Reply With Quote
It did not because he is among so many in this country that see teachers as people who should work for s**t wages.
Such pay is not outside the pale for someone with a masters degree and a good chunk of work experience.
Meh.
Take the one principal's salary, cut it in half if you want.
You might be able to hire one teacher.
What about the other 499?
Or did that not occur to you that the answer might not be so easy?
It did not because he is among so many in this country that see teachers as people who should work for s**t wages.
He will probably be the GOP nominee.
Don't you think that requires *some* vetting?
I realize you are going to vote for whatever GOP nominee comes out of the pike, so it really isn't for your benefit.
Quit being butthurt for getting called on your lack of knowledge about Texas politics.
100k for most mid-level managers in a professional field really isn't all that compe ive.
Big bad teachers and government workers get paid more than the "average worker", but when the average worker doesn't have a bachelors or master's degree, the comparison is disingenuous.
It is just one of the ways the right likes to lie about the subject.
Not only is this true, but where does Texas' state budget deficit compare to those of other states, other than California? (We all know California is a basket case, due in part to their unique insistence on 2/3 voting majority requirement to raise revenues and only 51% voting requirement to increase services - DUH!)
It seems to me that I read that Texas' state budget deficit projected for next year is second only to California. I honestly don't know. Is this true?
I know. After agreeing to a ten year program to pay off my student loans for my Doctoral degree in the behavioral Sciences, and figuring out that I couldn't educate my own child on what I was making from a state University, I switched to Private Enterprise, made a pot load of money, sent my kids to the finest private schools in the country, and retired early.100k for most mid-level managers in a professional field really isn't all that compe ive.
Big bad teachers and government workers get paid more than the "average worker", but when the average worker doesn't have a bachelors or master's degree, the comparison is disingenuous.
It is just one of the ways the right likes to lie about the subject.
But I know that teachers should be paid more, not less, than what they are paid by a society that has delegated every parental responsibility in the book to the elementary and secondary schools.
I just hate it when allegedly fiscal conservative, free-marketers like to denigrate the salaries of those who have the greatest responsibilities in the world, showing their own backsides in the process.
These are often the same people who denigrate people who work for the federal government, forgetting that only our national security and their own peace is a function of how well those people do their jobs.
I didn't say teachers should work for wages but I'm still shocked that Elementary school principals make over 100K a year. And saying "oh but they have to have a masters" is bull . They are management. and no, there aren't that many private sector middle managers making over 100K.
I wouldn't know, honestly. Sounds like you know a little more than I do.
Cheers to that.
(Shrugs)
What do private sector middle managers in professional fields with masters degree make?
I honestly don't know. If you have the data, feel free to back that statement up.
... and half an hour later CC still hasn't decided to back up his statement.
Dammit, man, don't make me do your work for you.
How much do you think private Elementary school principals make?
How many management jobs require a master's degree? Lots and lots of educational administration jobs do. Managers are almost always paid more than the subject matter experts that work in their organizations, whether you are in education, government, law or finance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Househo..._United_States
Median income for a masters is about $80,000.
Given that principals are managers, you can add a chunk for that. Not too far out of the pale.
Sorry, I don't buy the outrage, just for the sake of outrage.
elementary principals typically have a masters degree, and that is a pretty marketable acheivement in the private sector.
Beyond that they typically are directly managing what? 20-50 people?
$100,000, especially if you have been in the position for 20 years is supposed to be outrageous?
Don't we *want* educated, experienced, people running our schools?
I'm not philosophically opposed to cutting administrators pay, but I would rather not have my kids schools run by the bottom of the barrel of the US labor pool.
Given how few managers a school system like that needs, compared to the number of teachers, cutting their pay by a half wouldn't make that much of a difference.
Perhaps one of the people so outraged could tell me how many new teachers could be hired if all principals in their district got a 50% pay cut?
This is what I could find for private schools:
http://www.salaryexpert.com/index.cf...sitionId=30774
So now that I did your work for you and found out that yes, private sector middle managers with masters degrees do probably make more than 100k, now what?
This article is fairly interesting too, although it's New York, so it's probably not the norm:
http://www.nypost.com/pagesixmag/iss...als+Rake+Dough
google something like "for-profit colleges management salaries", often near $1M, mostly all taxpayer money from guaranteed loans to suckered students who have a quit rate of 50% with many $1000s in debt to the govt. not evern worthless for-profit diploma, debt, and heading into a 25% unemployment rate for 18 - 25 year old segment.
I wouldn't know, honestly. Sounds like you know a little more than I do.
Cheers to that.
Well, I looked around and this is what I found on the comparison between the two:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...71314420110204
The article appeared in February so it may have been superseded by events to date, but the basic point was that California's deficit was the absolute highest of any of the 50 states, but that Texas' projected 2012 shortfall was equal to 31.5% of its 2011 budget vs. 29% for California.
I assume that the massive cuts and accounting changes that have been made since then and that appear to have kicked the debt can down the road until early 2013 when Perry hopes to have a different job have changed that scenario somewhat. However, the critical thing to me is that, at least before this last legislative session, a state that has been dominated by Republican policies and policy makers for at least the last decade was effectively no better off than that bastion of leftism, aka California.
So where is the miracle in that?
Where is Perry's mandate for fiscal conservatism?
Out of curiosity, did Texas get it's highway tolls yet?
Quite the opposite.
No tolls yet? I heard a while back they were going to install them?
So you want your children to be managed by 30k people? and a masters isn't bull . Those middle managers don't have to account for 100's of other peoples children either.
Lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth.
As usual, Texans had rather strong feelings about them.
Depends on which ones you are talking about. I was talking about Texas' having to pay the toll company to cover the shortfall of projected revenues from existing toll roads. I like some of the roads themselves, but that was a royal screw job for small government, individualistic, risk-reward Texas.
Are WE getting our money's worth?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
