Superintendent Worries Teaching Less Attractive Than Factory Work

Michigan Capitol Confidential ^ | 6/4/2012 | Tom Gantert

[CSM]

$40,530 / 9 = $4,503.33 * 12 = $54,040 a year. $33280 / $54,040 = 61.5% of the teacher’s salary.

What this superindent is whining about is that he wants to steal more money from a person making 28.5% less than a teacher so that the teacher can make more. In other words, he wants to WIDEN the income gap. Hypocricy, thy name is MEA.

[NEMDF]

Yes, think about it. The 3rd year teacher could be only 24 or 25 years old, making over $40,000... with guaranteed raises for time of service and cost of living, cheap benefits, sweet retirement deals, a “can’t get fired” union deal no matter the performance and results. And 2 and a half months off each summer, in which to earn another few thousand dollars. I am getting tired of this mantra about teachers suffering so much financially.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

——I think the problem is this BS that somehow teaching is more important work than other careers, its not.-—

You have a point. But it depends on the objective importance of the subject matter (theology/philosophy v. Hotel management) and the receptivity of the learner. Aristotle, as a teacher, would be worth his weight in gold.

But payment for education should never be coerced. Schooling is not synonymous with education, and is often antithetical. Socrates even believed that the professionalization of teaching would obstruct good teaching. Compulsory schooling and compulsory funding of schooling are unjust. Vouchers would be a step in the right direction.

[USMCPOP]

I think Superintendent salaries need to be raised so we get some who are brighter than Ron Wilson.

Ron, send some of your teachers down south. I can probably help them get factory jobs for $10. an hour with no health insurance or retirement.

[drypowder]

Because there is no longer physical discipline allowed in public schools, two of my friends quit their teaching careers after the second time both were spit on by their students. I guess one could say the job didn't pay enough to put up with that.

[PA BOOKENDS]

I graduated in 1970 with a BS in education. It was during that time period (I’d say ‘65 to ‘75) that the profession underwent a sea change. It was the teachers themselves who pushed for more areas of responsibility (i.e. sex ed) because the parents just weren’t as smart as the “experts”.

The educational establishment was behind all the New Age nonsense that has replaced the teaching of fundamentals.

So, if teachers are overburdened with responsiblities previously shouldered by parents, it’s because they asked —— no -—— DEMANDED that they be the sole arbiter of what Johnny would be taught, or with what world view Mary would be indoctrinated.

So now, not only can Johnny not read, Mary has access to birth control or, if that fails, abortion information.

Sidelight: back in the early sixties, when the push for unionization was spearheaded by the AFT, the NEA was adamently opposed to unionizing teachers. Like I said, a sea change

[Buckeye McFrog]

Factory work produces something useful for society...

[wbill]

According to the district's union contract, that teacher would make $40,530 a year. Wilson said the teacher’s children are eligible for the reduced/free lunch program.

40 grand sounds like a pretty decent salary to me. Certainly, they're not getting rich, but neither are they paupers.

If they can't get by - perhaps it's time for the wife to work? Or the teacher to take a 2nd, summer job? Or the family to move? Or the teacher to find a higher paying gig? Or any number of other options?

But no. It's easier to sit and whine about the consequences of your decisions.

[wbill]

Man, I didn't read your post before I posted more-or-less the exact same thing. Really.

Truly, GMTA. :-)

[precisionshootist]

"Vouchers would be a step in the right direction."

I agree but vouchers will never just happen. It will take total commitment to eliminating public education. Vouchers would mean the end of public schools. If people, by choice, could receive a voucher for private schools instead of paying school taxes they would do so in numbers that would financially break the government system. It would also make it obvious to those that don't have kids that they should not have to pay property taxes to pay for schools when the aren't using the system.

If we just put an end to government involvement in education all the other problems will solve themselves. Good teachers and schools will be paid well and bad teachers won't be teachers. Perpetual property taxes to pay for bloated government waste can be eliminated and be a huge step for the reinstatement of the right to own private property.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

-—people, by choice, could receive a voucher for private schools instead of paying school taxes they would do so in numbers that would financially break the government system——

Govt school spending averages around $10k/child/yr. Higher in cities.$200k/yr/classroom of 20.

Most school choice plans include vouchers valued at half the per-pupil govt school expenditure. The amount is sufficient to cover the tuition of an inexpensive private school.

Govt schools would lose many students, at first. But competition would force improvement. The resulting system would look like the private college/state university system.

This system would be stable, and could last indefinitely. It would be very difficult to transition to a truly free market. But the possibility of jumping from our current system to a free market is non-existent.

[precisionshootist]

"Govt schools would lose many students, at first. But competition would force improvement. The resulting system would look like the private college/state university system."

I have serious doubts about this. Government involvement in college education is a complete disaster. The cost is exploding to the point where it's common to debate whether the cost of a college education will EVER pan out for the student.

The same would happen from elementary schools on up.

public schools everywhere, every year are howling for MORE MONEY. Vouchers would cut available funds so drastically they would collapse very quickly without huge tax increases.

And don't forget, the public pressure that will come from those that don't have kids and are not using the system at all. Where is their voucher? Why should they pay anything? If I take my kid out of the local elementary school and get a tax voucher for 5k how do you explain that to my neighbor who has no kids in school but still has to pay the full boat tax?

The Public school system is an unsustainable government cabal. It will collapse. Like a lot of things with big government, it's just taken many years to reach the breaking point. The good news is vouchers would accelerate the collapse and the move to totally private education.