Average Americans take on the budget problem.

Wealth and income are two different things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

That's like saying people's burdensome personal debt is due to the fact that they don't earn enough, rather than they buy things they cannot afford.

---

yes, the Repugs ran up the deficit by buying "things" the UCA can't afford: $1T in tax cuts for the super wealthy, bullshit wars, unfunded Part D, +$30B on NatSec (that again completely missed the turmoil in the M/E), bailing out Wall St, aiding and abetting the toxic mortgage crisis, etc, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Obvious Cobra

Wealth and income are two different things.

---

Um, thanks?

Your point?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_metrics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ncome_equality

Table 6: Distribution of income in the United States, 1982-2006
Income
Top 1 percent/ Next 19 percent /Bottom 80 percent
1982 12.8% 39.1% 48.1%
1988 16.6% 38.9% 44.5%
1991 15.7% 40.7% 43.7%
1994 14.4% 40.8% 44.9%
1997 16.6% 39.6% 43.8%
2000 20.0% 38.7% 41.4%
2003 17.0% 40.8% 42.2%
2006 21.3% 40.1% 38.6%

From Wolff (2010).

One out of every 5 dollars of income earned in the US went to that 1% in 2006, and the trend is for that share to get larger.

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesam...er/wealth.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Um, thanks?

Your point?

---

WC's basement twin is occasionally allowed a cup of coffee with a few rinds of stale toast. During these infrequent dining/daylight paroles his twin sometimes posts mischievously in his place.

His name is Mild Cobra. His metier? The bland and platitudinous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

How could you get rid of that without severely impacting freedom/liberty?

Do you consider it as a bottom-level collusion?

---

Up until 1959 there was NO collective bargaining allowed for public sector employees. Mayor of New York allowed it in order to enhance his reelection support with unions; worked like a charm.

Unions exist in order to give workers collective voice to battle the greed of managment/ownership. In public employee there IS NO greed motive to counterbalance that of the union reps. It's not a fair fight; and the employees end up with disproportionate compensation packages. Civil servants used to be just that; public servants who traded some level of comparable private income for job security; now the govt. emplouyees get the security, PLUS higher incomes - greater benefits, etc....can't go on forever; Wisconsin is a natural development; eventually the taxpayers WILL get fed up, and wrench control back.

Look, again, at the compensation I described above for a TWENTY TWO YEAR OLD elementary school teacher! It is obscene, frankly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

I live in a small town in Pa. Through years of contractual raises and union control, a kindergarten teacher, just out of college, beginning in 2014, will make $80,000, have a $200 deductible medical plan for herself and her family, with no premium contribution, as well as a guaranteed pension at 90% of her salary if she works just 30 years! Oh, yeah, and three months in the summer, fall, spring and Christmas breaks, as well as three weeks sick leave (accumulates and paid back) each year.

The problem is NOT what is going on in Wisconson right now. This has gotten bat-shit crazy. Public employees should have NEVER been given the right to collectively bargain. Even FDR recognized this very simple to understand fact.

---

:tu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

Up until 1959 there was NO collective bargaining allowed for public sector employees. Mayor of New York allowed it in order to enhance his reelection support with unions; worked like a charm.

Unions exist in order to give workers collective voice to battle the greed of managment/ownership. In public employee there IS NO greed motive to counterbalance that of the union reps. It's not a fair fight; and the employees end up with disproportionate compensation packages. Civil servants used to be just that; public servants who traded some level of comparable private income for job security; now the govt. emplouyees get the security, PLUS higher incomes - greater benefits, etc....can't go on forever; Wisconsin is a natural development; eventually the taxpayers WILL get fed up, and wrench control back.

Look, again, at the compensation I described above for a TWENTY TWO YEAR OLD elementary school teacher! It is obscene, frankly.

---

An unusual voice of sanity in the political forum...:toast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

An unusual voice of sanity in the political forum...:toast

---

:lol

Just like the avg. spending per student in TX in 11,500, right?

:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

I live in a small town in Pa. Through years of contractual raises and union control, a kindergarten teacher, just out of college, beginning in 2014, will make $80,000, have a $200 deductible medical plan for herself and her family, with no premium contribution, as well as a guaranteed pension at 90% of her salary if she works just 30 years! Oh, yeah, and three months in the summer, fall, spring and Christmas breaks, as well as three weeks sick leave (accumulates and paid back) each year.

---

Quote:

---

..the voice of sanity...

state is fifth on our comfort scale with average starting salaries of $34,976 and average overall salaries of $54,027.

---

Teacher Portal

Quote:

---

at the entry level, secondary school teachers make an average of $37,950,

---

Link

Quote:

---

Pennsylvania $34,976 $54,027 17.2% 5

---

Teacher Portal

Voice of sanity indeed.....too a wing-nut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Um, thanks?

Your point?

---

Why should I have to explain something so basic?

The collective wealth is very high. No doubt. However, to sell and pay off the debt, you need a buyer. It does no good to give the government assets. Who's going to buy them back to zero out the debt?

Should we sell our nation to China?

It's simple. There isn't enough annual income to buy the wealth to give to the government.

added---

To top it off, to put it all on the market in the same decade would lower the value so much because of supply and demand pricing, you probably still couldn't raise close to half of what's needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

I live in a small town in Pa. Through years of contractual raises and union control, a kindergarten teacher, just out of college, beginning in 2014, will make $80,000, have a $200 deductible medical plan for herself and her family, with no premium contribution, as well as a guaranteed pension at 90% of her salary if she works just 30 years! Oh, yeah, and three months in the summer, fall, spring and Christmas breaks, as well as three weeks sick leave (accumulates and paid back) each year.

---

Doubtful. Link/evidence please?

Even if true, this is an extreme exception that doesn't prove a thing. The notion that teacher's salaries are out of control is laughably absurd.

Union control, what is that exactly? How does that work?

http://www1.salary.com/Teacher-Eleme...ol-salary.html

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/...Teacher/Salary

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/...Teacher/Salary

$80K/year is about 2 std dev higher than the median, so it's not at all representative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

http://www1.salary.com/Teacher-Eleme...ol-salary.html

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/...Teacher/Salary

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/...Teacher/Salary

$80K/year is about 2 std dev higher than the median, so it's not at all representative.

---

Pretty good for a part time job.

The problem is the non-salary part of compensation.