The problem is......

....the U.S. can't compete globally.

"The unions are part of the Change to Win Coalition, seven labor groups
vowing to accomplish what the AFL-CIO has failed to do: Reverse the
decades-long decline in union membership. But many union presidents, labor
experts and Democratic Party leaders fear the split will weaken the movement
politically and hurt unionized workers who need a united and powerful ally
against business interests and global competition."



They just don't get it.

Sure, there are reasons I'm not a big fan of unions, seniority is probably
#1 on the list. That said, a company that pays its workers $15/hour to make
sneakers can't survive when Asian companies are paying their workers
$50/month to make the same product.

Airlines can't afford to lose millions of dollars each day and still pay
high wages to workers.

Large (and small) companies that have underfunded and unfunded pension
programs cannot continue to dump the responsibility for the programs onto
the PBGC.

Re: The problem is......

unions had their time and place in history.

A few years ago the teachers union in Buffalo, NY went on strike. The
average salary of the striking teacher was north of 100k/year.

The last GM striker I read about, the average salary of the striking
worker was 80k/year.

When I worked at Xerox, the average union member putting the copier
together made more than the line engineers which supported them.

not a big union fan here, either.

Re: The problem is......

jIM wrote:
> unions had their time and place in history.
>
> A few years ago the teachers union in Buffalo, NY went on strike. The
> average salary of the striking teacher was north of 100k/year.

Do you have a reference to this interesting news item. I sure would
like to know about a school district where the teachers make "north of
100K/year".


>
> The last GM striker I read about, the average salary of the striking
> worker was 80k/year.
>
> When I worked at Xerox, the average union member putting the copier
> together made more than the line engineers which supported them.
>
> not a big union fan here, either.

Re: The problem is......

I may have been misinformed, here are some links.

Re: The problem is......

jIM wrote:
> I may have been misinformed, here are some links.

So your "north of 100K" figure is a wild number with absolutely no
basis in fact?


>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: The problem is......

It was reported that teachers salaries in more than half the county's
schools earn upwards of $80,000 after 20 years on the job. They can retire
at the age of 55 with two-thirds of their salary. It has also recently been
reported that teachers' salaries are not a predictor of a pupil's academic
achievement.





"jIM" <> wrote in message
news:
>I may have been misinformed, here are some links.
>

Re: The problem is......

In article <>,
Ed <> wrote:
> It was reported that teachers salaries in more than half the county's
> schools earn upwards of $80,000 after 20 years on the job.

Reported by whom? It was just reported that teachers in Buffalo earned
100K, but that report was wrong.

Quoting a web site that doesn't give the reference is useless.

Re: The problem is......

"Greg Hennessy" <> wrote

> In article <>,
> Ed <> wrote:
>> It was reported that teachers salaries in more than half the county's
>> schools earn upwards of $80,000 after 20 years on the job.
>
> Reported by whom? It was just reported that teachers in Buffalo earned
> 100K, but that report was wrong.
>
> Quoting a web site that doesn't give the reference is useless.

Go find the reference then. You know about useless.

Re: The problem is......

Ed wrote:
> It was reported that teachers salaries in more than half the county's
> schools earn upwards of $80,000 after 20 years on the job. They can retire
> at the age of 55 with two-thirds of their salary. It has also recently been
> reported that teachers' salaries are not a predictor of a pupil's academic
> achievement.
>
>

Just one county.


>
>
>
> "jIM" <> wrote in message
> news:
> >I may have been misinformed, here are some links.
> >

Re: The problem is......

"PeterL" <> wrote

>
> Ed wrote:
>> It was reported that teachers salaries in more than half the county's
>> schools earn upwards of $80,000 after 20 years on the job. They can
>> retire
>> at the age of 55 with two-thirds of their salary. It has also recently
>> been
>> reported that teachers' salaries are not a predictor of a pupil's
>> academic
>> achievement.
>>
>>
>
> Just one county.

What about Chuck Hickey out there in Illinois?

Re: The problem is......

Ed wrote:
> "PeterL" <> wrote
>
> >
> > Ed wrote:
> >> It was reported that teachers salaries in more than half the county's
> >> schools earn upwards of $80,000 after 20 years on the job. They can
> >> retire
> >> at the age of 55 with two-thirds of their salary. It has also recently
> >> been
> >> reported that teachers' salaries are not a predictor of a pupil's
> >> academic
> >> achievement.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Just one county.
>
> What about Chuck Hickey out there in Illinois?

I don't know Chuck. How long has the Chuckster been teaching? Does he
have a graduate degree or two? Did he take on extra duties such as
coaching the debate team? Do you know Chuck? Maybe you can give him a
call and find out.

>

Re: The problem is......

"Ed" <> wrote in message
news:
>
> What about Chuck Hickey out there in Illinois?
>
>

And the funny thing is, Somonauk is a old farm town.
Out in the middle of nowhere. A true one road town with one stop light.
Population of maybe 1,500 1,600 by now.


To pay Chukie that kind of money, he must teach every kid in the town
at all grade levels.

Re: The problem is......

jIM <> wrote:
> unions had their time and place in history.
> A few years ago the teachers union in Buffalo, NY went on strike. The
> average salary of the striking teacher was north of 100k/year.

This is Republican bullshit spin. Wife taught in Buffalo. Average teacher
with a degress makes $30K, with a masters they make $40K.

What about the AMA? Or the "cartel" we have handling insurance? Why
is collective bargaining always bad when it's the working class but
a good thing when it's for the rich and powerful.

The outsourcing phenomenon is more involved than wether or not a particular
economy has decent labor laws. Already India & China are losing out other
less developed economies who can undercut them on wages. These countries
don't have a "union problem" either.

You can find a lot of problems with unions but they are not the major
faultline in our economy. On a whole, the labor movement is dying out
in this country and we're still losing jobs out to other countries.

Only real solution is to be more responsible at the government level
with how we spend our money, invest more and fix our schools & hope
that we can compete by having more educated Americans than our
neighbors abroad.

-Mike

Re: The problem is......

Ed <> wrote:
> It was reported that teachers salaries in more than half the county's
> schools earn upwards of $80,000 after 20 years on the job. They can retire
> at the age of 55 with two-thirds of their salary. It has also recently been
> reported that teachers' salaries are not a predictor of a pupil's academic
> achievement.
>

Makes sense. When my wife interviewed at the "good" school districts
(upper income families, high property taxes, McMansions etc..) the
teacher's pay was much better than what it was in the poorer districts.
And these districts routinely ranked among the best in the state and
had nearly 100% matriculation to college.

Re: The problem is......

Gary C wrote:
> "Ed" <> wrote in message
> news:
> >
> > What about Chuck Hickey out there in Illinois?
> >
> >
>
> And the funny thing is, Somonauk is a old farm town.
> Out in the middle of nowhere. A true one road town with one stop light.
> Population of maybe 1,500 1,600 by now.
>
>
> To pay Chukie that kind of money, he must teach every kid in the town
> at all grade levels.

Or, maybe they have problems finding good teachers out in the boondocks
and need to pay more to get them.

Re: The problem is......

In article <>,
Ed <> wrote:
> > Quoting a web site that doesn't give the reference is useless.
>
> Go find the reference then. You know about useless.

Why should I do your homework for you. If you want to make a point, it
is up to you to provide support for it.

Re: The problem is......

In article <>,
PeterL <> wrote:
> > What about Chuck Hickey out there in Illinois?
>
> I don't know Chuck. How long has the Chuckster been teaching? Does he
> have a graduate degree or two?

Apparently he has taught for 34 years, and has a Masters degree.

I wonder if he knows his salary information is out there for the world
to look at.

I wonder if that violates the privacy act.

Re: The problem is......

"PeterL" <> wrote in message
news:
>
>
> Gary C wrote:
>> "Ed" <> wrote in message
>> news:
>> >
>> > What about Chuck Hickey out there in Illinois?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> And the funny thing is, Somonauk is a old farm town.
>> Out in the middle of nowhere. A true one road town with one stop light.
>> Population of maybe 1,500 1,600 by now.
>>
>>
>> To pay Chukie that kind of money, he must teach every kid in the town
>> at all grade levels.
>
> Or, maybe they have problems finding good teachers out in the boondocks
> and need to pay more to get them.
>

Highly unlikely!

Re: The problem is......

Gary C wrote:
> "PeterL" <> wrote in message
> news:
> >
> >
> > Gary C wrote:
> >> "Ed" <> wrote in message
> >> news:
> >> >
> >> > What about Chuck Hickey out there in Illinois?
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> And the funny thing is, Somonauk is a old farm town.
> >> Out in the middle of nowhere. A true one road town with one stop light.
> >> Population of maybe 1,500 1,600 by now.
> >>
> >>
> >> To pay Chukie that kind of money, he must teach every kid in the town
> >> at all grade levels.
> >
> > Or, maybe they have problems finding good teachers out in the boondocks
> > and need to pay more to get them.
> >
>
> Highly unlikely!

Why? they pay more for inner city schools where it's difficult to find
teachers willing to teach there.

Re: The problem is......

"Greg Hennessy" <> wrote

> Ed <> wrote:
>> > Quoting a web site that doesn't give the reference is useless.
>>
>> Go find the reference then. You know about useless.
>
> Why should I do your homework for you. If you want to make a point, it
> is up to you to provide support for it.

What have you got against contributing?
Why do you come here only to whine?
I have presented you with facts in the past and you still elect to claim
they're false.
I sent you the web page for FreeCare and because your friend is as stupid as
you are you two teamed up and insisted he was right and Massachusetts has no
such program.

You said, "It was just reported that teachers in Buffalo earned
100K, but that report was wrong." Well, as far as I can tell, that was
hearsay and the poster admitted he was misinformed. I presented an article
that was published. Prove it wrong.

You're an idiot.

Re: The problem is......

"PeterL" <> wrote

>> What about Chuck Hickey out there in Illinois?
>
> I don't know Chuck. How long has the Chuckster been teaching? Does he
> have a graduate degree or two? Did he take on extra duties such as
> coaching the debate team? Do you know Chuck? Maybe you can give him a
> call and find out.
>
>>

Ok, so "just one county" does nothing for you.
A list from another state doesn't impress you.

All we're trying to establish is that some teachers do quite well. I think
the large majority of them do. If I gave you a list from all 50 states you
would just claim that it's very limited. The point has been made.

Have you met Greg? You two could be a couple.

Re: The problem is......

"Greg Hennessy" <> wrote

> I wonder if he knows his salary information is out there for the world
> to look at.
>
> I wonder if that violates the privacy act.

He is a public employee. He has no right to keep this information private. I
am hard pressed to come up with someone I've met that is dumber than you
are.

Re: The problem is......

"PeterL" <> wrote

> Why? they pay more for inner city schools where it's difficult to find
> teachers willing to teach there.

Really? You mean that inner city schools typically pay teachers more than
Chuck?

Re: The problem is......

"Mike Stone" <> wrote

> Makes sense. When my wife interviewed at the "good" school districts
> (upper income families, high property taxes, McMansions etc..) the
> teacher's pay was much better than what it was in the poorer districts.
> And these districts routinely ranked among the best in the state and
> had nearly 100% matriculation to college.

Yes, but it was the quality of the people and not teacher salaries that put
these schools at the top of the lists.

Re: The problem is......

"Mike Stone" <> wrote

> This is Republican bullshit spin. Wife taught in Buffalo. Average
> teacher
> with a degress makes $30K, with a masters they make $40K.

Perhaps at entry level but your figures are well below the average teacher
salary. Shatt we call this Democratic bullshit spin?

> You can find a lot of problems with unions but they are not the major
> faultline in our economy.

True. Being in a union these days is only harming union members.

> Only real solution is to be more responsible at the government level
> with how we spend our money, invest more and fix our schools & hope
> that we can compete by having more educated Americans than our
> neighbors abroad.

I don't see that ever happening and we already "invest" too much.

Re: The problem is......

"Mike Stone" <> wrote

> invest more and fix our schools & hope
> that we can compete by having more educated Americans than our
> neighbors abroad.
>
> -Mike

"The PISA study, conducted every three years, ranked the United States 24th
out of 29 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development."

In a Global Test of Math Skills, U.S. Students Behind the Curve

Re: The problem is......

In article <>,
Ed <> wrote:
> > Why should I do your homework for you. If you want to make a point, it
> > is up to you to provide support for it.
>
> What have you got against contributing?

I have nothing against contributing. I have contributed on this
thread. And pointing out that a supposed fact is wrong or unsupported
is contributing.

> I have presented you with facts in the past and you still elect to claim
> they're false.

Some of your claims are false, and when they are I point this out.

> I sent you the web page for FreeCare and because your friend is as stupid as
> you are you two teamed up and insisted he was right and Massachusetts has no
> such program.

You really ought to get profession help here, you seems as obsessed as
Monk over this issue. To put it simple enough that even you might
understand, I've never claimed Massachusetts had no such program. What
I have claimed, and the website *YOU* provided a link with agrees, is
that it doesn't cover everything. And I had a friend who had an
illness it didn't cover. I don't know why you are so shocked to find
that the freecare program doesn't cover anything, but it is a fact of
life.

> Prove it wrong.

In any discussion, it is the responsibility of those advancing an
argument to prove themselves correct, no the other side to prove it
wrong. I'm sorry you don't seem to understand this.

Re: The problem is......

In article <>,
Ed <> wrote:
> > I wonder if that violates the privacy act.
>
> He is a public employee. He has no right to keep this information
> private.

I am a civil servant. My salary is covered by the privacy act of 1974.

Re: The problem is......

"Greg Hennessy" <> wrote in message
news:dc5eo6$p70$
> In article <>,
> Ed <> wrote:
>> > I wonder if that violates the privacy act.
>>
>> He is a public employee. He has no right to keep this information
>> private.
>
> I am a civil servant. My salary is covered by the privacy act of 1974.

Goody for you.

Re: The problem is......

You don't know the difference between fact and fiction.

FreeCare would have covered your friend unless he had money/assets he didn't
want to spend.
That's a personal choice.



"Greg Hennessy" <> wrote

>> Prove it wrong.
>
> In any discussion, it is the responsibility of those advancing an
> argument to prove themselves correct, no the other side to prove it
> wrong. I'm sorry you don't seem to understand this.

They are one and the same, so get busy and prove it wrong. You made a weak
attempt to 'advance the argument', I suggest you prove my article false. Do
it, don't do it, whatever. I don't really care. I place zero value on your
thoughts, opinions, you.

Re: The problem is......

In article <>,
Ed <> wrote:
> FreeCare would have covered your friend unless he had money/assets he didn't
> want to spend.

OR it wasn't one of the eligible services. Freecare is nice, if it
covers what you have. Somethings it covers, so things it doesn't. I
don't know why you refuse to acknowledge this point. But since it
doesn't have anything to do with the current topic of discussion, I'm
done discussing it.

Re: The problem is......

Ed wrote:
> "PeterL" <> wrote
>
> >> What about Chuck Hickey out there in Illinois?
> >
> > I don't know Chuck. How long has the Chuckster been teaching? Does he
> > have a graduate degree or two? Did he take on extra duties such as
> > coaching the debate team? Do you know Chuck? Maybe you can give him a
> > call and find out.
> >
> >>
>
> Ok, so "just one county" does nothing for you.
> A list from another state doesn't impress you.
>
> All we're trying to establish is that some teachers do quite well.

That's a given. You can say that just about any profession. Hell,
some prisoners in the Federal Pen do "quite well". We are not talking
about one person or one county. But the US. No?

I think
> the large majority of them do.

So from one person and one county you come to the conclusion of "large
majority". I am not disputing that. But one person and one county
don't lead to that conclusion.


If I gave you a list from all 50 states you
> would just claim that it's very limited. The point has been made.
>

Don't put words in my mouth. If you give the national median, I would
definitely not say it's very limited.

> Have you met Greg? You two could be a couple.

Two people usually makes a couple. In fact that is the definition of a
couple.

Re: The problem is......

Ed wrote:
> "PeterL" <> wrote
>
> > Why? they pay more for inner city schools where it's difficult to find
> > teachers willing to teach there.
>
> Really? You mean that inner city schools typically pay teachers more than
> Chuck?

Not more than Chuck. But more than the districts with better students
because it is much more difficult to find teachers who are willing to
teach in inner city schools. We are talking about median pay, not one
person.

Re: The problem is......

Mike Stone wrote:

> jIM <> wrote:
>
>>unions had their time and place in history.
>>A few years ago the teachers union in Buffalo, NY went on strike. The
>>average salary of the striking teacher was north of 100k/year.
>
>
> This is Republican bullshit spin. Wife taught in Buffalo. Average teacher
> with a degress makes $30K, with a masters they make $40K.
>
> What about the AMA?

The AMA does not do collective bargaining. It is not a labor union, but
a professional organization. It does lobbying and advocacy.


> Only real solution is to be more responsible at the government level
> with how we spend our money, invest more and fix our schools & hope
> that we can compete by having more educated Americans than our
> neighbors abroad.

It really bothers me when government programs are mislabeled
"investments" by their advocates, so as to make them sound more
appealing than "government programs."

Especially on this NG, where we are supposed to know what an
"investment" is. For any investment I make, I always care about the
expected rate of return and alternative investments. So that if my
investment fails to produce the expected rate of return, I can withdraw
my money and invest elsewhere. I also tend to stay clear of investments
that start off with a negative return on investment. I would never buy
a piece of rental property that I couldn't rent out almost immediately,
for example.

If we're going to "invest" in our schools, I want to know the same
thing: What is the expected return on the investment, and what
alternatives do we have in the event that the expected return fails to
materialize? And how long will it be before the return on investment
turns positive?

Beyond that, I don't even think that an educated workforce is the
solution. It wouldn't matter if every blue-collar worker in a
manufacturing plant had a Ph.D., if the production costs aren't
competitive with foreign factories.

Historically, the real answer has been R&D, which has created entirely
new industries and entirely new job descriptions. For quite a while,
America owns those new industries until other nations are able to catch
up. The very Internet we use today was the commercial spinoff of a
major Government research project--the ARPANET.

And the correlation between education and technological breakthroughs
isn't all that strong. Neither Thomas Edison nor Bill Gates even had a
bachelor's degree.


--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:

Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.

Re: The problem is......

"Greg Hennessy" <> wrote in message
news:dc5ing$poi$
> In article <>,
> Ed <> wrote:
>> FreeCare would have covered your friend unless he had money/assets he
>> didn't
>> want to spend.
>
> OR it wasn't one of the eligible services. Freecare is nice, if it
> covers what you have. Somethings it covers, so things it doesn't. I
> don't know why you refuse to acknowledge this point. But since it
> doesn't have anything to do with the current topic of discussion, I'm
> done discussing it.

It doesn't matter, as you have indicated, he has found someone else to
sponge off of.

Re: The problem is......

"PeterL" <> wrote

> That's a given. You can say that just about any profession. Hell,
> some prisoners in the Federal Pen do "quite well". We are not talking
> about one person or one county. But the US. No?

No. "A few years ago the teachers union in Buffalo, NY went on strike. The
average salary of the striking teacher was north of 100k/year."

> I think
>> the large majority of them do.
>
> So from one person and one county you come to the conclusion of "large
> majority". I am not disputing that. But one person and one county
> don't lead to that conclusion.

The average salary for teachers in the US was $46,752 last year. The median
was $42,254.
Source: National Education Association. This does not include a very
generous benefits package for most teachers.

> If I gave you a list from all 50 states you
>> would just claim that it's very limited. The point has been made.
>>
>
> Don't put words in my mouth. If you give the national median, I would
> definitely not say it's very limited.

See above.

>> Have you met Greg? You two could be a couple.

> Two people usually makes a couple. In fact that is the definition of a
> couple.

Stop showing off.

Re: The problem is......

"PeterL" <> wrote

> Ed wrote:
>> "PeterL" <> wrote
>>
>> > Why? they pay more for inner city schools where it's difficult to find
>> > teachers willing to teach there.
>>
>> Really? You mean that inner city schools typically pay teachers more than
>> Chuck?
>
> Not more than Chuck. But more than the districts with better students
> because it is much more difficult to find teachers who are willing to
> teach in inner city schools. We are talking about median pay, not one
> person.

Well, you aren't giving us a source and I'm not really that interested.

Re: The problem is......

In article <>,
Ed <> wrote:
> No. "A few years ago the teachers union in Buffalo, NY went on strike. The
> average salary of the striking teacher was north of 100k/year."

That number has been shown to not be correct.

> The average salary for teachers in the US was $46,752 last year. The median
> was $42,254.

In 2002 the average salary for someone with a 4 year degree was
$51,194.

Arguing that teachers are overpaid becasue you don't like the amount
of taxes you pay is a short sighted argument. We'll need an educated
next generation to do things like earn the money to pay for your
social security. :)

Re: The problem is......

"Greg Hennessy" <> wrote

> In article <>,
> Ed <> wrote:
>> No. "A few years ago the teachers union in Buffalo, NY went on strike.
>> The
>> average salary of the striking teacher was north of 100k/year."
>
> That number has been shown to not be correct.

Of course it has. Did you just wake up?

>> The average salary for teachers in the US was $46,752 last year. The
>> median
>> was $42,254.

> In 2002 the average salary for someone with a 4 year degree was
> $51,194.

So, you are suggesting, without a source, that the average salary has
fallen.
I should believe that why? Is that in your state, nationwide, worldwide,
your high school?

> Arguing that teachers are overpaid becasue you don't like the amount
> of taxes you pay is a short sighted argument. We'll need an educated
> next generation to do things like earn the money to pay for your
> social security. :)

That's not my argument at all you dumb ass. My argument is that that should
be able to do much more with what they're already getting. You did just wake
up.

Didn't you see my link:

This puts the US at 24th out of 29. Do you think we spend less per student
that the 23 countries that produce better performing students?

I could give you more links like this but I'll let you find them all by
yourself. Bottom line is we aren't getting much for our money. Steven is
absolutely right, paying more won't increase teacher skill, interest, or
performance. All it will produce is better paid teachers.

Re: The problem is......

my previous post to this never made it... about one hour before that I
posted something to effect of:

"I could not find specific information on Buffalo teacher salaries and
my Aunt was the school teacher and her husband was the one who gave me
the information". It was at an xmas party and the information is as
good as the air it was delivered in.

Re: The problem is......

"Only real solution is to be more responsible at the government level
with how we spend our money, invest more and fix our schools & hope
that we can compete by having more educated Americans than our
neighbors abroad"

best solution is to let schools compete... not regulate and test them
to death. I know teachers in KY, OH and NY. Most tell me they teach
to make sure they score good on standard testing, not teach to make
sure students learn. WHY? because if their students do not do well on
the tests, the teachers will have underperformed.

I teach for a living, but I teach software to adults instead of Math to
kids... and when we design education curriculums and I compare notes
with my teacher friends, I relaize I have much more freedom to deliver
a quality product.

In the evening I coach soccer for fun, and design training curriculums
for myself and a few other coaches. Using similar principles to my day
job, the kids which are trained under my guidance do quite well. And I
only deal with them 1-2 days per week.

Meaning let me teach the kids Math, and I could do a full year's work
in 30 weeks, twice per week. It's easy to design a learning curriculum
if we don't have to test every step of the way.

the government should not regulate education, they are not good at it...

Re: The problem is......

In article <>,
Ed <> wrote:
> > That number has been shown to not be correct.
>
> Of course it has.

They why are you quoting it?

> > In 2002 the average salary for someone with a 4 year degree was
> > $51,194.
>
> So, you are suggesting, without a source, that the average salary has
> fallen.

No, I am sugguesting that teachers already earn below the average
salary for a college degree.

> This puts the US at 24th out of 29. Do you think we spend less per student
> that the 23 countries that produce better performing students?

Depending on how you measure it. I'll bet we spend a lower fraction of
our GDP on students than many of those countries.

> All it will produce is better paid teachers.

And given that this is a capitalist society, it will attract better
persons to be teachers.

Re: The problem is......

"And the correlation between education and technological breakthroughs
isn't all that strong. Neither Thomas Edison nor Bill Gates even had a

bachelor's degree."

and products like Teflon were discovered on accident as well. Science
is part discovery, part validating what has been discovered (why?) and
part improving what is already in existance.

Bill Gates improved the computer, Thomas Edison improved the light bulb
(among many other things).

Re: The problem is......

"Greg Hennessy" <> wrote

> In article <>,
> Ed <> wrote:
>> > That number has been shown to not be correct.
>>
>> Of course it has.
>
> They why are you quoting it?

Because it was the post that started of this highly paid teacher stuff. Do
you take stupidity enhancing drugs?

>> > In 2002 the average salary for someone with a 4 year degree was
>> > $51,194.
>>
>> So, you are suggesting, without a source, that the average salary has
>> fallen.
>
> No, I am sugguesting that teachers already earn below the average
> salary for a college degree.

How much do you have to earn to get a college degree. I thought most
teachers already had one.

>> This puts the US at 24th out of 29. Do you think we spend less per
>> student
>> that the 23 countries that produce better performing students?
>
> Depending on how you measure it. I'll bet we spend a lower fraction of
> our GDP on students than many of those countries.

Totally irrelevant.

>> All it will produce is better paid teachers.
>
> And given that this is a capitalist society, it will attract better
> persons to be teachers.

No it won't.

Re: The problem is......

"jIM" <> wrote

> best solution is to let schools compete... not regulate and test them
> to death. I know teachers in KY, OH and NY. Most tell me they teach
> to make sure they score good on standard testing, not teach to make
> sure students learn. WHY? because if their students do not do well on
> the tests, the teachers will have underperformed.

I have news for them. Globally, they are underperforming, standard testing
or not.

Re: The problem is......

jIM wrote:
> "And the correlation between education and technological breakthroughs
> isn't all that strong. Neither Thomas Edison nor Bill Gates even had a
>
> bachelor's degree."

Bad examples. Edison lived way before most people get their education
in colleges. And Bill Gates never invented anything.


>
> and products like Teflon were discovered on accident as well. Science
> is part discovery, part validating what has been discovered (why?) and
> part improving what is already in existance.
>

And in general people with more education are able to take advantage of
these discoveries, accidental or not. They didn't discover Teflon in
some garage.

> Bill Gates improved the computer,

Are you serious? Bill Gates didn't improve anything technology-wise.
His company took someone else' invention and marketed it.

Thomas Edison improved the light bulb
> (among many other things).

Re: The problem is......

Ed <> wrote:

> I could give you more links like this but I'll let you find them all by
> yourself. Bottom line is we aren't getting much for our money. Steven is
> absolutely right, paying more won't increase teacher skill, interest, or
> performance. All it will produce is better paid teachers.

Ed,

You seem to be a pro at regurgitation talk-radio vomit. So let me ask you,
where are we losing jobs to?

Aren't China & India taking good paying tech jobs from us hand over fist?

Guess what - the parts of India that are taking jobs are practically socialist
in nature. Kerbala takes the jobs because education is free regardless of
age and they keep raising taxes so they can continue to educate their people.

And China is also more socialist than anything else.

The countries that don't believe in spending a crap load of money on education
end up with crappy factory jobs. The countries that have well funded state run
schools take our high paying jobs.

We have too many hang-ups over government here.

-Mike

Re: The problem is......

jIM <> wrote:

> In the evening I coach soccer for fun, and design training curriculums
> for myself and a few other coaches. Using similar principles to my day
> job, the kids which are trained under my guidance do quite well. And I
> only deal with them 1-2 days per week.
>
> Meaning let me teach the kids Math, and I could do a full year's work
> in 30 weeks, twice per week. It's easy to design a learning curriculum
> if we don't have to test every step of the way.
>
> the government should not regulate education, they are not good at it...

I agree with this. My wife also taught and the bureacracy etc.. was overwhelming.

Problem is both political parties are now regulating schools at the federal level.

Re: The problem is......

In article <G2AFe.34517$>,
Mike Stone <> wrote:
>Ed <> wrote:
>
>> I could give you more links like this but I'll let you find them all by
>> yourself. Bottom line is we aren't getting much for our money. Steven is
>> absolutely right, paying more won't increase teacher skill, interest, or
>> performance. All it will produce is better paid teachers.
>
>Ed,
>
>You seem to be a pro at regurgitation talk-radio vomit. So let me ask you,
>where are we losing jobs to?
>
>Aren't China & India taking good paying tech jobs from us hand over fist?
>
>Guess what - the parts of India that are taking jobs are practically socialist
>in nature. Kerbala takes the jobs because education is free regardless of
>age and they keep raising taxes so they can continue to educate their people.
>
>And China is also more socialist than anything else.

India has put a great deal of effort into getting those jobs. For
instance, imported work is done tax-free, while domestic work is taxed as
you'd expect a practically socialist society to tax it. And they're paid
less. But education makes it possible for them. There are highly
educated Indians with prestigious call-center jobs. Some people argue
that the economics is just one small reason to export the jobs.

>
>The countries that don't believe in spending a crap load of money on education
>end up with crappy factory jobs. The countries that have well funded state run
>schools take our high paying jobs.
>
>We have too many hang-ups over government here.

I always seem to be reading about American businesses complaining about
the poor education that students are getting, resulting in workers that
can't read, can't do arithmetic, etc. And that's become more important as
jobs shift to those needing more thinking skills. But if, say, 3M wants
better educated workers, it's not really practical to ask 3M to handle
twelve years' worth of education for future 3M employees. Our society
just doesn't make that sort of thing possible. It's one of those "we're
all in this together" things.

--
"Very well, he replied, I allow you cow's dung in place of human
excrement; bake your bread on that." -- Ezekiel 4:15

Re: The problem is......

In article <frtFe.5168$>,
Steven L. <> wrote:
>Mike Stone wrote:

>Historically, the real answer has been R&D, which has created entirely
>new industries and entirely new job descriptions. For quite a while,
>America owns those new industries until other nations are able to catch
>up. The very Internet we use today was the commercial spinoff of a
>major Government research project--the ARPANET.
>
>And the correlation between education and technological breakthroughs
>isn't all that strong. Neither Thomas Edison nor Bill Gates even had a
>bachelor's degree.

But both Thomas Edison and Bill Gates have employed vast numbers of people
that did have bachelor's degrees, and depended on those people to invent
and develop products to sell.

Seriously, do you really think Bill Gates contributed any code to Windows,
to Word, to any products that the company had produced after, say, the
early 1980s? Who do you think is doing the work? BASIC was invented by
people with degrees, CP/M was invented by people with degrees, Gates came
tagging along after them.



--
"No other major companies were working on [computer-controlled homes], and
that was exactly the problem. Microsoft does best when it has a
successful competitor it can copy and then crush." -- Marlin Eller,
"Barbarians Led by Bill Gates", 1998

Re: The problem is......

"Gregory L. Hansen" <> wrote

> Seriously, do you really think Bill Gates contributed any code to Windows,
> to Word, to any products that the company had produced after, say, the
> early 1980s? Who do you think is doing the work? BASIC was invented by
> people with degrees, CP/M was invented by people with degrees, Gates came
> tagging along after them.

Is Microsoft a large company? Yes.
Does it employ smart people? Yes.
Is Bill Gates sccessful? Yes.
Is he wealthy? Beyond belief.
What is his title? Chairman and Chief Software Architect
Did he ever develop any software? While at Harvard, Gates developed a
version of the programming language BASIC for the first microcomputer - the
MITS Altair.

Re: The problem is......

"Mike Stone" <> wrote

> So let me ask you,
> where are we losing jobs to?

We are losing jobs to countries that will do the same work for half the
money or less.

> Aren't China & India taking good paying tech jobs from us hand over fist?

I don't know about hand over fist but yes, we are losing jobs to mostly
Russia and India. We're losing manufacturing jobs to China.

> Guess what - the parts of India that are taking jobs are practically
> socialist
> in nature. Kerbala takes the jobs because education is free regardless of
> age and they keep raising taxes so they can continue to educate their
> people.

Many of the jobs that go to India are in telemarketing. They should only be
allowed to call people in the country that the call originates from. I get
at least a half dozen calls from Indians each week and can't understand what
they are saying. Accents are much too heavy.

> The countries that don't believe in spending a crap load of money on
> education
> end up with crappy factory jobs. The countries that have well funded
> state run
> schools take our high paying jobs.

I think those countries that don't spend more than the US don't do it for
two reasons. 1. They don't have to spend as much as we do to get superior
results. 2. They are poor and can't.

> We have too many hang-ups over government here.

You're right. I wish people would stop bitching and just let them do
whatever they want to.

Re: The problem is......

"Gregory L. Hansen" <> wrote

> There are highly
> educated Indians with prestigious call-center jobs. Some people argue
> that the economics is just one small reason to export the jobs.

"Prestigious"? Maybe there in India. Economics is the only reason.

> I always seem to be reading about American businesses complaining about
> the poor education that students are getting, resulting in workers that
> can't read, can't do arithmetic, etc.

That's why they put little pictures of the food they sell on the cash
registers at fast food places instead of the numbers you would usually find
on a cash register.

Re: The problem is......

In article <>,
Ed <> wrote:
>
>"Gregory L. Hansen" <> wrote
>
>> There are highly
>> educated Indians with prestigious call-center jobs. Some people argue
>> that the economics is just one small reason to export the jobs.
>
>"Prestigious"? Maybe there in India. Economics is the only reason.

Yes, in India it's prestigious, and attracts better educated people.
Maybe economics is the only reason for us to export jobs there, but they
sure do have people willing and able to take those jobs.

>
>> I always seem to be reading about American businesses complaining about
>> the poor education that students are getting, resulting in workers that
>> can't read, can't do arithmetic, etc.
>
>That's why they put little pictures of the food they sell on the cash
>registers at fast food places instead of the numbers you would usually find
>on a cash register.

I've just been reading "Re-inventing the Corporation", published in 1985,
I think. It's pretty old. But as of 1985, American corporations actually
have been putting a lot of money and time into schools, offering tutors
and guest speakers and so on. A lot of schools had been "adopted" by one
corporation or another, and in some cases the school officials say it's
the best thing that has ever happened to the school. And part of the
reason is that businesses have been spending billions (with a "B") of
dollars in remedial education for their workers, and mistakes due to poor
skills.

I don't know what the situation looks like today. But education clearly
has an economic impact that goes beyond the level of the individual
nuclear family.

--
"The result of this experiment was inconclusive, so we had to use
statistics." (Overheard at international physics conference)

Re: The problem is......

In article <>,
Ed <> wrote:
>
>"Gregory L. Hansen" <> wrote
>
>> Seriously, do you really think Bill Gates contributed any code to Windows,
>> to Word, to any products that the company had produced after, say, the
>> early 1980s? Who do you think is doing the work? BASIC was invented by
>> people with degrees, CP/M was invented by people with degrees, Gates came
>> tagging along after them.
>
>Is Microsoft a large company? Yes.
>Does it employ smart people? Yes.
>Is Bill Gates sccessful? Yes.
>Is he wealthy? Beyond belief.
>What is his title? Chairman and Chief Software Architect
>Did he ever develop any software? While at Harvard, Gates developed a
>version of the programming language BASIC for the first microcomputer - the
>MITS Altair.

Did Bill Gates invent BASIC? No.
Was Microsoft BASIC a technological breakthrough? No. Gates just had the
idea to do it and sell it-- he's an entrepeneur, not an engineer.

"No other major companies were working on [computer-controlled homes], and
that was exactly the problem. Microsoft does best when it has a
successful competitor it can copy and then crush." -- Marlin Eller,
"Barbarians Led by Bill Gates", 1998


--
"He who only sees business in business is a fool."

Re: The problem is......

"Gregory L. Hansen" <> wrote

> Did Bill Gates invent BASIC? No.

I'll take your word for it because I don't care enough to look into it
further.
I didn't read any of his books.

> Was Microsoft BASIC a technological breakthrough? No. Gates just had the
> idea to do it and sell it-- he's an entrepeneur, not an engineer.

A software architect and an entrepeneur. He is THE most successful person
dealing with software that there ever was. To say he knows nothing about
software is suspect.

Re: The problem is......

"Gregory L. Hansen" <> wrote

> Yes, in India it's prestigious, and attracts better educated people.
> Maybe economics is the only reason for us to export jobs there, but they
> sure do have people willing and able to take those jobs.

I know they're willing, I'm not sure about the able part. When they call me
I can't understand what they are saying. Eventually I get tired of trying to
understand them and just tell then I have no idea what they're saying. They
speak louder but it doesn't help. Indian people with heavy accents speak as
if they have only half swallowed something and it's in the middle of their
throat.
I don't want to talk with American telemarketers, never mind a game of guess
what I'm saying.

I once asked a telemarketer if she was a Mom. In a pleasant voice she said
she was. I asked her what she tells the kids when they ask her what she does
for work. Does she tell them she's a professional pain in the ass. Her
pleasant voice changed.

Re: The problem is......

jIM wrote:
> "Only real solution is to be more responsible at the government level
> with how we spend our money, invest more and fix our schools & hope
> that we can compete by having more educated Americans than our
> neighbors abroad"
>
> best solution is to let schools compete... not regulate and test them
> to death. I know teachers in KY, OH and NY. Most tell me they teach
> to make sure they score good on standard testing, not teach to make
> sure students learn. WHY? because if their students do not do well on
> the tests, the teachers will have underperformed.
>
> I teach for a living, but I teach software to adults instead of Math to
> kids... and when we design education curriculums and I compare notes
> with my teacher friends, I relaize I have much more freedom to deliver
> a quality product.
>
> In the evening I coach soccer for fun, and design training curriculums
> for myself and a few other coaches. Using similar principles to my day
> job, the kids which are trained under my guidance do quite well. And I
> only deal with them 1-2 days per week.
>
> Meaning let me teach the kids Math, and I could do a full year's work
> in 30 weeks, twice per week. It's easy to design a learning curriculum
> if we don't have to test every step of the way.

Teaching is much much more than curriculum. Your students choose to
take your classes. Try teaching kids who are there because they must
go to school. You'll see a world of difference. You'll quickly learn
that the best curriculum in the world means nothing.


>
> the government should not regulate education, they are not good at it...