Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fully Funded ^ | August 3, 2012 | Kyle Olsen

Posted on 08/03/2012 9:32:40 AM PDT by Kaslin

Union apologists fail to quantify their “fully funded education” demand.

Teachers unions and their apologists constantly talk about the pressing need for a “fully funded” education system. We at have yet to see anyone actually quantify that argument and clearly define what “fully funded” means.

In 2006, New Jersey school districts spent an average of $14,630 per student while the national average was around $9,138. Does that mean New Jersey’s system is “fully funded”? Considering the fact that the statewide graduation rate is 83 percent, it seems the Garden State’s government education system has some problems to address. Of course the educrats would reflexively say New Jersey schools need even more money to get the job done.

Such is the case in Chicago. There, a union shill group, the “Chicago Teacher Solidarity Committee,” has been circulating a pledge form to gather names and contact information for union sympathizers who buy into the “money equals quality education” argument.

The language on the that the CTSC was “first proposed by the Occupy Chicago Labor Outreach,” responded to my email:

“It's difficult to quantify ‘fully compensated’ and ‘fully funded’ because there are a lot of variables in play - work hours, class size, curriculum quality, job security, etc. We are advocating that the budget and salary negotiations be considered with all of those things as priorities, rather than with charter schools and standardized testing and other private profit making endeavors as priorities.”

She then referred us to a document on the Chicago Teachers Union website.

So, in fact, she was really saying, “I don’t know, it’s not on my sheet of talking points, go ask the union.”

It’s obvious there is no amount of money that will fix the problems of government education. If there was, the problems would have been fixed long ago. The United States is among the world leaders in public school investment, and the returns have been disappointing for decades.

But citizens still fall into the trap of wanting a “fully funded” education system, whatever that means.

And “fully compensated” teachers? We think that’s already been accomplished in Chicago.

CBS2 reports the average Chicago teacher salary is $76,000 a year, and that doesn’t include benefits. The school district said that made Chicago’s teachers the highest paid in any city in the nation. The CTU disputed that, saying they’re just the second highest – behind New York City. Big whoop.

But who cares about comparing teachers to teachers? How about comparing them to private sector employees, who work 12 months a year, compared to nine months in a typical government school. The median household income in Chicago is $50,897, according to

It seems as though Chicago’s teachers have it pretty good – likely better than Stavroula Harissis. So what exactly is a “fully compensated” teacher? One with a bigger pension and lower deductibles and co-pays for health insurance? Bigger sick leave payouts? Who knows?

But the talking points are working like a charm, especially with average citizens and an overly-compliant Chicago media that never presses the CTU and its allies to back up their absurd claims.

TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial

1 posted on 08/03/2012 9:32:48 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

TX graduation rate for 2010 - most recent available - was 84.3 at a cost of 9,227. per student. Look like our poor kids are getting the short end - not. You point about money vs ROI or any other measure is right on target.

2 posted on 08/03/2012 9:41:15 AM PDT by q_an_a (the more laws the less justice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

NYC teachers peak at over 100,000 per year, with high pensions.
And I would sooner slit my throat, than own a home in New Jersey. How about property taxes of 10,000-12000 per year for a middle class home ?
The teachers love this : )

3 posted on 08/03/2012 9:42:32 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

Some places in NJ do have very high RE taxes but they would be Bergen County in the NE section near NYC,the rest is not nearly as bad as some think.

We live in a lovely community on a golf course in a 2700 sq ft home located in Ocean Twnshp in Ocean Cty NJ. RE taxes are $5300 which does not include the Homestead Rebate of about $1000. So net taxes are $4300, not so bad.

Confirming your claim of ridiculous taxes I can tell you my brother lives in a small town in Bergen County in a very modest 1300 sq ft Cape style home for which he is paying close to $14,000 in RE taxes.

4 posted on 08/03/2012 11:01:37 AM PDT by beenaround
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson