Post a reply
2/10/2012 12:34 pm
forsberg_us wrote:
The teachers' unions know they have the public by the short hairs because if they don't get what they want, they just call a strike and suddenly hundreds/thousands of parents have to find and pay for unexpected babysitting services. So they extort the maximum benefit for a job that requires them to work the equivalent of about 7 months out of the year.
I got into alittle debate in high school with a shop teacher who was crying about how underpaid for all the responsibility he has. He didnt care for my take on his responsibility.
Why do teachers have the right to strike?
2/10/2012 12:16 pm
The only way local governmant could be more fucked up then they general are is if they were run by the state and the only way state government could be more fucked up is to be ran by the federal government.
I wouldn't let local government off too easily either, AP. For all the caterwauling we (at least in Massachusetts) do about state taxes, I pay about three times as much to my town in property taxes, excise taxes and fees, and more to my town than I do to the feds. I'm getting a little tired of the mentality that a 3 percent raise every year is a birthright, especially when some of those employees work only nine months and have 3 1/2 weeks of vacation built into the school year, not to mention the half-days and "professional days" the school system springs on me once or twice a month. And the 90 percent health benefits they won't budge from and the retirement plans I have to pony up more dough for every year.
When the economy suffers, everyone should have to take that into consideration, not just the private sector. I don't mind pulling my weight, but I do tend to get annoyed when the people on the wagon tell me I'm not pulling hard enough.
I knew there was a Republican inside you just waiting to escape. (grin)
All kidding aside, pretty much everything you said describes what I tend to loathe about public employee unions (especially teachers' unions). The government isn't a for-profit business--any money or extra benefit given to one group has to come from another group's budget or there has to be a corresponding increase in revenue (i.e., a tax increase).
The teachers' unions know they have the public by the short hairs because if they don't get what they want, they just call a strike and suddenly hundreds/thousands of parents have to find and pay for unexpected babysitting services. So they extort the maximum benefit for a job that requires them to work the equivalent of about 7 months out of the year.
2/10/2012 11:59 am
On our last contract we tried to get an education incentive put in. It was shot down pretty quick. Rural America doesnt see a need in hiring the educated or rewarding someone for being educated. The dumber the better. Our wages are pretty shitty by comparison but you can live off of it. I can really complain to much but I still do. I do get alittle upset when people voice there opinion that I am overpaided (that isnt directed at you) without knowing what I even make. Or they see my earnings in the paper at the end of the year and fail to take into consideraion that I had to work 600hrs OT to make it. There are alot of overpaid state workers. For example a state trooper makes more then double what I do to work the same area.
2/10/2012 10:33 am
"However as a public employ I would disagree that a .03 raise is a birthright."
It may be different in Illinois than Massachusetts. We also have this shenanigan here called the "Quinn Bill," which gives educational incentives to police officers. As with almost everything else in this state, it's a good concept that has gone awry in practice. What ends up happening is classes are being taught right in police stations by *colleges* that are only accredited for the purposes of handing out certificates to police officers so they can get their incentive increases. It's an arrangement that harms no one, except of course for the taxpayers who are expecting to get a cop with a degree in criminal justice from a legitimate institution, not a certificate in origami from Professor Bob's Traveling School House.
2/09/2012 8:22 pm
Dont get me started on the yearly anal raping I get on my property taxes. I am gong to try and remember to buy some lube this year.
However as a public employ I would disagree that a .03 raise is a birthright. Around here it is more like not getting a raise for 3 years, getting laidoff and seeing insurance rob you of any gain you might have seen when a raise does come and those are not 3%. Just like the rest of the world every year we make less money yet most people dont believe that. I am moving to Massachusetts.
2/09/2012 6:17 pm
The only way local governmant could be more fucked up then they general are is if they were run by the state and the only way state government could be more fucked up is to be ran by the federal government.
I wouldn't let local government off too easily either, AP. For all the caterwauling we (at least in Massachusetts) do about state taxes, I pay about three times as much to my town in property taxes, excise taxes and fees, and more to my town than I do to the feds. I'm getting a little tired of the mentality that a 3 percent raise every year is a birthright, especially when some of those employees work only nine months and have 3 1/2 weeks of vacation built into the school year, not to mention the half-days and "professional days" the school system springs on me once or twice a month. And the 90 percent health benefits they won't budge from and the retirement plans I have to pony up more dough for every year.
When the economy suffers, everyone should have to take that into consideration, not just the private sector. I don't mind pulling my weight, but I do tend to get annoyed when the people on the wagon tell me I'm not pulling hard enough.
2/09/2012 3:24 pm
The only way local governmant could be more fucked up then they general are is if they were run by the state and the only way state government could be more fucked up is to be ran by the federal government.
2/09/2012 3:16 pm
Seems stupid on alot of levels.
See AP. In just one day you've correctly described the politics surrounding both the City of St. Louis and the New England Patriots.
2/09/2012 3:12 pm
Seems stupid on alot of levels.
2/09/2012 2:43 pm
"St. Louis was anti-slavery and the rest of the state was pro-slavery."
So St. Louis is now pro-slavery?
2/09/2012 1:51 pm
"A Safer Missouri Citizens' Coalition is sponsoring the 2012 ballot initiative to return control of the St. Louis police department to the city from the state"
So the STL Police Dept is ran by the state?
Yes. It's difficult to explain, but I think it goes back to before the Civil War. Missouri was supposed to be a free state, but St. Louis was pro-slavery. I think the state seized control of the City police force in order to ensure enforcement of laws related to slavery, and it hasn't been changed.
Here's more information than you probably want, but it explains the situation. I had it backward--St. Louis was anti-slavery and the rest of the state was pro-slavery.
2/09/2012 12:21 pm
"A Safer Missouri Citizens' Coalition is sponsoring the 2012 ballot initiative to return control of the St. Louis police department to the city from the state"
So the STL Police Dept is ran by the state?
2/08/2012 2:01 pm
"Man carrying petition forms for A Safer Missouri is shot in St. Louis"
Read more: