at a significant cost. and how do you think families would feel sending their kids to a school where the teachers made 6 figure salaries? you really think that would endear middle class families to educators, whose salaries they pay? i don't think it would.
Raise taxes on people that can afford it and benefit greatly from a good educational system. Every cent that goes to a public school and public school teacher is a redistribution of wealth; these places don't make any money (directly, at least). So whether you pay a teacher very little or a lot, you are still taking money from people that have produced it to those that will not produce (directly). So arguments about who "deserves" that money are moot; either way it is a value judgement about how much of other people's money these people deserve.
why wouldn't you hire kids right out of college?
1) When kids right out of college did get hired, you could afford to be hire the best and brightest. 2) You could afford to hire people with experience in industry and the private sector that are highly qualified and also have the attributes that make a great teacher. This has everything to do with giving education the resources to compete with the private sector for talent.
thats just the price you pay for working on the back of the taxpayers. and furthermore, it takes a lot more skill, training, and education to become a brain surgeon.
See, that is fundamentally the reason we disagree. I see teachers as performing a vital function for every person in society. You see them as working on the backs of the taxpayers, the real producers.
Of course, a lot more goes into becoming a brain surgeon than a teacher. But the argument stands. Actually from what I hear, a lot of physicians jump out of military service as soon as their loan programs are up, leaving nurses practitioners and PAs to do a lot of the work. The reason is that they don't receive competitive compensation; I don't see why members of the military deserve lower-quality care simply by virtue of being in the public sector though. Likewise I don't see why public school children deserve lower-quality education simply by virtue of the fact that their teachers are in the public sector.
other professionals are not paid through taxes.
This is totally irrelevant. Unless you advocate a complete privatization of education in this country, schools will be funded through tax dollars in some way. So why would we punish teachers because of this fact?
Teachers do not get competitive compensation compared to the relative value of their work. This is why I brought in the brain surgeon analogy. If you paid brain surgeons the same amount as teachers get paid now, it would still be "good pay" but the question is "Compared to what?"
because we aren't mandated to pay those bonuses.
Right, and people can choose to vote for lawmakers that don't pay teachers competitive compensations. That is what I mean when I saw the electorate can hold them hostage, and why collective bargaining is necessary.
no subject
Raise taxes on people that can afford it and benefit greatly from a good educational system. Every cent that goes to a public school and public school teacher is a redistribution of wealth; these places don't make any money (directly, at least). So whether you pay a teacher very little or a lot, you are still taking money from people that have produced it to those that will not produce (directly). So arguments about who "deserves" that money are moot; either way it is a value judgement about how much of other people's money these people deserve.
why wouldn't you hire kids right out of college?
1) When kids right out of college did get hired, you could afford to be hire the best and brightest.
2) You could afford to hire people with experience in industry and the private sector that are highly qualified and also have the attributes that make a great teacher. This has everything to do with giving education the resources to compete with the private sector for talent.
thats just the price you pay for working on the back of the taxpayers. and furthermore, it takes a lot more skill, training, and education to become a brain surgeon.
See, that is fundamentally the reason we disagree. I see teachers as performing a vital function for every person in society. You see them as working on the backs of the taxpayers, the real producers.
Of course, a lot more goes into becoming a brain surgeon than a teacher. But the argument stands. Actually from what I hear, a lot of physicians jump out of military service as soon as their loan programs are up, leaving nurses practitioners and PAs to do a lot of the work. The reason is that they don't receive competitive compensation; I don't see why members of the military deserve lower-quality care simply by virtue of being in the public sector though. Likewise I don't see why public school children deserve lower-quality education simply by virtue of the fact that their teachers are in the public sector.
other professionals are not paid through taxes.
This is totally irrelevant. Unless you advocate a complete privatization of education in this country, schools will be funded through tax dollars in some way. So why would we punish teachers because of this fact?
Teachers do not get competitive compensation compared to the relative value of their work. This is why I brought in the brain surgeon analogy. If you paid brain surgeons the same amount as teachers get paid now, it would still be "good pay" but the question is "Compared to what?"
because we aren't mandated to pay those bonuses.
Right, and people can choose to vote for lawmakers that don't pay teachers competitive compensations. That is what I mean when I saw the electorate can hold them hostage, and why collective bargaining is necessary.