Anyone following what's going on in Wisconsin?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

OR

The gov overplayed his hand and it backfires on him.

they agreed to 100% of the costs. 100% as long as they can keep the right to collective bargining.

RIROCKHOUND, you may be right. However, in my opinion, when people stop looking at the "don't hate me because I'm a teacher" signs, and they realize that all the gov is asking for is for teachers to pay LESS THAN HALF of what the taxpayers have to pay, more people will side with the gov.

Again, why is it unfair to ask teachers to pay 13% of the cost of health insurance, if everyone else pays 30%.

As Obama likes to say (or more correctly, he used to like to say), "elections have consequences". The people in WI voted for Republicans.

One last thing? anyone siding with the Dems who fled the state, has forever forfeited the right to call Republicans "obstructionists".

This is a fascinating event, which I think will have repurcussions way beyond WI.

[TheSpecialist]

You know what would be better, if the teachers said screw you and all quit. Then let the parents all stay home from work to watch and home school them.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

You know what would be better, if the teachers said screw you and all quit. Then let the parents all stay home from work to watch and home school them.

No, what would happen is, parents would get their property taxes back and use that money to enroll their kids in private schools, which are better, cheaper, and NOT coincidentally, have no unions!!

And then the teachers would all go to the private sector, and by 10:00 AM on the first day they'd realize how great they had it.

[RIROCKHOUND]

[QUOTE=Jim in CT;838618]No, what would happen is, parents would get their property taxes back and use that money to enroll their kids in private schools, which are better, cheaper, and NOT coincidentally, have no unions!!QUOTE]

Property taxes in round numbers, for me is $3500/year, what % of that is education? Call it 2K. I have one kid, what if I had 5?

Whats the tuition of the average private school? Hendrican is 11K, so is Prout. Maybe grammar school age is cheaper.


The education majors (I was dabbling in an education double major for a bit) I was enrolled with who ended up in Private schools, were not the cream of the crop and couldn't wait to get out b/c the money sucks. The exception are religious heavy schools, were many educators in those schools have something else invested in it.

[Jim in CT]

[QUOTE=RIROCKHOUND;838622]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

No, what would happen is, parents would get their property taxes back and use that money to enroll their kids in private schools, which are better, cheaper, and NOT coincidentally, have no unions!!QUOTE]

Property taxes in round numbers, for me is $3500/year, what % of that is education? Call it 2K. I have one kid, what if I had 5?

Whats the tuition of the average private school? Hendrican is 11K, so is Prout. Maybe grammar school age is cheaper.


The education majors (I was dabbling in an education double major for a bit) I was enrolled with who ended up in Private schools, were not the cream of the crop and couldn't wait to get out b/c the money sucks. The exception are religious heavy schools, were many educators in those schools have something else invested in it.

In CT, I pay $8,000 a year in property taxes for a 3 bedroom colonial on half an acre. In my town, about 60% of property taxes is for education. Give that money back to EVERYBODY, including people who don't have kids in school, and we couild build some nice non-union schools with that monety.

[RIROCKHOUND]

[QUOTE=Jim in CT;838629]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

In CT, I pay $8,000 a year in property taxes for a 3 bedroom colonial on half an acre. In my town, about 60% of property taxes is for education. Give that money back to EVERYBODY, including people who don't have kids in school, and we couild build some nice non-union schools with that monety.

So you could send three kids to private school for $4800? Would you really like the quality of education in that school?
Or is this more of the same; lets make cuts and deal with the consequences later

give me a break. The teachers in WI conceeded to the costs. They want to keep some union rights and the Gov cracks down. that seems to have been the Gov's plan all along.

[Jim in CT]

[QUOTE=RIROCKHOUND;838631]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

So you could send three kids to private school for $4800? Would you really like the quality of education in that school?
Or is this more of the same; lets make cuts and deal with the consequences later

give me a break. The teachers in WI conceeded to the costs. They want to keep some union rights and the Gov cracks down. that seems to have been the Gov's plan all along.

"So you could send three kids to private school for $4800? "

Do you think through anything before regurgitating the liberal talking points? I pay property taxes for LIFE, not just the years that my kids are in school. And it's not just property taxes. A good chunk of my state income tax goes to education, as well as a god chunk of my federal income tax. Gimme all that money back, and there's a great chance it would cover the cost of a great, Catholic education.

If those lifetime tax cuts didn't cover private tuition, it would be close. I'd be willing to kick in the difference. So would most people. And the school would be 10 times better, and I'd know for damn sure that the folks teaching there ain't doing it for the money, because they don't get paid nearly as much as the union counterpartys in public schools.

"The teachers in WI conceeded to the costs."

For now. And then next year, the union would start demanding more and more, and then we're back in the same boat.

The gov proposed that public employees would get annual cost-of-living increases automatically (better than what the private sector offers). If public employees wanted increases bigger than COLA, they'd have to get public approval, which is obviously reasonable, since it's the public's money. But the union REFUSED. Why refuse that?

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

No, what would happen is, parents would get their property taxes back and use that money to enroll their kids in private schools, which are better, cheaper, and NOT coincidentally, have no unions!!

And then the teachers would all go to the private sector, and by 10:00 AM on the first day they'd realize how great they had it.

Wrong because they get a bargain now, most could not afford private schools How much in tax dollars would they get back? BC high school cost 15g's a year, same as most of the best private schools

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

Wrong because they get a bargain now, most could not afford private schools How much in tax dollars would they get back? BC high school cost 15g's a year, same as most of the best private schools

OK, Specialist, I hear you. You are right, most parents cannot afford private schools. So according to you then, since teachers have the parents over a barrel, teachers are justified in using their unions to extort unreasonable benefits from the taxpayers? Because they have a perfect monopoly, you are fine with teachers demanding benefits that woudl NEVER be accepted if there was competition?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

Wrong because they get a bargain now, most could not afford private schools How much in tax dollars would they get back? BC high school cost 15g's a year, same as most of the best private schools

"because they get a bargain now,"

Here in CT, most people would not say that property taxes are a "bargain". How can it be a "bargian" when the teachers get such insane benefits?

In WI, the governor and GOP legislature were elected specifically because people are realizing thatthese unions are nothing close to a "bargain".

Sorry, elections have consequences.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

You know what would be better, if the teachers said screw you and all quit. Then let the parents all stay home from work to watch and home school them.

thanks for illustrating why collective bargaining should be eliminated...

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

RIROCKHOUND, you may be right. However, in my opinion, when people stop looking at the "don't hate me because I'm a teacher" signs, and they realize that all the gov is asking for is for teachers to pay LESS THAN HALF of what the taxpayers have to pay, more people will side with the gov.

They just conceeded to exactly what was asked. Now he is looking like he is trying to kill the union, which may have been his first task and ultimate goal.

Specialist:
my very Right leaning gradfather was on an anti-teachers union rant once, and that stopped him in his tracks. Fine, they all get fired or quit, who teaches them?
and will the kids really fare better?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

They just conceeded to exactly what was asked. Now he is looking like he is trying to kill the union, which may have been his first task and ultimate goal.

Specialist:
my very Right leaning gradfather was on an anti-teachers union rant once, and that stopped him in his tracks. Fine, they all get fired or quit, who teaches them?
and will the kids really fare better?

"Now he is looking like he is trying to kill the union, which may have been his first task and ultimate goal."

You may well be right. I wish him luck on this noble quest. He also doesn't want to be seen as someone who can be bullied. If the unions made that offer before all of their histrionics, maybe he would have accepted. But they had to throw a fit like a 3 year-old, so they forced his hand. When I was in the USMC, we had an old saying..."if you're going to pull the trigger, make sure you don't have the gun aimed at your own d**k.". Well, these unions shot themselves in their own you-know-whats.


"they all get fired or quit, who teaches them? "

Do you really believe that NO ONE will want teachers jobs, if teachers are required to pay 13% of their health insurance? People will still kill for those jobs. What part of "13% is half of what everyone else pays" don't you understand?

If these teachers would rather quit than pay 13% of their health insurance costs, then OBVIOUSLY they are only in this for the cushy benefits, and thus they're in the wrong profession to begin with.

They won't quit, because as greedy as they are, they're smart enough to know how much cushier they have it than those in the private scetor.

No one here has mentioned that these parasites all called in sick, shutting down the schools for 3 days. So the parents have to either burn through precious vacation days, or spend $$ on daycare at the last minute.

F**k these teachers and the horses they rode in on. This reminds me of one of my heroes, former Mass Governor Calvin Coolidge. In 1919 I believe, the Massachusetts cops went on strike. Then-governor Coolidge fired them all, with no chance of ever being re-hired. A few years later, he was in the White House.

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Now he is looking like he is trying to kill the union, which may have been his first task and ultimate goal."

You may well be right. I wish him luck on this noble quest. He also doesn't want to be seen as someone who can be bullied. If the unions made that offer before all of their histrionics, maybe he would have accepted. But they had to throw a fit like a 3 year-old, so they forced his hand. When I was in the USMC, we had an old saying..."if you're going to pull the trigger, make sure you don't have the gun aimed at your own d**k.". Well, these unions shot themselves in their own you-know-whats.


"they all get fired or quit, who teaches them? "

Do you really believe that NO ONE will want teachers jobs, if teachers are required to pay 13% of their health insurance? People will still kill for those jobs. What part of "13% is half of what everyone else pays" don't you understand? Poor parents have to pay for day care, but they can all afford to send their kids to private school right. Teachers do much more than teach the kids, they act as day care as well right?

If these teachers would rather quit than pay 13% of their health insurance costs, then OBVIOUSLY they are only in this for the cushy benefits, and thus they're in the wrong profession to begin with.

They won't quit, because as greedy as they are, they're smart enough to know how much cushier they have it than those in the private scetor.

No one here has mentioned that these parasites all called in sick, shutting down the schools for 3 days. So the parents have to either burn through precious vacation days, or spend $$ on daycare at the last minute.

F**k these teachers and the horses they rode in on. This reminds me of one of my heroes, former Mass Governor Calvin Coolidge. In 1919 I believe, the Massachusetts cops went on strike. Then-governor Coolidge fired them all, with no chance of ever being re-hired. A few years later, he was in the White House.

It's not a question of anyone wanting a teacher job, it is a question of being able to meet the standards to be hired as a teacher.

As far as them calling in sick, what would happen if they all quit, how long would it take for people to fill their shoes, especially after seeing the crap that the govenor is pulling. No one in their right mind would want that job.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

It's not a question of anyone wanting a teacher job, it is a question of being able to meet the standards to be hired as a teacher.

As far as them calling in sick, what would happen if they all quit, how long would it take for people to fill their shoes, especially after seeing the crap that the govenor is pulling. No one in their right mind would want that job.

"No one in their right mind would want that job"

I could annihilate everything you said, but let's stick to this one inane point.

Teachers in Wisconsin get a salary that is 32% higher than the average salary for that state. On top of that, they only pay 0.2% of pension osts, and 6% of healthcare costs. They get tons of days off. They have a lifetime jog guarantee called tenure, which make it just about impossible to get fired for incompetence. They get guaranteed pensions for life. They are spared from social security, which is ripping everyone else off.

No one in their right mind would want that job? Why do so many people apply for every teaching vacancy that opens up?

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"No one in their right mind would want that job"

I could annihilate everything you said, but let's stick to this one inane point.

Teachers in Wisconsin get a salary that is 32% higher than the average salary for that state. On top of that, they only pay 0.2% of pension osts, and 6% of healthcare costs. They get tons of days off. They have a lifetime jog guarantee called tenure, which make it just about impossible to get fired for incompetence. They get guaranteed pensions for life. They are spared from social security, which is ripping everyone else off.

No one in their right mind would want that job? Why do so many people apply for every teaching vacancy that opens up?

If the jobs are so good why don't you put your money where your mouth is. Take one in CT. at a lower wage than the status quo, pay more for your health insurance, and pension, then see how long you last.

JUst out of curiosity, you say you have the highest property taxes in the nation, what is your house assessed at?

Mine is assessed at 353,000. , what do you think I pay in property taxes?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

If the jobs are so good why don't you put your money where your mouth is. Take one in CT. at a lower wage than the status quo, pay more for your health insurance, and pension, then see how long you last.

JUst out of curiosity, you say you have the highest property taxes in the nation, what is your house assessed at?

Mine is assessed at 353,000. , what do you think I pay in property taxes?

"Take one in CT. at a lower wage than the status quo"

The wages are NOT lower than the status quo. Can you stop making stuff up?

"pay more for your health insurance, and pension,"

Everyone pays more than they did a few years ago. The WI proposal didn't ask the unionized employees to pay anywhere near as much as what they'd have to pay in the private sector. Do you understand that? Do you get that 13% is less than 30%?

"you say you have the highest property taxes in the nation, what is your house assessed at?"

First of all, I never said I have the highest property taxes in the nation, no idea where you got that. I'm not sure what my "assessed" value is. Market value is around $450,000, and I pay $8200 in property taxes.

"what do you think I pay in property taxes?"

No idea. But you need to consider all taxes, not just property taxes.