So put me in the camp in support of the union supporters in Wisconsin. I find it absolutely incredible that people that want to keep the top 2% of American's income, i.e. those that make over $250,000, at a lower tax rate, they get to keep a whole $5,000 or so a year (yes, more for those that make $1,000,000 - oooo, I bet they really feel the pain), and instead are trying to take away the wages and benefits of people that make $50,000 a year. Yes, these teachers that make a fifth, or even less of the richest people in America, those are the people that are the "blame" for our country's budget woes. As Stephen Colbert states, damn those rich teachers and their 93 Sentras. Totally makes sense to go after people driving almost 20 year old cars instead of those that, you know, own several 2011 Rolls Royces, or Bently's, or Mercedes, or Porches.
Now the unions in Wisconsin are willing to compromise. They are willing to accept less in wages and less in benefits. They understand that everyone needs to contribute in these hard economic times to help balance budgets. But what they are not willing to accept is their absolute destruction, the complete inability to later bargain and negotiate to get those benefits and wages back when economic conditions improve. These people will sacrifice some money now, but want the right to get it back later. Compare this to bankers, who didn't even have to sacrifice their money, not one single penny of it, now. The bankers got bailed out in the billions. They got their six figure bonuses. Did you get a bonus for Christmas this year? Or last year? Did you get a raise? Bankers did, teachers did not. Teachers are giving up their ability to trade in their 18 year old car for a 10 year old car, whereas bankers are trading in their 2010 RRs for the new 2011 model. Cry me a friggin river you top 2%.
Oh, but those teachers get 3 months vacation and only work till 3pm. Well, let me say Bullshit! My mother was a teacher. She worked well past 3pm. At home, she was always grading papers, getting lesson plans together, making bulletin board displays. She worked summer schools often. I remember seeing many of my teachers working in grocery stores over the summer because they just couldn't last 3 months without a paycheck. That's right, its not like these teachers get 3 months "paid vacation." They get 3 months without a paycheck. You try living 3 months without a paycheck.
QUIT BALANCING OUR BUDGET ON THE BACKS OF TEACHERS AND KIDS! We have to pay teachers well to encourage more to enter the field. I've constantly heard the excuse by big companies. Oh, we have to pay our CEOs these millions of dollars to encourage them to stay/come to our company. That's what "big lawfirms" say to excuse their $160,000 paychecks to top law students. Why not use that same excuse to attract more teachers to the profession?
Maybe, just maybe, if more teachers entered the profession and could make living wages, our kids would be better educated. I've heard arguments that teachers are so secure in their jobs, so they don't try. How about, our teachers are so overwhelmed with 35+ student classes, having to find ways to get school supplies, even paying for them out of their own pocket (there's a special tax write off for that too, you think that would be necessary if teachers were getting such supplies from the school?), having to be babysitters as well as teachers because both parents (to the extent there are two parents) are working long hours trying to pay the rent or mortgage and put food on the table. These teachers are exhausted, and so are the parents. Meanwhile the poor top 2% are having to "sacrifice" by canceling one of their ten trips to Europe this year and only being able to buy 10 new pairs of shoes this year instead of 15. Lets get that violin out.
A poor education leads to poorly trainable workers. A recent article in my local paper talked about problems with the new Septa rail cars. They have a lot of defects. They're being made in America (which we're all supposed to encourage, right, rather than having them made in Mexico?), but the Korean supervisors are complaining that all the workers are unskilled and they are difficult to train. Maybe if they could read and do math better, they'd be better workers. And maybe if those workers had better education in school they could read and do math better. And maybe they'd get that better education if there was more money being paid to the schools and the teachers.
Some say that "throwing money at the problem won't solve it." HOW DO THEY KNOW THAT? WE'VE NEVER TRIED IT! How about we give it a try and throw more and more money at education, and do it for like 10 years and see if things improve?
Unions may not be perfect. There may be corruption at the top. But there's no way there's more "corruption" in unions than there is at the top of big business, and no way that union bosses earn more than the CEOs of these businesses. You think CEOs "make jobs"? Yeah, maybe, but I bet half of those jobs are in other countries, Mexico, India, China. Union bosses, however, make American jobs. Union bosses fight for more wages for their union members, giving them more money, so that maybe the members can afford to eat out at Applebees once a month, thereby allowing Applebees to hire more waiters, servers, cooks and dishwashers. There, more jobs created and in America.
So I say no to abolishing unions or taking away collective bargaining rights. Frankly, I don't think they should be giving up any of their hard earned wages or benefits, not unless the top 2% make similar concessions in their taxes. You want union employees to take a 5% cut in wages and benefits, then raise the taxes 5% on the top 2%. Guess which one creates more money for state and federal budgets?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
The amount of money spent on education per student is a flawed metric. We can spent $100K per student to teach them basketweaving, or we can spend $50K per student to teach them math and science. Which would give us the better result?
Here in AZ, I frequently see online comments about how we don't spend enough on education. I can tell you that when Lynette's son was entering high school up in Pinal County, he and his classmates were being issued laptops.
Here in Tucson, when we throw money at the problem, we get a superintendent who makes $205K per year.
http://tucsoncitizen.com/three-sonorans/2010/11/24/will-pedicone-save-tusd-in-2-5-years-at-a-cost-of-500000/
We also get a school district that would rather pay out huge judgments to settle accidents that a problem school bus driver gets into rather than firing the driver.
http://tucsoncitizen.com/morgue/2008/09/16/96750-jury-decides-ex-teacher-hit-by-school-bus-in-06-is-due-4-5m/
So, when the district comes to us every election year to ask for a "budget override", we the voters tell them no. They've been told no twice in the past three years.
If they can ever emerge out of mismanagement then we'll be more sympathetic to them.
I would agree that there can be a lot of mismanagement in how the money is spent. The money should be spent on the students, on the teachers, on the equipment and supplies. Issuing laptops isn't so bad. Spending $200,000 on an administrator when teachers have to buy school supplies, is not.
My local school district used to teach languages in elementary school, the absolute best time to do it. But budget cuts forced them to cut those classes.
I also admit, if we could have afforded private school for our girls, we would have done it. I would like to see school districts manage their budgets better so such classes could be reinstated.
Post a Comment