Posted on 12/08/2005 9:32:57 AM PST by NormsRevenge
Much more than that if you figure in the full retirement benefits.
>>>Nobody makes those teachers take $40,000 or whatever they make.
$500 billion to Howard Stern? I think you have too many zeros in that figure.
If the government paid athletes, they probably wouldn't make jack either. Stern and sports pros are paid by private corporations who are looking to make profits off their investment and they do. As it should be. It says NOTHING of societies priorities. "Society" does not pay these people, private corporations do.
Teaching at a public school is a government job. Comparing celebrities in the private sector to teachers in the public sector is not a fair comparison. Teachers do not generate revenue like Stern and the athletes do.
Hey, I'm all for everybody making more money but if you are looking at that aspect as a way to improve performance, I think you are a bit misled. Paying someone more money does not make them better at what they do.
And where do the private corporations and sports pros get their cash? From society, who buys the tickets or the products. I'll agree that paying someone more cash won't make them better, but promising more cash if they DO a great job probably will. However, I still think that society's values are still misplaced in certain arenas. It's a shame that cancer research institutes have to beg for funding, while folks have no problem making millionaires out of movie or sports stars. They have far more value to us than teachers or scientists.
Don't get me wrong, I do think, as a nation, our priorities are a bit out of whack. Your points are good examples of it. People spend a large amount of money on entertainment so it's not really surprizing that companies can afford to pay entertainers more money. They generate their own income plus millions more.
For future teachers, more money may attract higher quality individuals into the profession but I think even those will be bound by a government bureaucracy that limits their effectiveness. Make it as difficult to get a teaching license as it is to get a license to practice medicine then I could see significanly raising teacher salaries. Most anybody with a college degree can get certified to teach. There is no unique skill set there to drive up the value of the wage. Literally, almost anybody can do it. Sadly, it reflects back on the monetary value of the salary.
The seriously wrong starts elsewhere, however, as regards education in California.
If 90% of the illegal aliens went back to Mexico; and if public schools were not obligated to educate Mexican citizens; then we would have no budget problem.
I think the number of illegal alien kids in LASUSD approaches 30%. In some individual schools the numbers are close to 80%. Even the schools in nice little places like Santa Barbara are filled with Mexican children. Imagine the disparity -- an all-American place like Santa Barbara where nearly all the children in the public schools are foreigners, and ones living illegally in the USA at that.
The NEA is more to blame for the screwed up state of our education system than the government bureaucrats. But getting rid of the Dept of Education (which Jimmy Carter promised to the NEA if their members would vote for him) is a good start. Return schooling to local control, as it was before 1980.
Make it as difficult to get a teaching license as it is to get a license to practice medicine then I could see significanly raising teacher salaries. Most anybody with a college degree can get certified to teach
I don't think you need a four year degree to teach grade school. Look at those parents with no college degree who homeschool their kids and the kids win spelling bees. I've been taught by teachers who had Master degrees and those who've had Doctorates. The degree didn't matter - what made the good ones good was their ability to communicate their knowledge. I think we need to base teacher's salaries on results, not on their degrees. If the results are good, then pay them highly. Highly enough that teaching will become a high status profession that will attract more qualified people. Not a profession that gets degraded with the old saying "Those that can't do, teach". The job of educating the next generation is too important.
"If the results are good, then pay them highly. Highly enough that teaching will become a high status profession that will attract more qualified people."
I can see your point there. I am a fan of results-based compensation. Even Stern and the athletes will be dropped if they don't perform. Sadly, that's the opposite of what unions are about.
I used to contract IT services to the government. There were really no government IT people, all contractors. The government found that if an employee knew they would be fired if they did not perform, they actually did perform, unlike the government workers who did not have to. For all practical purposes, they could not be fired. Paying them exhorbatant amounts of money did not help. Bringing in contractors who worked basically for results-based compensation did the trick. We actually made significanly less money than the government employees but our performance was much greater because if we did not perform, we would be replaced, unlike government workers. After you established yourself as a dependable, productive employee, your salary went up. Mine went up almost 100% over 5 years.
Essentially, that's how I guage the teacher performance issue.
Oooops. Yes that would be a bit much, even for Howard Stern. I should have left out the word million.
"That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Who do you think train the people who are going to bring in all the revenue in the future? Teachers, dumbass."
I don't see where you attacking me and calling be curse-words supports your lame attemp at a point. Another poster and I were having a very civil discussion until you show up with your classless act.
And by the way, you are dead wrong. Public school teachers generate ZERO revenue outside of holding an occasional fund drive. Schools don't invest in teachers hoping to turn a profit. Businesses do, on the other hand, DO invest large sums of money in people for a return on their investment. That isd in NO WAY like teachers. You have some nerve calling other people dumb after your ridiculous statements. If you can't understand the most simple of concepts, I truly feel sorry for you.
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.