage?

Are the copays for a doctor visit under $25?

Is her salary over $30/hr when you consider the hours she actually works?

[Wild Cobra]

Don't know about Oregon, but in Texas we have the TRS, Teacher Retirement System. Teachers in Tx pay into this fund, and they are not allowed to pay into Social Security.
Tlong is right about the Oregon school system and PERS. They have such a sweet deal in PERS... It's ridiculous.

[Wild Cobra]

Wow Dan.

If they are working 80 hrs a week at a base pay of $45k, then they are making well over $100K annual...

It's bullshit if you are suggesting they work 80 hrs a week for $45k.

[RandomGuy]

So?

Many of us haven't seen a raise for a few years.

I don't know about your state, but in many places, teachers are overpaid for the work required. Teachers have a far better benefits package than most tax payers supporting their salaries. Most government employees unions get over on the government too easily because the government doesn't have the same bottom line businesses have. Need more money? Just siphon more from that tax payers...

I'm sorry, until teachers accept the fact that they are over compensated for their jobs, I have no sympathy for their whining.

http://www.trephination.net/gallery/macros/bs_wave.gif

Prove teachers are over-compensated.

Supporting data, and definitions. Your claim, your burden of proof.

Bullshit has been called. Can you walk the walk, or are you gonna run away from this one?

[RandomGuy]

You can read about it here. (http://newswithviews.com/guest_opinion/guest92.htm) The article was written in 2006 so the figures cited are out of date. The salaries are much higher now and the problem is probably even worse than it was predicted to be.

http://newswithviews.com/images/guest_opinion_com_hdr.gif

Ah yes, the ever present op-ed piece. Is this where you get all your information?

Please show data supporting your claim that current salaries are "much higher now".

Lastly, let's look at just ONE solid claim by this guy:


How much savings/capital is needed to fund a single life annuity for $53,000 (106% of $50,000) in the private sector, for a male, at the age of 58? The answer: $873,000.00. How much does Oregon PERS say they need? The answer: $563,368.00. This is a difference of over $300,000. Do they have that money? Absolutely NOT: Not today and Not in the past; tax, borrow, tax, borrow, etc

As someone who is an actual expert in finance, I will tell you this statement is deeply flawed, and it was one of several instances where his math did not add up.

The author is clearly ignorant about one of the most fundamental concepts in finance. His ingorance and mistakes such as the one above invalidate his conclusions.

In short, it is little more than hysterical handwaving by someone who clearly doesn't know the first thing about what he is talking about.

Can you identify the mistake the author makes in his passage? Give it a try. If you don't or won't, I will be more than happy to point it out.

[RandomGuy]

Medical coverage:

Is her copay over $100 a month for the coverage?

Are the copays for a doctor visit under $25?

Is her salary over $30/hr when you consider the hours she actually works?

Bullshit has been called. Stop asking someone else to prove a negative.

Your claim, your burden of proof.

[TeyshaBlue]

Wow Dan.

If they are working 80 hrs a week at a base pay of $45k, then they are making well over $100K annual...

It's bullshit if you are suggesting they work 80 hrs a week for $45k.

It's not bullshit. It's the norm, idiot.

[mrsmaalox]

WC needs to go spend a year at a high need public school to see what teachers really go through and then ask himself if $45K is really enough for the 80 hour work week, the disrespectful, unmotivated kids, the constant scrutiny from administrators, the mountains and mountains of paperwork, the legal responsibilities *teaching is one of the only professions where you can go to jail for messing up on your job...spending anywhere from $100-200 of personal money per month for work supplies, the responsibility of a squeaky clean personal image...helicopter parents...20 minute lunches....and now... having to save the kids from guys with guns and tornadoes..

How so? I'm curious because as far as on the job offenses, I've only heard of teachers going to jail for physical/sexual abuse of minors and misuse/embezzlement of funds---what are the other reasons? And what are the professions that are safe from prosecution in those instances?

[tlongII]

http://newswithviews.com/images/guest_opinion_com_hdr.gif

Ah yes, the ever present op-ed piece. Is this where you get all your information?

Please show data supporting your claim that current salaries are "much higher now".

Lastly, let's look at just ONE solid claim by this guy:



As someone who is an actual expert in finance, I will tell you this statement is deeply flawed, and it was one of several instances where his math did not add up.

The author is clearly ignorant about one of the most fundamental concepts in finance. His ingorance and mistakes such as the one above invalidate his conclusions.

In short, it is little more than hysterical handwaving by someone who clearly doesn't know the first thing about what he is talking about.

Can you identify the mistake the author makes in his passage? Give it a try. If you don't or won't, I will be more than happy to point it out.

LOL. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about in this case. If you want to go toe to toe with me on Oregon PERS you're welcome to give it a try though. Of course it was an Op Ed piece. I never claimed otherwise. However, the basic principles of the argument are undeniably correct.

[RandomGuy]

LOL. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about in this case. If you want to go toe to toe with me on Oregon PERS you're welcome to give it a try though. Of course it was an Op Ed piece. I never claimed otherwise. However, the basic principles of the argument are undeniably correct.

His basic principles were deeply flawed, and demonstrate a shocking ignorance about how these funds work. That is what is undeniable.

I will assume that you cannot tell me why the given passage was incorrect?
I did not see you attempt to show why I might think so. Do you not know?

[RandomGuy]

LOL. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about in this case. If you want to go toe to toe with me on Oregon PERS you're welcome to give it a try though.

I am an accountant. I audit insurance companies that issue annuities for a living. I have approximately 50 hours of graduate level, directly applicable education in finance and economics, as well as about six years of professional experience in evaluating reserves for such things. I told you I am an expert on this sort of thing, and I do know what the fuck I am talking about, unlike the dipshit who wrote the op-ed mastabatory bullshit you seem to think passes for a good framework on which to view such things.

I will be happy to own your dumb ass on this.

If you can't tell me why the guy is wrong, I will simply assume you don't know, and will move on to showing exactly why he is wrong in a way that will be painfully obvious to anybody, including you, and do so in great detail.

[TeyshaBlue]

I will be happy to own your dumb ass on this.

Too late.:lmao

[Wild Cobra]

It's not bullshit. It's the norm, idiot.
They make over $100 k and are complaining?

[boutons_deux]

They make over $100 k and are complaining?

link?

[Wild Cobra]

link?
TB said it's the norm. It was put out they make $45k, which would be base, and work 80 hrs a week. If the $45k was not base, then only $18k would be base for it to take them 80 hrs a week to make $45k for the year.

Don't you see, it is me calling bullshit.

[Th'Pusher]

TB said it's the norm. It was put out they make $45k, which would be base, and work 80 hrs a week. If the $45k was not base, then only $18k would be base for it to take them 80 hrs a week to make $45k for the year.

Don't you see, it is me calling bullshit.
Are you so fucking stupid that you think teachers are hourly employees eligible for overtime?

[TeyshaBlue]

TB said it's the norm. It was put out they make $45k, which would be base, and work 80 hrs a week. If the $45k was not base, then only $18k would be base for it to take them 80 hrs a week to make $45k for the year.

Don't you see, it is me calling bullshit.

I did not say 100k was the norm. Fucking hell.

Dumbass. Stop thinking hourly. Teachers earn straight salary. http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/smilies/facepalm.gif

[RandomGuy]

TB said it's the norm. It was put out they make $45k, which would be base, and work 80 hrs a week. If the $45k was not base, then only $18k would be base for it to take them 80 hrs a week to make $45k for the year.

Don't you see, it is me calling bullshit.

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214754&p=6586853&viewfull=1#post6586853

[TeyshaBlue]

Are you so fucking stupid that you think teachers are hourly employees eligible for overtime?

apparently.

[TeyshaBlue]

It's bullshit if you are suggesting they work 80 hrs a week for $45k.


It's not bullshit. It's the norm, idiot.

[MannyIsGod]

:lmao

Never fails.

We just have to read his posts. Can you imagine working with or actually knowing this dude? I can't imagine WC has too many friends.

[baseline bum]

Honestly, on a scale of 1-10 the exchange in this thread is probably only a 3 or a 4 on the Wild Cobra stupidity scale.

[clambake]

in before he says "what if"

[Wild Cobra]

I did not say 100k was the norm. Fucking hell.

Dumbass. Stop thinking hourly. Teachers earn straight salary. http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/smilies/facepalm.gif
Serious?

I thought the law changed such that it was illegal to class non management positions as salary only.

If a teacher has to work 80 hrs to get the job done, they must be incompetent...

[TeyshaBlue]

Serious?

I thought the law changed such that it was illegal to class non management positions as salary only.

If a teacher has to work 80 hrs to get the job done, they must be incompetent...

And, as if on cue, you double down on stupid.

You don't have the first fucking clue what it takes to teach in today's schools.

[clambake]

what a fucking dumbass.

[TeyshaBlue]

And, as if on cue, you double down on stupid.

You don't have the first fucking clue what it takes to teach in today's schools.

And before you start your standard obfuscation shuffle, It may or may not be 80 hours/week depending upon who you ask. But as a generic target, 70-80 hours rings true. I will tell you, in the 10 years I taught, I never, ever put in less than 12 hours at school per day. Then I brought shit home to work on.

[Spurminator]

None of this is surprising in a nation that values the societal contributions of PC stock trading programs more than those of its teachers.

[TSA]

And before you start your standard obfuscation shuffle, It may or may not be 80 hours/week depending upon who you ask. But as a generic target, 70-80 hours rings true. I will tell you, in the 10 years I taught, I never, ever put in less than 12 hours at school per day. Then I brought shit home to work on.
I'm not agreeing with WC in the least bit, but having grown up with a teacher as a mom my entire childhood I didn't see these 80 hour work weeks you guys are talking about. And she's not some slacker teacher either. She's taught for over 30 years, from deaf/hard of hearing, special ed, 3-7th grade, and now works as a consultant for teachers. I just find that 80 hour mark a bit of a stretch, considering if it were true I never would have seen my mom growing up.

[TeyshaBlue]

As I stated upstream, time will vary. Both my parents were teachers as well. Factoring in the nightly grading they were probably pushing 65 -70. My Father was also a coach so he got to grade after workouts/games/scrimmages were done. He often tipped into the 80's.

[tlongII]

I am an accountant. I audit insurance companies that issue annuities for a living. I have approximately 50 hours of graduate level, directly applicable education in finance and economics, as well as about six years of professional experience in evaluating reserves for such things. I told you I am an expert on this sort of thing, and I do know what the fuck I am talking about, unlike the dipshit who wrote the op-ed mastabatory bullshit you seem to think passes for a good framework on which to view such things.

I will be happy to own your dumb ass on this.

If you can't tell me why the guy is wrong, I will simply assume you don't know, and will move on to showing exactly why he is wrong in a way that will be painfully obvious to anybody, including you, and do so in great detail.

I'm going to guess you think it has something to do with the funding amount needed to cover the future annual payments of $53K to a teacher although I'm not sure. So let's see...

If I assume a rate of return of 4% annually and I calculate the present value of annuity of $53,000 for 25 years I come up with a present value of $922,896.83. That seems pretty close to what this guy is saying so I don't think it's too far out there.

[RandomGuy]

I'm going to guess you think it has something to do with the funding amount needed to cover the future annual payments of $53K to a teacher although I'm not sure. So let's see...

If I assume a rate of return of 4% annually and I calculate the present value of annuity of $53,000 for 25 years I come up with a present value of $922,896.83. That seems pretty close to what this guy is saying so I don't think it's too far out there.

His first mistake is far more fundamental, but you are on the right track.

[tlongII]

Actually a 4% return assumption would result in a NPV of $827,970.24. I think I used 3% originally.

[RandomGuy]

I'm going to guess you think it has something to do with the funding amount needed to cover the future annual payments of $53K to a teacher although I'm not sure. So let's see...

If I assume a rate of return of 4% annually and I calculate the present value of annuity of $53,000 for 25 years I come up with a present value of $922,896.83. That seems pretty close to what this guy is saying so I don't think it's too far out there.

Your calculation is also wrong. Re-check your math.

[RandomGuy]

Actually a 4% return assumption would result in a NPV of $827,970.24. I think I used 3% originally.

You did.

[RandomGuy]

How much savings/capital is needed to fund a single life annuity for $53,000 (106% of $50,000) in the private sector, for a male, at the age of 58? The answer: $873,000.00. How much does Oregon PERS say they need? The answer: $563,368.00. This is a difference of over $300,000. Do they have that money? Absolutely NOT: Not today and Not in the past; tax, borrow, tax, borrow, etc

Here is the first stupidity.

How much savings/capital is needed to fund a single life annuity for $53,000 (106% of $50,000) in the private sector, for a male, at the age of 58? The answer: $873,000.00.

873000/53000=16.47


Why is 16.47 important?

[RandomGuy]

Here is the first stupidity.

How much savings/capital is needed to fund a single life annuity for $53,000 (106% of $50,000) in the private sector, for a male, at the age of 58? The answer: $873,000.00.

873000/53000=16.47


Why is 16.47 important?

Hint: 58+16.47=???

[RandomGuy]

Setting aside the fact that he doesn't know what the time value of money is... he was looking at "average life expectancy"

He went somewhere like wiki and got a number to figure how much money he thinks would be necessary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

Currently, if you lookup the value for a US male, it is... 76.12

In 2006, it was revised, but care to guess what the widely available 2000 stat was?

You guessed it 74 and some change.

Why is this wrong?

(hint read the column heading at the wiki page)

[RandomGuy]

The heading of the column is:

"Male life expectancy at birth"

A 58 year old man is not an infant.
2007 actuarial tables:
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html

Currently a 58 year old man will probably live another 22 years. Not 16.

Aside from the stupidity of not knowing the time value of money, Mr. Op-Ed does not know how to find life expectancy.

[tlongII]

Setting aside the fact that he doesn't know what the time value of money is... he was looking at "average life expectancy"

He went somewhere like wiki and got a number to figure how much money he thinks would be necessary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

Currently, if you lookup the value for a US male, it is... 76.12

In 2006, it was revised, but care to guess what the widely available 2000 stat was?

You guessed it 74 and some change.

Why is this wrong?

(hint read the column heading at the wiki page)

Life expectancy at birth?

[tlongII]

The heading of the column is:

"Male life expectancy at birth"

A 58 year old man is not an infant.
2007 actuarial tables:
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html

Currently a 58 year old man will probably live another 22 years. Not 16.

Aside from the stupidity of not knowing the time value of money, Mr. Op-Ed does not know how to find life expectancy.

I'm afraid your analysis is incorrect. You are neglecting the fact that the $873,000 you cited a few posts above is in fact earning interest itself. You cannot simply divide that number by $53K and come up with the expected number of years. You are earning interest on a declining sum of money each year. I'm not sure what rate the dude is applying to it though.

[tlongII]

All in all it's irrelevant though. The state has not funded its future obligations at a level that is reasonable. This is because of the PERS program that guarantees public employees to earn annual pay greater than any annual income they received during their working career.

[RandomGuy]

I'm going to guess you think it has something to do with the funding amount needed to cover the future annual payments of $53K to a teacher although I'm not sure. So let's see...

If I assume a rate of return of 4% annually and I calculate the present value of annuity of $53,000 for 25 years I come up with a present value of $922,896.83. That seems pretty close to what this guy is saying so I don't think it's too far out there.


To be fair:

Mr. Starkey's assumptions are based on his assertion that long-term:


PERS will tell you that the 8% return per year is guaranteed. That is a half-truth at best, but they also guarantee a 2% Cost of Living, exclusion from paying State Income Taxes, Medical Benefits, and no Administrative or Insurance costs.[10] This means, in reality, an annuity rate of 11% to 16% and sometimes higher.

He could very well be calculating based on his preferred narrative.

If you actually look up the rolling averages since 2006 in the financials available from the Oregon treasurer, they do indeed stick to their guns, and their long term returns haven't varied much from that norm, even with the financial crisis.

Their $563,368.00 figure is, if you back engineer it, based on an assumption of about 7.8% return.

[RandomGuy]

I'm afraid your analysis is incorrect. You are neglecting the fact that the $873,000 you cited a few posts above is in fact earning interest itself. You cannot simply divide that number by $53K and come up with the expected number of years. You are earning interest on a declining sum of money each year. I'm not sure what rate the dude is applying to it though.

I know that. I am assuming he made a rather bad mistake.

In that, I could be wrong, as I just noted.

Our problem in figuring out what HE bases his figure on is that he didn't show his math.

[tlongII]

To be fair:

Mr. Starkey's assumptions are based on his assertion that long-term:



He could very well be calculating based on his preferred narrative.

If you actually look up the rolling averages since 2006 in the financials available from the Oregon treasurer, they do indeed stick to their guns, and their long term returns haven't varied much from that norm, even with the financial crisis.

Their $563,368.00 figure is, if you back engineer it, based on an assumption of about 7.8% return.

That is the crux of the problem.

[RandomGuy]

LOL. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about in this case. If you want to go toe to toe with me on Oregon PERS you're welcome to give it a try though. Of course it was an Op Ed piece. I never claimed otherwise. However, the basic principles of the argument are undeniably correct.

Here is where the principles of intellectual honesty force me to go back and re-read the thing. Further, I feel compelled to admit:

Going back through, and re-reading it a bit more carefully, once one gets past the hand waving it doesn't read quite so badly. Had to take a crash course in the PERS finances, though.

The tone of the piece though makes me VERY wary of accepting his conclusions though, without some good critical thinking. He seems far to eager to reach a certain conclusion. I smell confirmation bias.

I will be big enough to admit after reading a whole lot more may have jumped the gun here. The tone of the first part of the piece seems like pointless hysteronics.

[RandomGuy]

That is the crux of the problem.

If you thumb through PERS most recent finances, even with the financial crash, their rolling averages don't deviate much from that 8%


Gotta go digging:
http://www.oregon.gov/pers/Pages/section/financial_reports/financial_status_statistics_actuarial_studies.aspx

from there to here:
http://www.oregon.gov/treasury/Divisions/Investment/Pages/Oregon-Public-Employees-Retirement-Fund.aspx

Most recent year-end, 2012:

http://www.oregon.gov/treasury/Divisions/Investment/Documents/OPERS/Monthly%20Returns/2012/OPERF_1212.pdf

Their 5 year average sucks monkey balls, but the last few years equities performance is good.

Remember that they get to invest LONG term, so they can lock in buy and hold strategies that smooth out hiccups, even ones as large as 2008-2009.

(edit: FWIW their year end 2012 performance was 17%-- I would guess apple stock... but that is a guess.)

[RandomGuy]

http://www.oregon.gov/treasury/Reports/Documents/Oregon%20Employees%20Retirement%20Fund.pdf

Equity listing. Funds galore. No Apple. :P

Actually earned them a pretty darn good return.

http://www.oregon.gov/treasury/Reports/Documents/1994_001.pdf


Looks like a long history of socking money away. Dollar cost averaging FTW.

[RandomGuy]

However, the basic principles of the argument are undeniably correct.


Going back to this:

Sort of. The guy was way too hand wavy.

PERS is underfunded, per their most recent 2011 lookback. In 2006, it was more than adequately funded though.

For that kind of thing you need to look at the actuarial report by Milliman (great firm, BTW, if you ever need actuarial guns for hire, they are THE go to firm)
http://www.oregon.gov/pers/docs/financial_reports/actuarial_service/2011_actuarial_valuation_rpt.pdf

Page 4 says what you need to know.

The orange is the 6% employee contribution. Seems capped. The employees need to contribute more.

The higher the bar, the more money needs to go into it. as of 2011, things sucked though. The green part is the part you need to pay attention to, that is the shortfall that will need to be made up by the contributions that Mr. Starkey is so worried about.

I am going to guess that the year end for 2013 will see that next bar down more than a bit, based on the 2012 returns.

[Rogue]

teachers & cops (as well as most so-called public servants) have been paid too much for too long. they also live in the same cruel world we all live in and when there's a crisis in our economy, i don't see no reason why they should be sheltered from the whole mess, though i respect those people as much as everyone does.

[Nbadan]

How so? I'm curious because as far as on the job offenses, I've only heard of teachers going to jail for physical/sexual abuse of minors and misuse/embezzlement of funds---what are the other reasons? And what are the professions that are safe from prosecution in those instances?

Some offenses under the STAAR test.. also, not being trained and certified to restrain a child who is out of control in the classroom...

[TDMVPDPOY]

i will contribute to this thread later

OP what field you in?

ur wife should come down here and teach, they get paid around 60-80k + bonuses +10k if you achieve govt standards, heck go t each in rural areas or countryside you get paid more money then public school teachers

[Wild Cobra]

Actually a 4% return assumption would result in a NPV of $827,970.24. I think I used 3% originally.
I believe PERS has a guaranteed 8% rate on the fund at the expense of the future tax payers. They have changed it enough over the years, hard to keep up with how the tax payers keep getting screwed.

[Wild Cobra]

And, as if on cue, you double down on stupid.

You don't have the first fucking clue what it takes to teach in today's schools.
OK, not incompetent. The teachers must be fucking stupid to take a job that requires them to work that many hours.

[George Gervin's Afro]

OK, not incompetent. The teachers must be fucking stupid to take a job that requires them to work that many hours.

so from them being lazy and just wanting a paycheck...

.. now they are just stupid...

[elbamba]

No. The common misconception is since there is no school in summer, teachers get 3 months off. Unless, like most teachers, you work another couple of weeks at the end of school, then take a few weeks off unless you work a second job over the summer, then a month before school starts, you're back in the classroom getting everything ready for the next year. I usually got 3 weeks if I was lucky. It was different for me because, as a band director, we always had summer band a month prior to school starting. But when I'd show up at school, there were always teachers in their rooms getting things in place for the coming year.

Three weeks? Its like you get a free sick week.

In all seriousness, I have given a lot of time to my son's school this year assisting with field trips and other activities. His teacher puts up with a lot of crap outside of teaching, which is difficult enough. Education is the one place I don't mind my tax dollars going.

[TeyshaBlue]

Three weeks? Its like you get a free sick week.

In all seriousness, I have given a lot of time to my son's school this year assisting with field trips and other activities. His teacher puts up with a lot of crap outside of teaching, which is difficult enough. Education is the one place I don't mind my tax dollars going.

I get 5 weeks right now in the private sector.:lol And I'm with you on investing in education. :toast

[TeyshaBlue]

OK, not incompetent. The teachers must be fucking stupid to take a job that requires them to work that many hours.

Or maybe they feel a calling to do this.
*Protip* Anything you don't understand is not automatically fucking stupid.

[DarrinS]

baM8N24K8kE

[DarrinS]

Kinda sucks that a really good teacher gets paid the same as a shitty teacher, so long as they have the same amount of tenure.

[TeyshaBlue]

Kinda sucks that a really good teacher gets paid the same as a shitty teacher, so long as they have the same amount of tenure.

In some places. In Tx, tenure is irrelevant...well, sorta. There is the whole career ladder thing that is basically more years experience = more $.

[RandomGuy]

teachers & cops (as well as most so-called public servants) have been paid too much for too long. they also live in the same cruel world we all live in and when there's a crisis in our economy, i don't see no reason why they should be sheltered from the whole mess, though i respect those people as much as everyone does.

Define "too much".

Both professions have very high turnover, which strongly suggests that they are not paid enough from an economic standpoint. That turnover, further, results in ultimately higher costs.

Further, do you want your average high-school graduate to teach kids that will be our future bosses and/or employees? History is littered with the wrecks of countries that fail to invest in their own human capital. The US has benefitted from other countries neglect in education from immigrants coming here for precisely that and staying.

[RandomGuy]

I believe PERS has a guaranteed 8% rate on the fund at the expense of the future tax payers. They have changed it enough over the years, hard to keep up with how the tax payers keep getting screwed.

Sigh. That as painfully ignorant, and hurtz ma brain.

The 8% return was their long term investment return, goober, not the growth in benefits "at the expense of future tax payers". The dingleberry waving his hands around took issue with what amounts to a long term average rate of return.

Speaking of which, it looks youran away from your statement.


http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214754&p=6586853&viewfull=1#post6586853

Give you one more chance to defend it, before I book mark it and add it to my siggy and rub your nose in it.

[mrsmaalox]

Some offenses under the STAAR test.. also, not being trained and certified to restrain a child who is out of control in the classroom...

Well the only offense under the STAAR test would be to assist in cheating or not adhering to the policy for the administration of the test; jail time sounds a bit extreme for that but it would definitely qualify to be reviewed for not fulfilling the job requirement-----just as in any other profession.

Training and certification of their employees to restrain out of control kids is the school district's responsibility, not the teacher's. The teacher is personally liable if they are neglectful in carrying out the district's policy for controlling a student, which results in physical harm to any person-----still really not unique to the teaching profession.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Well the only offense under the STAAR test would be to assist in cheating or not adhering to the policy for the administration of the test; jail time sounds a bit extreme for that but it would definitely qualify to be reviewed for not fulfilling the job requirement-----just as in any other profession.

Training and certification of their employees to restrain out of control kids is the school district's responsibility, not the teacher's. The teacher is personally liable if they are neglectful in carrying out the district's policy for controlling a student, which results in physical harm to any person-----still really not unique to the teaching profession.

my wife is the staff member on her campus that is trained to physically restrain children. She does it all of the time.

Of course her friend , who teaches kids who have issues, gets regualry spat on, she cleans desks, floors, etc. that have urine or feces on them.


I guess she's just fucking stupid for taking that job..

WC

[mrsmaalox]

my wife is the staff member on her campus that is trained to physically restrain children. She does it all of the time.

Of course her friend , who teaches kids who have issues, gets regualry spat on, she cleans desks, floors, etc. that have urine or feces on them.


I guess she's just fucking stupid for taking that job..

WC

Yup, my neighbor is a special ed teacher but now she is the one in Judson ISD who trains/certifies schools' special ed staff for these "take downs". It's serious business, exactly the kind of responsibility carried by psych ward and jail staff, but with a much more delicate population.

[tlongII]

Sigh. That as painfully ignorant, and hurtz ma brain.

The 8% return was their long term investment return, goober, not the growth in benefits "at the expense of future tax payers". The dingleberry waving his hands around took issue with what amounts to a long term average rate of return.

Speaking of which, it looks youran away from your statement.


http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214754&p=6586853&viewfull=1#post6586853

Give you one more chance to defend it, before I book mark it and add it to my siggy and rub your nose in it.

If there is a guaranteed 8% return on LT investments and they fail to meet that growth rate how do you think it gets funded?

[RandomGuy]

If there is a guaranteed 8% return on LT investments and they fail to meet that growth rate how do you think it gets funded?

Is it "guaranteed"?

That is the word Mr. Starkle used. I didn't see anything in the financials that implied that it was written in stone or backed up by anybody.

I think it gets funded by cutting benefits, if there is a substantial enough shortfall. In the end the retirees will eat no small amount of any shortage.

To get to an honest answer to your question, yes, there may have to be tax rate increases to cover shortfalls as well.

I imagine long before then any caps on the reqeuired employee contributions will be raised though, meaning the employees themselves will be funding it.

Personally, I have no problem with forcing people to save more. I do not think that the majority of Americans save what they need to, and the nanny state will have to come to the rescue and do some overreaching, over the howls of the tea party jackwagons who would prefer people starving in the streets and bleeding to death in emergency rooms becuase they committed the crime of not having enough money.

[101A]

In the town I live in, teachers starting pay (BA/BS is education or other field with an education certification), 1st year teacher's salaries are just over $60K. Steps are incremental yearly beyond that, and currently a teacher with 20 years in the District (or equivalent experience) makes just over 95K. A teacher with a masters degree makes an additional 6K annually, and another 6 for a Ph.D. There is a local 16,000 student university. The District will pay for teachers to get the additional degrees from that University. In turn, the University offers convenient classes (2 hours per week for 4 semesters - much of it online instruction), for teachers who wish to attain those additional degrees (both M.Ed, as well as Ph.D. Ed.). Additionally, the teachers are allowed 3 weeks personal time, and 3 weeks sick leave each year - and those accrue if they are not used; and a teacher at retirement can cash those in (although many simply take whatever accrual time they have at the end of their careers, prior to retirement - usually a couple of school years - in order to get additional "steps", which increases the retirement pension they will receive; 90% of final base pay on average). The teacher's also do pay into, and receive Social Security.

All of those numbers increase annually by 3 - 4% depending on the CBA, which is negotiated every 4 years (NEXT summer it is up for negotiation).

Yesterday was a school board election primary. All candidates cross filed, so the primary is, essentially, the general election. The board that will negotiate that contract will contain two spouses of active teachers in the district, the most recently retired superintendent, and the most recently retired director of math curriclum, as well as one more retired teacher. There are 9 total members of the board. I don't anticipate the board being particularly adversarial with the Union during negotiations.

I don't know specifics about other places, but that is the package teachers in our town currently earn.

Regarding police; the Sheriff here makes 55K.

[boutons_deux]

the Sheriff here makes 55K.

what are his qualifications? prerequisites for the job?

[LnGrrrR]

Serious?

I thought the law changed such that it was illegal to class non management positions as salary only.

If a teacher has to work 80 hrs to get the job done, they must be incompetent...

If someone who owns a business works 80 hrs a week, it shows how motivated he is to being successful.

If a teacher does it, he's incompetent.

[TeyshaBlue]

If someone who owns a business works 80 hrs a week, it shows how motivated he is to being successful.

If a teacher does it, he's incompetent.

and stoopid.

[101A]

what are his qualifications? prerequisites for the job?

Elected Position

[boutons_deux]

Kinda sucks that a really good teacher gets paid the same as a shitty teacher, so long as they have the same amount of tenure.

CEOs get bonuses of $10Ms whether the company and/or stock does great or crappy

[tlongII]

Is it "guaranteed"?

That is the word Mr. Starkle used. I didn't see anything in the financials that implied that it was written in stone or backed up by anybody.

I think it gets funded by cutting benefits, if there is a substantial enough shortfall. In the end the retirees will eat no small amount of any shortage.

To get to an honest answer to your question, yes, there may have to be tax rate increases to cover shortfalls as well.

I imagine long before then any caps on the reqeuired employee contributions will be raised though, meaning the employees themselves will be funding it.

Personally, I have no problem with forcing people to save more. I do not think that the majority of Americans save what they need to, and the nanny state will have to come to the rescue and do some overreaching, over the howls of the tea party jackwagons who would prefer people starving in the streets and bleeding to death in emergency rooms becuase they committed the crime of not having enough money.

Actually what happens is that the state government cuts other services in order to cover the shortfall. Essentially to get these services to their previous levels taxes would need to be increased though. My understanding is that these returns are guaranteed as well. If I get a chance I'll try to find documentation of it.

[Wild Cobra]

Sigh. That as painfully ignorant, and hurtz ma brain.

You are the ignorant one.

I live in Oregon. I have been hearing of the ups and downs of the system for decades.

Fuck your holier than though attitude on shit you think you're and expert on because you find a link on the internet.

I just verified my facts. When the PERS fund does not generate 8%, the employees are still guaranteed the 8% growth rate for their retirement. That's why I said "at the expense of the taxpayer"

[Wild Cobra]

If someone who owns a business works 80 hrs a week, it shows how motivated he is to being successful.

If a teacher does it, he's incompetent.
How about stupid, for being a willing slave to the system. How about stupid for not finding better employment.

Why are teachers "entitled?"

Why is anyone "entitled?"

Fuck that loser attitude.

[Wild Cobra]

If someone who owns a business works 80 hrs a week, it shows how motivated he is to being successful.

If a teacher does it, he's incompetent.
How about stupid, for being a willing slave to the system. How about stupid for not finding better employment.

Why are teachers "entitled?"

Why is anyone "entitled?"

Fuck that loser attitude.

[clambake]

this......coming from:

a welfare suckling

to an army suckling

to a union suckling.







congrats. you hit the trifecta!

[George Gervin's Afro]

How about stupid, for being a willing slave to the system. How about stupid for not finding better employment.

Why are teachers "entitled?"

Why is anyone "entitled?"

Fuck that loser attitude.

you dumbness has gone farther than ever before ..lol

[Wild Cobra]

you dumbness has gone farther than ever before ..lol
OK, you tell me.

Why does anyone stay in a job, working 70+ hrs a week at an effective pay of maybe $12/hr?

That's fucking stupid, unless you love the job, so stop with this entitlement idea.

Apparently, supply and demand has no problem filling the positions, so shut your silly entailment mentality up...

[TeyshaBlue]

How about stupid, for being a willing slave to the system. How about stupid for not finding better employment.

Why are teachers "entitled?"

Why is anyone "entitled?"

Fuck that loser attitude.

If all were to adhere to that unspeakably retarded narrative, we would have no teachers. Holy shit. You actually get dumber the longer you post on a topic. Unbelievable.

[Wild Cobra]

If all were to adhere to that unspeakably retarded narrative, we would have no teachers. Holy shit. You actually get dumber the longer you post on a topic. Unbelievable.
No, you simply are too stupid to try to accept my viewpoint.

[TeyshaBlue]

No, you simply are too stupid to try to accept my viewpoint.

Which fucking viewpoint? The one where teachers are incompetent? Or the one where they're stupid?
You are simply too stupid to put forth a viewpoint that makes any sense whatsoever.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No, you simply are too stupid to try to accept my viewpoint.

Well it's either everyone is too stupid to accept your viewpoint --no one does, not even our neocons-- or the more likely case of you being the moron. We have to further this claim the litany of stupidity and failed reasoning that has been on display since you have joined us.

[scott]

I thought the law changed such that it was illegal to class non management positions as salary only

lolwut?

[RandomGuy]

You are the ignorant one.

I live in Oregon. I have been hearing of the ups and downs of the system for decades.

Fuck your holier than though attitude on shit you think you're and expert on because you find a link on the internet.

I just verified my facts. When the PERS fund does not generate 8%, the employees are still guaranteed the 8% growth rate for their retirement. That's why I said "at the expense of the taxpayer"

I think I am an expert because I have the technical expertise and education to understand the material that I find at that link, you goober.

And it is "holier than thou"

[RandomGuy]

So?

Many of us haven't seen a raise for a few years.

I don't know about your state, but in many places, teachers are overpaid for the work required. Teachers have a far better benefits package than most tax payers supporting their salaries. Most government employees unions get over on the government too easily because the government doesn't have the same bottom line businesses have. Need more money? Just siphon more from that tax payers...

I'm sorry, until teachers accept the fact that they are over compensated for their jobs, I have no sympathy for their whining.

http://www.trephination.net/gallery/macros/bs_wave.gif

Prove teachers are over-compensated.

Supporting data, and definitions. Your claim, your burden of proof.

Bullshit has been called. Can you walk the walk, or are you gonna run away from this one?

EDIT

This is about the fourth time I have tried to get Wild Goober to back his shit up.

No nice. I will just assume he has run away from this. Probably a good call on his part.

[RandomGuy]

I just verified my facts. When the PERS fund does not generate 8%, the employees are still guaranteed the 8% growth rate for their retirement. That's why I said "at the expense of the taxpayer"

Link?

You will have to pardon me if I have the temerity to doubt your intepretation of "fact".

Link or GTFO.

[TeyshaBlue]

http://www.trephination.net/gallery/macros/bs_wave.gif

Prove teachers are over-compensated.

Supporting data, and definitions. Your claim, your burden of proof.

Bullshit has been called. Can you walk the walk, or are you gonna run away from this one?

EDIT

This is about the fourth time I have tried to get Wild Goober to back his shit up.

No nice. I will just assume he has run away from this. Probably a good call on his part.


until teachers accept the fact that they are over compensated for their jobs,

It's a fact, RG. A FACT.:lol

[RandomGuy]

How about stupid, for being a willing slave to the system. How about stupid for not finding better employment.

Why are teachers "entitled?"

Why is anyone "entitled?"

Fuck that loser attitude.

The high cost of teacher turnover would imply that not many of them find the salary all that compelling.

Most first year teachers have higher "dropout" rates than their students and aren't teaching in the same school 4 years later, and many just aren't even staying in the profession.

http://nctaf.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/NCTAF-Cost-of-Teacher-Turnover-2007-policy-brief.pdf

We could save money by paying them more.

Suck on that.

Economically that implies they are underpaid for their level of education.

[LnGrrrR]

Obviously, the best solution is to save money for the taxpayers, and abolish all public education. This way we can cut the deficit and lazy no good parents will be responsible for having an active role in the childrens' education. I see no downside to this solution. [/WC]

[leemajors]

In the town I live in, teachers starting pay (BA/BS is education or other field with an education certification), 1st year teacher's salaries are just over $60K. Steps are incremental yearly beyond that, and currently a teacher with 20 years in the District (or equivalent experience) makes just over 95K. A teacher with a masters degree makes an additional 6K annually, and another 6 for a Ph.D. There is a local 16,000 student university. The District will pay for teachers to get the additional degrees from that University. In turn, the University offers convenient classes (2 hours per week for 4 semesters - much of it online instruction), for teachers who wish to attain those additional degrees (both M.Ed, as well as Ph.D. Ed.). Additionally, the teachers are allowed 3 weeks personal time, and 3 weeks sick leave each year - and those accrue if they are not used; and a teacher at retirement can cash those in (although many simply take whatever accrual time they have at the end of their careers, prior to retirement - usually a couple of school years - in order to get additional "steps", which increases the retirement pension they will receive; 90% of final base pay on average). The teacher's also do pay into, and receive Social Security.

All of those numbers increase annually by 3 - 4% depending on the CBA, which is negotiated every 4 years (NEXT summer it is up for negotiation).

Yesterday was a school board election primary. All candidates cross filed, so the primary is, essentially, the general election. The board that will negotiate that contract will contain two spouses of active teachers in the district, the most recently retired superintendent, and the most recently retired director of math curriclum, as well as one more retired teacher. There are 9 total members of the board. I don't anticipate the board being particularly adversarial with the Union during negotiations.

I don't know specifics about other places, but that is the package teachers in our town currently earn.

Regarding police; the Sheriff here makes 55K.

Teachers in Austin ISD start at around half that.

[Nbadan]

Well the only offense under the STAAR test would be to assist in cheating or not adhering to the policy for the administration of the test; jail time sounds a bit extreme for that but it would definitely qualify to be reviewed for not fulfilling the job requirement-----just as in any other profession.

Training and certification of their employees to restrain out of control kids is the school district's responsibility, not the teacher's. The teacher is personally liable if they are neglectful in carrying out the district's policy for controlling a student, which results in physical harm to any person-----still really not unique to the teaching profession.

I guess my point is in other jobs you have to be willfully negligent to be charged with a crime on the job...in teaching, all you have to do is not be an 'active observer' while the kids are taking a test...

[Nbadan]

Obviously, the best solution is to save money for the taxpayers, and abolish all public education. This way we can cut the deficit and lazy no good parents will be responsible for having an active role in the childrens' education. I see no downside to this solution. [/WC]

...and we can finally teach the bible in school again...hallelujah

[Nbadan]

WC is willfully ignorant on this topic, but he does cut on an important point....we need a way to reward good teachers and keep them in the classroom....teaching is a calling because it takes a shit load of patience to deal with challenging kids, not because they should work for a fraction of what they would earn in the private sector..

[Nbadan]

A veteran teacher shares her story...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uH9vxq1iJVM


“This year alone, I have been a helpless witness as half a dozen dedicated, hardworking teachers were reduced to tears, shame and desperation because an administrator decided they disliked them for some arbitrary reason,” Rubenstein said. “These devoted employees were handed concern forms filled with false accusations and no opportunity for discussion was provided. They then received a less-than-glowing evaluation with no recourse or opportunity for appeal or dialogue — they were told their contracts were not being renewed.”

[Wild Cobra]

LOL...

You guys get so worked up so easy.

Seriously, if teaching pays so poorly, why are people spending the many for college to work such shitty wages?

Maybe things are different in other states, but teachers here in Oregon are well compensated. i think you're all lying about the hours and pay. Every teacher i know, when working extra hours as a coach, or other stuff, gets extra pay as well. Then there's this:

Bureau of Labor Statistics link: Teachers’ work patterns: when, where,
and how much do U.S. teachers work? (https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/249299/bls-teachers-work-patterns.pdf)

So excuse me for calling you guys morons, incompetent, etc... But if the shoe fits...

If you are in cities or jobs that do work you that 70+ hrs a week, it is not normal. i suggest moving to a different city.

[George Gervin's Afro]

LOL...

You guys get so worked up so easy.

Seriously, if teaching pays so poorly, why are people spending the many for college to work such shitty wages?

Maybe things are different in other states, but teachers here in Oregon are well compensated. i think you're all lying about the hours and pay. Every teacher i know, when working extra hours as a coach, or other stuff, gets extra pay as well. Then there's this:

Bureau of Labor Statistics link: Teachers’ work patterns: when, where,
and how much do U.S. teachers work? (https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/249299/bls-teachers-work-patterns.pdf)

So excuse me for calling you guys morons, incompetent, etc... But if the shoe fits...

If you are in cities or jobs that do work you that 70+ hrs a week, it is not normal. i suggest moving to a different city.

My god you are an idiot.

Teachers are not paid by the hour you moron! That is a fact!

My wife , as incompetent and stupid she is, has taught for over 20 yrs you dumbass! I know how teachers are paid!

[scott]

LOL...

You guys get so worked up so easy.

Seriously, if teaching pays so poorly, why are people spending the many for college to work such shitty wages?



Perhaps they don't place money as the #1 compensating factor in choosing their profession. After all, not all of us can follow the golden pathway of Union Parts Changing.

[RandomGuy]

LOL...

You guys get so worked up so easy.

Seriously, if teaching pays so poorly, why are people spending the many for college to work such shitty wages?

Maybe things are different in other states, but teachers here in Oregon are well compensated. i think you're all lying about the hours and pay. Every teacher i know, when working extra hours as a coach, or other stuff, gets extra pay as well. Then there's this:

Bureau of Labor Statistics link: Teachers’ work patterns: when, where,
and how much do U.S. teachers work? (https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/249299/bls-teachers-work-patterns.pdf)

So excuse me for calling you guys morons, incompetent, etc... But if the shoe fits...

If you are in cities or jobs that do work you that 70+ hrs a week, it is not normal. i suggest moving to a different city.

Jeez, take off your troll hat for a second and see if you can actually prove that teachers are overpaid.

It is a commonly held idea in many people's head, and if you want to parrot it, the least you can do is see if the evidence, fairly looked at, supports it.

Would it really kill you to change your mind or base your opinion on good evidence for this particular thing?

[RandomGuy]

Actually what happens is that the state government cuts other services in order to cover the shortfall. Essentially to get these services to their previous levels taxes would need to be increased though. My understanding is that these returns are guaranteed as well. If I get a chance I'll try to find documentation of it.

That would be awesome, thank you. I would prefer to know for sure, so that I can have as realistic and comprehensive grasp on it as I can. Better information = better decisions.

It may not be MY state's ERS, but all states pretty much have similar systems, and it is a huge potential liability collectively in the US. More than many would guess at.

[TeyshaBlue]

LOL...

You guys get so worked up so easy.

Seriously, if teaching pays so poorly, why are people spending the many for college to work such shitty wages?

People get worked up when someone with a room temperature IQ starts slinging shit at them. Teaching is an important job that must be done. Some might describe it as a calling.



Maybe things are different in other states, but teachers here in Oregon are well compensated. i think you're all lying about the hours and pay. Every teacher i know, when working extra hours as a coach, or other stuff, gets extra pay as well. Then there's this:

Bureau of Labor Statistics link: Teachers’ work patterns: when, where,
and how much do U.S. teachers work? (https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/249299/bls-teachers-work-patterns.pdf)
That study is so full of caveats, only a small mind would consider that representative of anything other than an analysis of extremely broad characteristics. And just how many Teachers do you know? Having actually taught (something you know absolutely nothing about) for 10 years, I'd say I know a shit ton more of them and my data set is probably several orders of magnitude higher quality than whatever you've got tucked away in that bovine sensorium of yours.



So excuse me for calling you guys morons, incompetent, etc... But if the shoe fits... It doesn't. It's already been demonstrated that you are, once again, completely full of shit and unable to back up your asinine notions of teachers being overpaid. You're a clueless coward. It's ok. We all know it.


If you are in cities or jobs that do work you that 70+ hrs a week, it is not normal. i suggest moving to a different city.
I suggest you climb a wall of dicks.

[leemajors]

I suggest you climb a wall of dicks.

He may tumble down on purpose tbh.

[tlongII]

That would be awesome, thank you. I would prefer to know for sure, so that I can have as realistic and comprehensive grasp on it as I can. Better information = better decisions.

It may not be MY state's ERS, but all states pretty much have similar systems, and it is a huge potential liability collectively in the US. More than many would guess at.

The attached link gives a good explanation of the situation we're in. It is not an op ed piece so I think you can trust it. It appears the return was guaranteed at one time, but may not be now. Let me know what you think.

http://www.oregonbusinessplan.org/Initiatives/Improve-Public-Finance-and-Budgeting/Reform-PERS-to-Put-More-Dollars-in-the-Classroom.aspx

[RandomGuy]

The attached link gives a good explanation of the situation we're in. It is not an op ed piece so I think you can trust it. It appears the return was guaranteed at one time, but may not be now. Let me know what you think.

http://www.oregonbusinessplan.org/Initiatives/Improve-Public-Finance-and-Budgeting/Reform-PERS-to-Put-More-Dollars-in-the-Classroom.aspx

Thanks.

I think the "guaranteed" rate is indeed gauranteed, now that I can get some actual better reading, although the link you gave didn't give a source solid enough to confirm it, it seems measured and careful enough that I can safely assume they are accurate in the use of that word.

That said:
Average 42 year rate of return on their invested assets:
10.32%

pg 14, data table
http://www.oregon.gov/pers/docs/general_information/pers_by_the_numbers9-2012.pdf

If your long term average is 2.3% higher than the guaranteed rate of increase, that would not seem to be a long term problem.

THAT said, the business plan's proposals are spot on. They all need to be enacted, IMO.

Thanks again for giving me enough good information for me to get there, and apologies for me getting a bit huffy.



When considering this, the big ticket item that should be focused on is the UAL, or Unfunded Actuarial Liability. That is the bottom-line current year shortfall, and it determines how much the public will have to pony up, through their cities and state taxes.

In this case, the beneficiaries need to bear a bit more of the burden than they are currently required to, and that is more than reasonable.

Lastly:
The benefits aren't quite as generous as have been portrayed here. The annuities seem to be based on average working salary, which includes a lot of years of entry-level and time-eroded pay.

See page 7 of the above linked pdf.

It isn't the last year high salary on which your annuity is based. The average annuity pays out 74% (currently) of that last years pay. So the 53,000/yr employee generally would get 74% of that. Further, the plan projects that to fall down to the target of 50% over time Still further, newer employees hired after 2003 are already bearing more of the cost and market risk.

Reform is needed, but it isn't as bad as some might think. Needs improvement, but not terminal, IMO.

[RandomGuy]

When considering this, the big ticket item that should be focused on is the UAL, or Unfunded Actuarial Liability. That is the bottom-line current year shortfall, and it determines how much the public will have to pony up, through their cities and state taxes.

A final note:

There is a limiting mechanism built in to the system that limits any required extra contributions due to this UAL from cities and so forth, called a "collar", it limits increases to a certain amount, recalculated every two years. This functions as a smoothing mechanism to allow the market itself time to correct and fill in gaps BEFORE goverments must add money.

The UAL is pretty substantial in 2012, owing to the BIG hit the fund took in the financial crisis. It will be smaller in 2013, simply due to the good returns on stocks in the last couple of years.

Keep an eye on it though, because equities will get pretty sluggish once the Fed stops buying bonds and allows the first small rises in interest rates as the economy recovers.

[Wild Cobra]

The high cost of teacher turnover would imply that not many of them find the salary all that compelling.

Most first year teachers have higher "dropout" rates than their students and aren't teaching in the same school 4 years later, and many just aren't even staying in the profession.

http://nctaf.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/NCTAF-Cost-of-Teacher-Turnover-2007-policy-brief.pdf

We could save money by paying them more.

Suck on that.

Economically that implies they are underpaid for their level of education.
I went to see what this link said. You wonder why I never believe a word you liars say. Don;'t you follow up on your source links for accuracy, or do you like their lies?

Your link:


In 1999, in the School District of Philadelphia, 919
new teachers began teaching and 12,000 students
began ninth grade. Six years later, 58% of those
students had graduated from high school, but only
30% of those new teachers were still teaching in
Philadelphia.

Do you know what mobility is? My God shithead.... These people, like any other, get their first teaching job wherever they can. They they move to a better location when a slot becomes available for them. According to the US Department of Education, teachers who leave the profession during their first three years is about 8.5%. About 6.5% for teachers with 4-9 years of experience. The numbers are 13.3% and 10.2% for those moving. I would suggest your Teacher Activist link cherry picked the higher number (outlier) data.

I don't see that notable any worse than any other profession.

Then in a later post, you agree with the 8% guaranteed PERS rate...

And you call me a troll for calling you guys out on your lies...

[boutons_deux]

TX teachers have about the same average career as NFL players: 5 years.

low entry standards, shitty pay, high stress, demonized and slandered by TX Repugs as over-paid, coddled, shitty teachers and union members, etc, etc, etc.

[TeyshaBlue]

I went to see what this link said. You wonder why I never believe a word you liars say. Don;'t you follow up on your source links for accuracy, or do you like their lies?

Your link:



Do you know what mobility is? My God shithead.... These people, like any other, get their first teaching job wherever they can. They they move to a better location when a slot becomes available for them. According to the US Department of Education, teachers who leave the profession during their first three years is about 8.5%. About 6.5% for teachers with 4-9 years of experience. The numbers are 13.3% and 10.2% for those moving. I would suggest your Teacher Activist link cherry picked the higher number (outlier) data.

I don't see that notable any worse than any other profession.

Then in a later post, you agree with the 8% guaranteed PERS rate...

And you call me a troll for calling you guys out on your lies...

From the same link: "The monetary loss for many schools impacts already stretched budgets and adds to the hiring struggles of school leaders. The problem is most acute in the nation’s high minority, high poverty, and low performing schools. Because 46% of all new teachers in the United States leave the profession within five years, NCTAF says leaders of at-risk schools are in a constant cycle of rebuilding their staff."

And you wonder why we think you are a fucking idiot. http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/smilies/facepalm.gif

[TeyshaBlue]

TX teachers have about the same average career as NFL players: 5 years.

low entry standards, shitty pay, high stress, demonized and slandered by TX Repugs as over-paid, coddled, shitty teachers and union members, etc, etc, etc.

Leave your moonbat narrative at home little fella, and talk like a fucking grown up.

[TeyshaBlue]

"Don;'t (sic)you follow up on your source links for accuracy, or do you like their lies?"

I'm dying of an overdose of Vitamin I.

[TeyshaBlue]

Five Reasons Teacher Turnover Is on the Rise

http://www.takepart.com/article/2011/08/09/five-reasons-teacher-turnover-rise

[George Gervin's Afro]

Five Reasons Teacher Turnover Is on the Rise

http://www.takepart.com/article/2011/08/09/five-reasons-teacher-turnover-rise


Money and respect are only two things quality educators want more of.


Well they would get neither from WC.. they are incompetent or stupid...

[Wild Cobra]

From the same link: "The monetary loss for many schools impacts already stretched budgets and adds to the hiring struggles of school leaders. The problem is most acute in the nation’s high minority, high poverty, and low performing schools. Because 46% of all new teachers in the United States leave the profession within five years, NCTAF says leaders of at-risk schools are in a constant cycle of rebuilding their staff."

And you wonder why we think you are a fucking idiot. http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/smilies/facepalm.gif
Liar.

That's not in Random's link.

[TeyshaBlue]

It's from a link in RG's link, dolt.

[TeyshaBlue]

But, go ahead and ignore that "46% of all new teachers in the United States leave the profession within five years" while you start your obfuscation shuffle. Fucking moron.

[TeyshaBlue]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/03/08/high-teacher-turnover-rates-are-a-big-problem-for-americas-public-schools/

[leemajors]

:corn:

[Wild Cobra]

TB...

Those high numbers I find are turnover rates at individual schools. Not leaving the profession. Many of them are just moving to a different school in the same district even, but are counted as a turnover..

[TeyshaBlue]

So WC, which are you? Incompetent, or stupid?

[Wild Cobra]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/03/08/high-teacher-turnover-rates-are-a-big-problem-for-americas-public-schools/
Yes, I found that when I searched part of the sentence you quoted.

Where is the Forbes source for that info?

Funny how the NEA information differs...

[TeyshaBlue]

That' 46% figure is dissected here;

http://shankerblog.org/?p=4534

[TeyshaBlue]

I am debating downhill with you, WC. You haven't even approached the curve I passed 15 years ago.

[TeyshaBlue]

btw, you haven't even sniffed making a case for teachers being overcompensated, incompetent or stupid.

[TeyshaBlue]

Motherfuckin' hat trick.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/teyshablue/ronalds-pimp-hand.jpg (http://s3.photobucket.com/user/teyshablue/media/ronalds-pimp-hand.jpg.html)

[Wild Cobra]

I am debating downhill with you, WC. You haven't even approached the curve I passed 15 years ago.
In your dreams.

You post a blog... As evidence... No good solid links...

Why no NEA links?

Also...

How many of these are part time activities while still finishing school, or part time unable to get full time? How many are "let go" rather than leave on their own?

I took Randoms links and searched the footnotes and dispelled what he said about the link. Then you say "in the same ink" and it was a Forbes link instead, with no source listed...

You have the ignorance to think you are in my league?

LOL...

LOL...

LOL...

LOL...

[Wild Cobra]

btw, you haven't even sniffed making a case for teachers being overcompensated, incompetent or stupid.
Yes I did.

Supply and demand.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Yes I did.

Supply and demand.

you do realize the govt pays them..don't you?

so if they want more money (higher taxes). are you willing to pay more in taxes?

[RandomGuy]

Do you know what mobility is? My God shithead.... These people, like any other, get their first teaching job wherever they can. They they move to a better location when a slot becomes available for them.
And you call me a troll for calling you guys out on your lies...

(facepalm)


aren't teaching in the same school 4 years later

That whole speil you posted is pretty much what I said.

I acknowledged that they moved around.

I don't blame you for getting a bit testy with everybody picking on you and calling you names though. If you think you need to take it out on someone, I can take it.

Not sure how much of the tone is genuine and how much is some trolling attempt, but assuming it is genuine, take a breath and consider the consequences of that moving around on the costs for the school in terms of hiring and training.

Then consider the statistics on teachers leaving the profession.

People may swtich careers (careers mind you, not jobs) three times or so in their lifetimes. Switching within 5 years would suggest that many are leaving. Again, more money spent on education by the teachers themselves that they give up to change.

As for agreeing with you about the 8% "guaranteed" part, if you had bothereed to take a mintute or two and give me a link as tlong did, I would have been happy to acknowledge it.

I take it you missed the part where the 8% turns out to be two percentage points lower than the fund's average rate of return for the last 42 years?

[Wild Cobra]

you do realize the govt pays them..don't you?

so if they want more money (higher taxes). are you willing to pay more in taxes?
Pay too much already. The Oregon cost is in excess of $13,000 per student per year.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Pay too much already. The Oregon cost is in excess of $13,000 per student per year.

so it isn't about supply and demand..

[RandomGuy]

Pay too much already. The Oregon cost is in excess of $13,000 per student per year.

What would be reasonable to you?

What are the components of that cost?

What are the benefits of that to the Oregon economy?

How much is that per capita?

[RandomGuy]

so it isn't about supply and demand..

People like WC tend to just see costs, and never realize that there are very solid economic benefits to educating children. It is bizzarre.

[George Gervin's Afro]

People like WC tend to just see costs, and never realize that there are very solid economic benefits to educating children. It is bizzarre.

I guess investing in our children is not a priority for the likes of WC

[RandomGuy]

so it isn't about supply and demand..

The bigger thing to realize is that he is forming his opinoin with the emotional part of his brain.


Self-proclaimed right-wingers had a more pronounced amygdala - a primitive part of the brain associated with emotion.
It is an almond-shape set of neurons located deep in the brain's medial temporal lobe.
However, those aligned to the left had thicker anterior cingulates - which is an area associated with anticipation and decision-making.

The research was carried out by Geraint Rees director of the UCL Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience who said he was 'very surprised' by the finding, which is being peer reviewed before publication next year.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1342239/Brain-study-reveals-right-wing-conservatives-larger-primitive-amygdala.html



The amygdala has many functions, including fear processing [11]. Individuals with a large amygdala are more sensitive to fear [12], which, taken together with our findings, might suggest the testable hypothesis that individuals with larger amygdala are more inclined to integrate conservative views into their belief system. Similarly, it is striking that conservatives are more sensitive to disgust [13, 14], and the insula is involved in the feeling of disgust [15]. On the other hand, our finding of an association between anterior cingulate cortex volume and political attitudes may be linked with tolerance to uncertainty. One of the functions of the anterior cingulate cortex is to monitor uncertainty [16, 17] and conflicts [18]. Thus, it is conceivable that individuals with a larger ACC have a higher capacity to tolerate uncertainty and conflicts, allowing them to accept more liberal views

http://critical-thinker.net/?p=1074
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1342239/Brain-study-reveals-right-wing-conservatives-larger-primitive-amygdala.html


Keep that in mind when you start reading about how outraged conservatives are about one thing or another.

Ironic given that many of them think liberals are the overly emotional ones.

[Wild Cobra]

Then consider the statistics on teachers leaving the profession.

People may swtich careers (careers mind you, not jobs) three times or so in their lifetimes. Switching within 5 years would suggest that many are leaving. Again, more money spent on education by the teachers themselves that they give up to change.
Still, the material you quoted included those moving, and you said leaving the profession.

As for agreeing with you about the 8% "guaranteed" part, if you had bothereed to take a mintute or two and give me a link as tlong did, I would have been happy to acknowledge it.

I take it you missed the part where the 8% turns out to be two percentage points lower than the fund's average rate of return for the last 42 years?
No, I didn't miss it, but the fund has changed. It never used to be 8% guaranteed, and if those 8%'s were losses like in real life in some years, I doubt the annual average would be over 8%. Look at how many times in the last 20 years it was only an 8% growth... This means the real growth was less, or at a loss, and supplemented by tax payers!

Consider a year with say a real market loss of 12% in the held funds. This means tax payers would be subsidizing 20% of the fund value that year!

[RandomGuy]

I guess investing in our children is not a priority for the likes of WC

That particular viewpoint doesn't see it as investing at all, that is the problem.

It is the goverment picking peoples pockets, as if the money disappears into a black hole and never reappears, totally wasted.

It isn't, and it doesn't.

They seem to think that most of that $13,000 somehow goes into the fat-cat pockets of the teachers, and the teacher unions are what drives the emotional narrative for conservatives.

The inconvenient fact that most of that actually doesn't end up in teachers pockets is sort of unacknolwedged.

Here is what a school budget looks like:

http://www.pps.k12.or.us/files/budget/13-14_PPS_Approved_Budget.pdf

Total outlays for all salaries is 53% of the budget. (first few pages)

Of that salary total, 61% goes to teachers. ("subtotal instruction", page 27)

A little bit of math and you end up with 31% of the overall budget. The rest goes to administration, bus drivers, accountants, construction, etc.

I guess if the NRA gets it way, we can add campus police to that overhead too.

Alll of that money, all $852M or so, goes right back into the economy.

The BEST argument he could possibily make is that it was inefficiently spent, somehow. Given that he has run away from trying to prove anything other than how wrong I am about any given topic, I'm not holding my breath.

Pity. It is one of the most important conversations that we should be having, and all we get are "teachers are overpaid" ad nauseum.

[Wild Cobra]

The bigger thing to realize is that he is forming his opinoin with the emotional part of his brain.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1342239/Brain-study-reveals-right-wing-conservatives-larger-primitive-amygdala.html




http://critical-thinker.net/?p=1074
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1342239/Brain-study-reveals-right-wing-conservatives-larger-primitive-amygdala.html


Keep that in mind when you start reading about how outraged conservatives are about one thing or another.

Ironic given that many of them think liberals are the overly emotional ones.
LOL...

Reaching, aren't we?

[Wild Cobra]

That particular viewpoint doesn't see it as investing at all, that is the problem.

It is the goverment picking peoples pockets, as if the money disappears into a black hole and never reappears, totally wasted.

It isn't, and it doesn't.

They seem to think that most of that $13,000 somehow goes into the fat-cat pockets of the teachers, and the teacher unions are what drives the emotional narrative for conservatives.

The inconvenient fact that most of that actually doesn't end up in teachers pockets is sort of unacknolwedged.

Here is what a school budget looks like:

http://www.pps.k12.or.us/files/budget/13-14_PPS_Approved_Budget.pdf

Total outlays for all salaries is 53% of the budget. (first few pages)

Of that salary total, 61% goes to teachers. ("subtotal instruction", page 27)

A little bit of math and you end up with 31% of the overall budget. The rest goes to administration, bus drivers, accountants, construction, etc.

I guess if the NRA gets it way, we can add campus police to that overhead too.

Alll of that money, all $852M or so, goes right back into the economy.

The BEST argument he could possibily make is that it was inefficiently spent, somehow. Given that he has run away from trying to prove anything other than how wrong I am about any given topic, I'm not holding my breath.

Pity. It is one of the most important conversations that we should be having, and all we get are "teachers are overpaid" ad nauseum.
You seem to assume something each line. Trust me, what you assume of my viewpoint is not true.

Part of the problem with you liberals here is that you don't try to understand the points people like me make. You assume it to be something else, then you end up arguing against straw.

[TeyshaBlue]

In your dreams.

You post a blog... As evidence... No good solid links...

Why no NEA links?

Also...

How many of these are part time activities while still finishing school, or part time unable to get full time? How many are "let go" rather than leave on their own?

I took Randoms links and searched the footnotes and dispelled what he said about the link. Then you say "in the same ink" and it was a Forbes link instead, with no source listed...

You have the ignorance to think you are in my league?

LOL...

LOL...

LOL...

LOL...

Yeah. I'm sure you've spent plenty of time in the education profession.

Fucking moron.

[RandomGuy]

Still, the material you quoted included those moving, and you said leaving the profession.

And then I said "MANY". I didn't quote any particular figures, but you were too busy being mad to note that.


No, I didn't miss it, but the fund has changed. It never used to be 8% guaranteed, and if those 8%'s were losses like in real life in some years, I doubt the annual average would be over 8%. Look at how many times in the last 20 years it was only an 8% growth... This means the real growth was less, or at a loss, and supplemented by tax payers!

Consider a year with say a real market loss of 12% in the held funds. This means tax payers would be subsidizing 20% of the fund value that year!

Which is why they have a moving collar to constrain growth of additional requirements in those years to smooth over any additional taxes and let the market itself make up the extra.

You do know about the collar right?

It's right there in the actuarial report from Milliman.

[TeyshaBlue]

People like WC tend to just see costs, and never realize that there are very solid economic benefits to educating children. It is bizzarre.

People like WC tend to just see what they think are costs. They don't ever see the true cost because they are unable to even form the question to summon the answer.

[TeyshaBlue]

In your dreams.

You post a blog... As evidence... No good solid links...

Why no NEA links?



There are 20+ source links in that blog, moron.

[Wild Cobra]

Yeah. I'm sure you've spent plenty of time in the education profession.

Fucking moron.
Do you have a number from a more reputable source, like the NEA to support the numbers you pulled out of a bloggers ass?

You guys get on me for my personal experience on things and call it anecdotal. Why is it OK for you to be so fucking hypocritical in this regard?

[Wild Cobra]

There are 20+ source links in that blog, moron.
Some bad links, and the ones I followed did not support your contention.

add---

I'm sorry, it was the Forbes article, or another with the broken link.

I went back and looked, one of the links is the same one I found earlier to dispute Ransom's 30% claim.

Which one supports your claim?

[TeyshaBlue]

Yes I did.

Supply and demand.

Make the case, idiot. 3 words don't quite cut it.

[RandomGuy]

You seem to assume something each line. Trust me, what you assume of my viewpoint is not true.

Part of the problem with you liberals here is that you don't try to understand the points people like me make. You assume it to be something else, then you end up arguing against straw.

That's my perception of your viewpoint, and notice I very carefully said "that viewpoint" not "his".

I allow for you to speak your own mind, although I do lump you into the group of people who seem to spend their time screaming about the costs, but never utter a word about what we get for that in a larger ecnomic sense.

How much of that $13,000 per year do we get back into the economy over the lifetime of that kid?

[Th'Pusher]

The bigger thing to realize is that he is forming his opinoin with the emotional part of his brain.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1342239/Brain-study-reveals-right-wing-conservatives-larger-primitive-amygdala.html




http://critical-thinker.net/?p=1074
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1342239/Brain-study-reveals-right-wing-conservatives-larger-primitive-amygdala.html


Keep that in mind when you start reading about how outraged conservatives are about one thing or another.

Ironic given that many of them think liberals are the overly emotional ones.
:lol I bet you can see WC's amygdala from space :lol throbbing :lol

[TeyshaBlue]

Some bad links, and the ones I followed did not support your contention.

Bullshit.

[TeyshaBlue]

Do you have a number from a more reputable source, like the NEA to support the numbers you pulled out of a bloggers ass?

You guys get on me for my personal experience on things and call it anecdotal. Why is it OK for you to be so fucking hypocritical in this regard?

lol NEA. As if they were the sole source of compelling data.

[TeyshaBlue]

Maybe you can find a NEA white paper that underpins your idiotic notion that teachers are overcompensated, and stupid.

[TeyshaBlue]

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/teyshablue/Thisthread.gif (http://s3.photobucket.com/user/teyshablue/media/Thisthread.gif.html)

[Wild Cobra]

Make the case, idiot. 3 words don't quite cut it.
Yes, I know. You are too stupid to understand supply and demand, so I would have to write an informative paper on the topic.

Sorry, not going to waste the effort on a jackass like you.

I wonder though. Are you suggesting that all jobs are entitlements to a good salary?

What then is a good salary? $65k, $80k? Why stop there? Why not demand $200k+ if you think what the market will bear, has no bearing, and you are a libtard with that entitlement mentality?

As for something said earlier. The level of education in children cannot be fixed by throwing more money at it.

[RandomGuy]

Oddly enough we do have median income figures.

27,000. year.


If the nation’s secondary schools improved sufficiently to graduate all of their students, rather than the 72 percent of students who currently graduate annually,3 the payoff would be significant. For instance, if the students who dropped out of the Class of 2011 had graduated, the nation’s economy would likely benefit from nearly $154 billion in additional income over the course of their lifetimes.
http://www.all4ed.org/files/HighCost.pdf
High school drop out income: 19K/year
High school graduate income: 27k/year
Bachelors degree: 46k/year

We might quibble about specifics but that holds.

Multiply the net present value of the lost income over a life time for drop outs. 9k per year for 50+ years. $231,000 or so at 3% inflation.

Losing those last few years of education is VERY expensive. This would imply that we could spend and extra $25,000 PER STUDENT PER YEAR for the last four years of high school and still come out ahead.

Lost human capital is expensive, and a far more inefficient use of our resources than giving some modest retirement fund to public servants.

[Wild Cobra]

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/teyshablue/Thisthread.gif (http://s3.photobucket.com/user/teyshablue/media/Thisthread.gif.html)
I see you found your new avatar.

definition; avatar: "An incarnation, embodiment, or manifestation of a person"

[TeyshaBlue]

Yes, I know. You are too stupid to understand supply and demand, so I would have to write an informative paper on the topic.

Sorry, not going to waste the effort on a jackass like you.

I wonder though. Are you suggesting that all jobs are entitlements to a good salary?

What then is a good salary? $65k, $80k? Why stop there? Why not demand $200k+ if you think what the market will bear, has no bearing, and you are a libtard with that entitlement mentality?

As for something said earlier. The level of education in children cannot be fixed by throwing more money at it.

Dumbass. I've forgotten more about education than you'll ever know. Fuck.
You won't waste the effort because you can't fucking make the case. Admit it coward and stop obfuscating. RG called you on it pages ago. You've yet to even state a premise other than "supply and demand". Idiot. It's not about what the market (this is public education, dumbfuck) will bear.

[TeyshaBlue]

Maybe you can find a NEA white paper that underpins your idiotic notion that teachers are overcompensated, and stupid.

[TeyshaBlue]

Make the case for overcompensation.

[Wild Cobra]

Maybe you can find a NEA white paper that underpins your idiotic notion that teachers are overcompensated, and stupid.
You fail to accept my viewpoint. Right or wrong, it is my viewpoint that teachers are not underpaid when they don't have a shortage of teachers.

See Supply and Demand.

Again, teachers are stupid if they complain about the wages they get, but don't find a better job or somehow get better wages. maybe the union contracts are holding them down because of the least common denominator worker? How many times have unions rejected merit based salaries for teachers?

Too stupid for more income... Collectively...

people like you are real idiots, when they need a link on the internet, to prove something. Especially when it is blatantly obvious.

[RandomGuy]

In your dreams.

You post a blog... As evidence... No good solid links...

Why no NEA links?

Also...

How many of these are part time activities while still finishing school, or part time unable to get full time? How many are "let go" rather than leave on their own?

I took Randoms links and searched the footnotes and dispelled what he said about the link. Then you say "in the same ink" and it was a Forbes link instead, with no source listed...

You have the ignorance to think you are in my league?

LOL...

LOL...

LOL...

LOL...

Bitch please, you can't even back up your bullshit about teachers being overpaid.

Fuck, I'm gonna do a paste a thon later to show how you have dodged that about half a dozen times.

It will make you look just like ol' Cosmored.

Is that what you are shooting for?

Or are you gonna walk it back a bit, and maybe admit you might have been wrong?

[TeyshaBlue]

You fail to accept my viewpoint. Right or wrong, it is my viewpoint that teachers are not underpaid when they don't have a shortage of teachers.

See Supply and Demand.

Again, teachers are stupid if they complain about the wages they get, but don't find a better job or somehow get better wages. maybe the union contracts are holding them down because of the least common denominator worker? How many times have unions rejected merit based salaries for teachers?

Too stupid for more income... Collectively...

lol @ the "Union" teddy bear.
How many teachers collectively bargain for salary? You don't know do you?

Hint: We sure as fuck didn't in Texas.

But, since you only seem able to ask questions rather than provide a case for overcompensation, I'll accept that as proof that you have no fucking idea what you are talking about. Again.

[Wild Cobra]

Bitch please, you can't even back up your bullshit about teachers being overpaid.

Fuck, I'm gonna do a paste a thon later to show how you have dodged that about half a dozen times.

It will make you look just like ol' Cosmored.

Is that what you are shooting for?

Or are you gonna walk it back a bit, and maybe admit you might have been wrong?
Did I say overpaid? I meant over compensated, but pay is part of that. Supply and demand.

Paste away... Supply and demand...

You guys simply will not accept my answer, so FUCK YOU!

[TeyshaBlue]

Bitch please, you can't even back up your bullshit about teachers being overpaid.

Fuck, I'm gonna do a paste a thon later to show how you have dodged that about half a dozen times.

It will make you look just like ol' Cosmored.

Is that what you are shooting for?

Or are you gonna walk it back a bit, and maybe admit you might have been wrong?

WC is pathalogically unable to admit if he's wrong. It's the true mark of a sycophant.

[TeyshaBlue]

Did I say overpaid? I meant over compensated, but pay is part of that. Supply and demand.

Paste away... Supply and demand...

You guys simply will not accept my answer, so FUCK YOU!

That's not an answer, fucktard. Might as well say the price of parachute pants. It makes as much sense.

[Wild Cobra]

lol @ the "Union" teddy bear.
How many teachers collectively bargain for salary? You don't know do you?

Hint: We sure as fuck didn't in Texas.

But, since you only seem able to ask questions rather than provide a case for overcompensation, I'll accept that as proof that you have no fucking idea what you are talking about. Again.
You didn't collectively bargain in Texas?

Wouldn't the ATPE (http://www.atpe.org/) disagree with you?

[RandomGuy]

Some bad links, and the ones I followed did not support your contention.

add---

I'm sorry, it was the Forbes article, or another with the broken link.

I went back and looked, one of the links is the same one I found earlier to dispute Ransom's 30% claim.

Which one supports your claim?

I didn't claim 30% for anything, and you most certainly didn't dispute anything either, except in your own head.

Sorry.

[RandomGuy]

You didn't collectively bargain in Texas?

Wouldn't the ATPE (http://www.atpe.org/) disagree with you?

No, not really.

ATPE is a toothless entity by any reasonable analysis.

More fail.

[TeyshaBlue]

You didn't collectively bargain in Texas?

Wouldn't the ATPE (http://www.atpe.org/) disagree with you?

ATPE does not bargain for salary, dumbfuck.

[RandomGuy]

Did I say overpaid? I meant over compensated, but pay is part of that. Supply and demand.

Paste away... Supply and demand...

You guys simply will not accept my answer, so FUCK YOU!

Over paid, over compensated.

Play the semantics game if you want.

You haven't supported any claim you have made so far, and that speaks volumes.

[TeyshaBlue]

Good God..the stupid never ceases from you, WC. Just fucking quit already.

[Wild Cobra]

ATPE does not bargain for salary, dumbfuck.
facepalm yoursef dipshit.

I did not say that!

You must really think you are a genius to always answer a question not asked!

My God.

Just how far does your stupidity run?

[RandomGuy]

WC is pathalogically unable to admit if he's wrong. It's the true mark of a sycophant.

you are thinking of the word "sophist".

Learned that one little tidbit from Cosmored, or what it pop tech... the crazy blends after a while.

[TeyshaBlue]

you are thinking of the word "sophist".

Learned that one little tidbit from Cosmored, or what it pop tech... the crazy blends after a while.

Either applies. lol

But you're right, sophist it is.

[Wild Cobra]

Over paid, over compensated.

Play the semantics game if you want.

You haven't supported any claim you have made so far, and that speaks volumes.
Paste away.

I'm tired of you wondering why an employer doesn't need to raise benefits and salary when they can get the help they need at the current rates.


Or is it that I disagree with the "entitlement mentality?"

[TeyshaBlue]

Paste away.

I'm tired of you wondering why an employer doesn't need to raise benefits and salary when they can get the help they need at the current rates.


Or is it that I disagree with the "entitlement mentality?"

I was wrong. You can actually make a stupider statement. There may be no bounds to your lunacy.
The employer (The Fucking State) can't just jump in and raise salary and bennies because the employer (The Fucking State) is bound by tax receipts and a budget. Which is why, your idiotic "supply and demand" talking point fails immediately.

Holy fuck.

[TeyshaBlue]

facepalm yoursef dipshit.

I did not say that!

You must really think you are a genius to always answer a question not asked!

My God.

Just how far does your stupidity run?

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
"You didn't collectively bargain in Texas?

Wouldn't the ATPE disagree with you?"

Fucking hell.

[Wild Cobra]

I was wrong. You can actually make a stupider statement. There may be no bounds to your lunacy.
The employer (The Fucking State) can't just jump in and raise salary and bennies because the employer (The Fucking State) is bound by tax receipts and a budget. Which is why, your idiotic "supply and demand" talking point fails immediately.

Holy fuck.
It doesn't stop my state from compensating teachers well...
If there was a need for more teachers, and it took paying more to get them, Texas would find a way.

[TeyshaBlue]

Paste away.

I'm tired of you wondering why an employer doesn't need to raise benefits and salary when they can get the help they need at the current rates.


Or is it that I disagree with the "entitlement mentality?"

But they are not getting the help they need at the current rates. I've already shown you the turnover rates. What your feeble mind cannot provide are the additional costs outside of retraining, to the student population. There are studies that show the act of turnover itself is detrimental to students. Notice I said "The act itself".

[Wild Cobra]

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
"You didn't collectively bargain in Texas?

Wouldn't the ATPE disagree with you?"

Fucking hell.
LOL...

My God... You are so stupid to read things into what someone does not say!

How many times do I own you libards that way?

I said...

The ATPE would disagree with you.

I did not say the ATPE negotiated the wages...

[TeyshaBlue]

It doesn't stop my state from compensating teachers well...
If there was a need for more teachers, and it took paying more to get them, Texas would find a way.

This is not supporting your argument of overcompensation of teachers, dumbass. Try again.

[TeyshaBlue]

LOL...

My God... You are so stupid to read things into what someone does not say!

How many times do I own you libards that way?

I said...

The ATPE would disagree with you.

I did not say the ATPE negotiated the wages...

Fuck you, coward. I know exactly what you said. So do you.

Run away from it again.

[TeyshaBlue]

and lo fucking l at liberal.

[TeyshaBlue]

But they are not getting the help they need at the current rates. I've already shown you the turnover rates. What your feeble mind cannot provide are the additional costs outside of retraining, to the student population. There are studies that show the act of turnover itself is detrimental to students. Notice I said "The act itself".

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/teacherbeat/2012/03/when_teachers_leave_schools_ov.html

[Wild Cobra]

OK, I'll take that bake.

I needed to go farther than this from the ATPE site:

Collective bargaining is a process by which management and labor (school boards and educators) negotiate to reach an agreement on working conditions such as salaries, hours and benefits. It goes on to say teachers in Texas do not collectively bargain.

I stand corrected on this one, except, I found my own mistake.

You didn't!

However, please consider that when you said i was wrong, I went and checked.

How many times to you check on the possibility you are wrong? Seems like a big fat zero!

[TeyshaBlue]

But go ahead. Show me how teachers are overcompensated.

[TeyshaBlue]

OK, I'll take that bake.

I needed to go farther than this from the ATPE site:
It goes on to say teachers in Texas do not collectively bargain.

I stand corrected on this one, except, I found my own mistake.

You didn't!

However, please consider that when you said i was wrong, I went and checked.

How many times to you check on the possibility you are wrong? Seems like a big fat zero!

no dumbfuck. RG and I called you on that already. Even when you're wrong, you're wrong. That's quite an accomplishment.

[Wild Cobra]

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/teacherbeat/2012/03/when_teachers_leave_schools_ov.html
You love that information overload.

Too bad you are incompetent to link the source link with a small quote to support your contention.

[TeyshaBlue]

You love that information overload.

Too bad you are incompetent to link the source link with a small quote to support your contention.

Here you go, idiot. It only took 5 seconds of reading.

"• For each analysis, students taught by teachers in the same grade-level team in the same school did worse in years where turnover rates were higher, compared with years in which there was less teacher turnover.
• An increase in teacher turnover by 1 standard deviation corresponded with a decrease in math achievement of 2 percent of a standard deviation; students in grade levels with 100 percent turnover were especially affected, with lower test scores by anywhere from 6 percent to 10 percent of a standard deviation based on the content area.
• The effects were seen in both large and small schools, new and old ones.
• The negative effect of turnover on student achievement was larger in schools with more low-achieving and black students.

"Turnover must have an impact beyond simply whether incoming teachers are better than those they replaced—even the teachers outside of this redistribution are somehow harmed by it," the authors conclude. "Though there may be cases where turnover is actually helpful to student achievement, on average, it is harmful.":"

[Wild Cobra]

LOL...

Looks like correlation equals implies causation to me...

What is relevant that i didn't read?

[TeyshaBlue]

Are you too incompetent to actually read a link?

[TeyshaBlue]

LOL...

Looks like correlation equals implies causation to me...

What is relevant that i didn't read?

Read it again, idiot.

[TeyshaBlue]

notice they controlled for size, student makeup. The only thing in doubt at the time of the study were the actual drivers. "The authors call for more research to identify the mechanics of the decline—whether a loss of collegiality, or perhaps a loss of institutional knowledge among the staff due to turnover, is the cause of the lower achievement."

[TeyshaBlue]

This is not correlation. I can tell you don't have a clue what that means either.

[Wild Cobra]

Read it again, idiot.
I will ask this.

Could the cause for the turnover rate also be the cause for the student scoring, rather than the turnover rate?

Are you suggesting that the same factor that has a negative effect on teachers, causing high turnover rates, does not by itself, affect the students?

[TeyshaBlue]

I will ask this.

Could the cause for the turnover rate also be the cause for the student scoring, rather than the turnover rate?

Are you suggesting that the same factor that has a negative effect on teachers, causing high turnover rates, does not by itself, affect the students?
That's exactly what the study says.

[TeyshaBlue]

The actual study.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/teacherbeat/TchTrnStAch%20AERJ%20R%26R%20not%20blind.pdf

[TeyshaBlue]

Fucking read it.

[Wild Cobra]

LOL... OK, I'll entertain this for a moment.

How is higher wages going to stop mobility, where the majority of the turnover rate is changing location of teaching? Is it going to stop retirement where (I think I read) ~25% of the turnover rate is because of retirements? According to the US Department of Education, teachers who leave the profession during their first three years is about 8.5%... Just how much money will it take to half that number?

[Wild Cobra]

Fucking read it.
LOL...

41 pages...

I seem to remember saying "information overload."

You know I am not going to waste that much of my time having fun at your expense.... Right?

Is that why you didn't quote any relevant pints in it, so you can have a false win?

[TeyshaBlue]

LOL... OK, I'll entertain this for a moment.

How is higher wages going to stop mobility, where the majority of the turnover rate is changing location of teaching? Is it going to stop retirement where (I think I read) ~25% of the turnover rate is because of retirements? According to the US Department of Education, teachers who leave the profession during their first three years is about 8.5%... Just how much money will it take to half that number?

You ask me for a link and post up a wish sandwich? You're fucking hilarious.

[TeyshaBlue]

LOL...

41 pages...

I seem to remember saying "information overload."

You know I am not going to waste that much of my time having fun at your expense.... Right?

Is that why you didn't quote any relevant pints in it, so you can have a false win?

I already have posted relevant points. You continue to ignore them. Shocking. Not.

I'm sorry, WC, but quality data analysis isn't found in coloring books.

[TeyshaBlue]

Now, make the case for teachers being incompetent, over compensated and stupid. Go ahead. We're all waiting.

[Wild Cobra]

Now, make the case for teachers being incompetent, over compensated and stupid. Go ahead. We're all waiting.

I already did. Sorry that you didn't understand. Is it because you are a teacher?

[clambake]

burn

[TeyshaBlue]

I already did. Sorry that you didn't understand. Is it because you are a teacher?

Ex Teacher. And no you didn't outside of tossing out "Supply and Demand", which is not exactly cutting it.

[clambake]

he called you a teacher.

you know what that means?

[TeyshaBlue]

he called you a teacher.

you know what that means?

Shup! The WTF thread says I'm engaging.

[Wild Cobra]

Ex Teacher. And no you didn't outside of tossing out "Supply and Demand", which is not exactly cutting it.
Hmmmm...

Are you saying they aren't getting qualified teachers at the rate of pay they give?

Again, of that 8.5% that leave the profession within 3 years, how much money would it take to reduce that by half?

How are you going to stop mobility, which is around half of the turnover rate?

I won't ask you about the retirees again. i will assume you agree teachers should be able to retire.

Why did you leave? why are you part of the problem?

[clambake]

are you autistic?

[TeyshaBlue]

Hmmmm...

Are you saying they aren't getting qualified teachers at the rate of pay they give?

Again, of that 8.5% that leave the profession within 3 years, how much money would it take to reduce that by half?

How are you going to stop mobility, which is around half of the turnover rate?

I won't ask you about the retirees again. i will assume you agree teachers should be able to retire.

Why did you leave? why are you part of the problem?

lol ignoring the 46% within 5 years.
Mobility is not half of the turnover rate. The 46% are those that fucking left the profession. Period. Good God.
Why I left is irrelevant. But, I left because I was losing my hearing which I subsequently made worse by touring for a year with Alligator Records. lol
I was never part of the problem, idiot.

[TeyshaBlue]

That's 46% of teachers leave within the first 5 fucking years of their career. Retirement really doesn't enter into it.

[Wild Cobra]

lol ignoring the 46% within 5 years.

I'm just going with the Department of Education numbers instead of some cherry picked location or blog.

[TeyshaBlue]

You ever gonna link that?
Smh

[TeyshaBlue]

Btw...for the zillionth time....make your case.

[jack sommerset]

The problem we have is George's wife hasn't gotten a raise in 3 years. The good news is she loves her job. Bad news is this government job isn't giving raises mostly because of the debt.

The private schools tend to pay far less than the public schools. She might be able to find a private school that pays more and gives her the same satisfaction that her current position gives her. Might?!?!

Does she have a 2nd job? Summer job? You might be able to change these up to create more money?


George, you might want to give us more details on you alls situations. Maybe we can find a solution to this problem. We know she wants more money but wont get any more any time soon from her current job. Lets us know how much more money she wants and the forum can brain storm.

God bless

[leemajors]

The problem we have is George's wife hasn't gotten a raise in 3 years. The good news is she loves her job. Bad news is this government job isn't giving raises mostly because of the debt.

The private schools tend to pay far less than the public schools. She might be able to find a private school that pays more and gives her the same satisfaction that her current position gives her. Might?!?!

Does she have a 2nd job? Summer job? You might be able to change these up to create more money?


George, you might want to give us more details on you alls situations. Maybe we can find a solution to this problem. We know she wants more money but wont get any more any time soon from her current job. Lets us know how much more money she wants and the forum can brain storm.

God bless

[LnGrrrR]

In this thread:

WC asks for proof.

People provide proof.

WC says that's not enough proof.

People provide more proof.

WC complains about an excess of proof.

[rascal]

No. The common misconception is since there is no school in summer, teachers get 3 months off. Unless, like most teachers, you work another couple of weeks at the end of school, then take a few weeks off unless you work a second job over the summer, then a month before school starts, you're back in the classroom getting everything ready for the next year. I usually got 3 weeks if I was lucky. It was different for me because, as a band director, we always had summer band a month prior to school starting. But when I'd show up at school, there were always teachers in their rooms getting things in place for the coming year.

Teachers still work far fewer days than the general factory worker.

[TeyshaBlue]

lol "far fewer"
Got a number for that metric?
And is there a point you would like to make?

[ElNono]

:lmao Cobra opening his ignorant mouth and getting bitchslapped into a corner, per par goods

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I'm sorry, WC, but quality data analysis isn't found in coloring books.

:lmao

[Wild Cobra]

In this thread:

WC asks for proof.

People provide proof.

WC says that's not enough proof.

People provide more proof.

WC complains about an excess of proof.
LOL...

I ask for proof right away. that's right, ask me several hours later after I close my browser and my history clears. I'm not going to look for it again.

I listed four numbers in post 129 and specified they came from the Department of Education.

Search for them yourself since nobody asked when I was debating this, and before I closed my browser.

[Wild Cobra]

In this thread:

WC asks for proof.

People provide proof.

WC says that's not enough proof.

People provide more proof.

WC complains about an excess of proof.

LnGrrR...

I have always likes you, but you are turning into a royal libtard in front of my eyes. I don't make up numbers that I post, which you seem to imply. Would you at least admit that I do normally link my material? Just because I don't in active conversation all the time when multitasking, doesn't mean it wasn't there.

Now...

If I was asked at the time the conversation was active, I would have provided the link the numbers from post 129 came from.

Post #129:

Do you know what mobility is? My God shithead.... These people, like any other, get their first teaching job wherever they can. They they move to a better location when a slot becomes available for them. According to the US Department of Education, teachers who leave the profession during their first three years is about 8.5%. About 6.5% for teachers with 4-9 years of experience. The numbers are 13.3% and 10.2% for those moving. I would suggest your Teacher Activist link cherry picked the higher number (outlier) data.

I don't see that notable any worse than any other profession.

Now. Here is another year of the same type study:

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x262/Wild_Cobra/Politics/teachersurvey_zps3d09c932.png (http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010353.pdf)

Link attached to the graphic.

[LnGrrrR]

LnGrrR...

I have always likes you, but you are turning into a royal libtard in front of my eyes. I don't make up numbers that I post, which you seem to imply. Would you at least admit that I do normally link my material? Just because I don't in active conversation all the time when multitasking, doesn't mean it wasn't there.

I'd like to note that I never said you make up numbers, at least not in that particular post. :D


Now...

If I was asked at the time the conversation was active, I would have provided the link the numbers from post 129 came from.

Post #129:
Now. Here is another year of the same type study:

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x262/Wild_Cobra/Politics/teachersurvey_zps3d09c932.png (http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010353.pdf)

Link attached to the graphic.


Thanks for showing your work. :) I'll let the others who were in on this respond. You have to admit WC, the proof you ask for is often quite specific, and dismissed if you don't readily believe the source.

[TeyshaBlue]

Only took 3 pages before you posted a fucking link. Awesome.

Now I can, and have, posted link after link supporting another set of figures.

In the end, your obfuscation shuffle is irrelevant. I'll ask for the 3,000,000,000th time. Make your case for teachers being overcompensated.

[Wild Cobra]

Only took 3 pages before you posted a fucking link. Awesome.

Now I can, and have, posted link after link supporting another set of figures.

In the end, your obfuscation shuffle is irrelevant. I'll ask for the 3,000,000,000th time. Make your case for teachers being overcompensated.
You haven't accepted my supply and demand argument. No need to raise compensation as long as new teachers come in at the current pay.

[George Gervin's Afro]

You haven't accepted my supply and demand argument. No need to raise compensation as long as new teachers come in at the current pay.

The govt pays them with tax money! WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO GET THE MONEY TO COMPETE?

[TeyshaBlue]

You haven't accepted my supply and demand argument. No need to raise compensation as long as new teachers come in at the current pay.

That's not an argument for overcompensation. To distill your point, you claim that teachers are overpaid (compensated). You have yet to make a single, cogent point supporting that. Nothing.