What do you see happening to your healthcare costs in the next few years

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Why on earth are you worried about the homeless in Seattle? Seattle is a very Progressive city. No way that homelessness will exist there. The supposedly homeless in Seattle should be asked "How is your life suffering because of progressive policy?"

The progressive liberal utopia of Connecticut, is also an epicenter of income inequality, where the zillionaires of Westport and Greenwich live next-door to unimaginable poverty in Bridgeport.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

The progressive liberal utopia of Connecticut, is also an epicenter of income inequality, where the zillionaires of Westport and Greenwich live next-door to unimaginable poverty in Bridgeport.

Still far far better than all those conserv. states where they can't even pay their teachers decent salaries and have to have high school grads teach school.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Still far far better than all those conserv. states where they can't even pay their teachers decent salaries and have to have high school grads teach school.

I doubt that income inequality is better in those states. We weren't talking about average income, or teacher income, we were talking about income inequality. That is a huge issue in CT, because it's a byproduct of hard-core liberalism.

High school grads teaching school? Where is that?

One conservative state that people are moving to in huge numbers is NC. They pay their teachers poorly, which is one reason why taxes are low. But they still get people to apply for teaching jobs, and if you do 5 minutes of research before deciding what town to live in, you can get great public schools.

Paul, here in CT we pay teachers very well (despite what they claim), and we give them insane benefits (despite what they claim). There is an upside to that, sure, as talent often goes where the money is. There is also a downside (in addition to the cost). You can run the risk of drawing people to the profession who are only attracted by the pay, benefits, and time off. That is not a profession where you want people who are only casually interested in the underlying work. You need people who are answering a call to teach.

When I was a student in public schools in CT, teacher pay was barely above poverty. Yet we got great, certified teachers, not high school grads. Then I went to a Catholic high school, where teachers were paid even less. Again, I had amazing teachers. It's a total fallacy to claim that unless we bankrupt ourselves to pay them well, that no one will teach except for illiterate criminals. It's demonstrably false.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I doubt that income inequality is better in those states. We weren't talking about average income, or teacher income, we were talking about income inequality. That is a huge issue in CT, because it's a byproduct of hard-core liberalism.

When I was a student in public schools in CT, teacher pay was barely above poverty. Yet we got great, certified teachers, not high school grads. Then I went to a Catholic high school, where teachers were paid even less. Again, I had amazing teachers. It's a total fallacy to claim that unless we bankrupt ourselves to pay them well, that no one will teach except for illiterate criminals. It's demonstrably false.

Hard-core liberalism made CT a suburb of NYC? How did the people of Fairfield County make other people poor?
Are you sure teachers even deserve to be paid? Or should they own their own schools so they can make a profit, then it would be OK to make whatever they can.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Hard-core liberalism made CT a suburb of NYC? How did the people of Fairfield County make other people poor?
Are you sure teachers even deserve to be paid? Or should they own their own schools so they can make a profit, then it would be OK to make whatever they can.

No, you misinterpreted my post about. I was not saying liberalism caused the fabulously wealthy enclaves of Fairfield County, that was great luck for the state of CT. I'm saying liberalism is directly responsible for the other side of income inequality, the extreme poverty, and for the loss of much of the middle class. Highly progressive areas tend to attract large numbers of wealthy people who can afford the taxes that accompany liberalism, and also large numbers of people who want to live off liberal welfare. The middle class fall through the cracks and go elsewhere. That's why you have income inequality, you have people at both extremes, not a lot of folks in the middle.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Are you sure teachers even deserve to be paid? Or should they own their own schools so they can make a profit, then it would be OK to make whatever they can.

Not sure what made you think I don't think they should be paid (I taught public school for a short time in CT). They should be paid an amount that is reasonable to fund via reasonable taxes.

What I said, and it's demonstrably true, is that lower compensation doesn't always mean a lower quality of education.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

One conservative state that people are moving to in huge numbers is NC. They pay their teachers poorly, which is one reason why taxes are low. But they still get people to apply for teaching jobs, and if you do 5 minutes of research before deciding what town to live in, you can get great public schools.

And their d... uppity teachers are walking out
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opi...211234489.html
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/08/us/no...est/index.html

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

And their d... uppity teachers are walking out
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opi...211234489.html
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/08/us/no...est/index.html

Fine. let them walk out, and I bet for every teacher that quits, the town gets 10 applications from fresh college grads eager to land their first job. Do you have any data to suggest that they can't fill open teaching positions in the Carolinas? I'd bet the farm that's not true.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Fine. let them walk out, and I bet for every teacher that quits, the town gets 10 applications from fresh college grads eager to land their first job.

That makes sense, let's stuff the schools with first timers learning on the job with no experienced mentors.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

That makes sense, let's stuff the schools with first timers learning on the job with no experienced mentors.

Glad to see you're not making assumptions or anything. First, the citizens of places like the Carolinas have freely chosen (unlike the masochists in CT) to live with low taxes, and to pay public servants accordingly.

Second, the teaching profession has plenty of grizzled, burnt-out veterans, and the students might benefit by replacing them with eager rookies bursting with energy and enthusiasm and new creative ideas.

Third - "no experienced mentors" - show me the data that says that there aren't any experienced teachers left.

Paying teachers poverty wages isn't ideal. Nor is what we have here in CT, where we have promised them benefits that can never, ever be delivered.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Still far far better than all those conserv. states where they can't even pay their teachers decent salaries and have to have high school grads teach school.

Is it? How much better would lower income folks be with a lower tax burden?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Is it? How much better would lower income folks be with a lower tax burden?

Sure is. If you look at many stats, the evil liberal states rank far better than the conserv. utopian states. Things like quality of life, education, health care access, public safety, crime, life expectancy, environmental health, housing rates, etc. Those come at a cost - higher taxes.

Would the poor fare better w/a lower tax burden - I don't think so as the stats indicate there are less "ills" in the higher tax states.

Would Jim, you and I fare better in a low income state - prob. yes.

I heard that in Utah (which has a severe teacher shortage) they hired teachers w/a college degree. The person who said that also said you could teach w/o a degree if you have 5 years of relevant experience - which I don't think is a bad idea.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Sure is. If you look at many stats, the evil liberal states rank far better than the conserv. utopian states. Things like quality of life, education, health care access, public safety, crime, life expectancy, environmental health, housing rates, etc. Those come at a cost - higher taxes.

Would the poor fare better w/a lower tax burden - I don't think so as the stats indicate there are less "ills" in the higher tax states.

Would Jim, you and I fare better in a low income state - prob. yes.

I heard that in Utah (which has a severe teacher shortage) they hired teachers w/a college degree. The person who said that also said you could teach w/o a degree if you have 5 years of relevant experience - which I don't think is a bad idea.

Paul, how do you explain the fact that CT is always among the nation's leaders in population exodus? CT offers an amazing quality of life if you can afford it. Many people are deciding that it's not worth the cost, that the Carolinas offer a better bang for the buck.

And that's based on today's taxes, which we know aren't anywhere near enough to fund the debt that's coming soon. So even though most of the debt is off the balance sheet in unfunded IOUs. we're still losing productive citizens. What's going to happen when these debts come due, which is around the corner?

"Would Jim, you and I fare better in a low income state - prob. yes. "

There are upper middle class areas in NC and SC where I can enjoy a comparable quality of life, for far lower cost. You refer to them as "low income states" to disparage the entire state. I'm not saying I want CT to turn into all of NC or SC. But we can learn lessons from the parts of NC and SC that are working so well, like the suburbs of Charlotte, which is the banking capital of the US. They are building $450k houses as fast as they can be put up, and it isn't meth heads who are buying them. The population exodus has been a disaster for tax revenue.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Is it? How much better would lower income folks be with a lower tax burden?

The problem with that, is that liberals feel that the state knows better than these people, how to best spend their money.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Is it? How much better would lower income folks be with a lower tax burden?

Also, the cost of living is lower ("more affordable") in those lower taxed states, so lower salaries can be sustained more easily.