patrick.net

there are living wages and there are insanely high wages they are demanding for very easy work. if they are so good why don't they take their lazy asses onto free market like the rest of us and do something for their country.

Clearly the guys owning yachts like this work about a million times harder than any of us:

But you have chosen to be RAGING ENVY OUTRAGED over "union thugs"

Corporate Thug:

Uh-oh, everybody run... I am about to inject FACTS into the debate!

Oh crap! You know those facts just piss off the conservatives/libertarians/teabaggers/republicans. They can't speak that language.

What about Obama's shovel ready projects that turned out as he said "Not so shovel ready".
What about all the bail outs?
What about parts of TARP passed during his time?
What about bail outs to the loan industry with first time home buyer bullshit credit?
What about Obamacare? If you haven't noticed, but my insurance has gone up because of it and a lot. But if you remember Nanci Pelosi, we had to pass the bill before we could read what's in it.
What about all the housing assistance programs to the states? Those were his items.
What about his new attempt to rent out foreclosed properties by having government cover principal reductions?

What about AIG bailout?
What about GM bailout?

What about the other $10T?

thunderlips11 says

What about the other $10T?

He increased debt by 4 trillion. Thats a 40% increase in just over 2 years.

The other 10 trillion represents many years our nation living in denial about how sustainable programs and benefits and handouts everyone keeps on voting for.

So you have absolutely no recolelction of facts? Who was president when AIG got bailed out? WHo was president when GM got their first bail out? I will sit here and wait while you Google the answer.

What about Medicare Part D?

What about Iraq?

What about Afghanistan?

What about the tax cuts?

What about No Child Left Behind?

What about the 2008 stimulus checks?

Or do these not count since Bush enacted them?

I don't really believe that the gullible dolts that listen to the right wing propaganda are AS stupid as Chris likes to pretend. Although he clearly may be an exception. Most of them are just really good at believing what they want to, and don't want to exert their brains by making an effort to understand.

The single biggest contribution to our debt, that is over 3 trillion of it, is attributable to decreases in tax revenues do to our recession/depression we have been in since 2008.

If McCain was elected, possibly we would be better off, but only because they probably would have let him do a bigger stimulus, and also because they might have continued the policy of keeping much of our war spending off books (accounting tricks).

Chris, you probably have the ability to comprehend this, but the willingness ?

About war spending being off the books under Bush:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/02/weighing-the-ir/

About "Union Thugs," we might have some interesting news out of Wisconsin's recall votes tomorrow.

What about "Ownership Society"?

How about Canada and Australia now has America beat for home ownership?

The reason big business hates public employees so much as they see a huge field for "Consulting" and "Outsourced Customer Service".

They want Cost Plus contracting for all these things.

They literally can't wait to fire the last DMV worker, state office building janitor, etc. so they can rush in at outsource anybody they can, and pay 30% less for anybody they can't, while charging the state as much or more than the state pays government employees itself. The difference is profit.

HousingWatcher says

What about No Child Left Behind?

who is removing accountability from it now? Obamas administration.

NCLB was a huge waste of money that did not improve education at all. It was also a huge power grab by the federal govt. so I'm surprised you support it.

HousingWatcher says

NCLB was a huge waste of money that did not improve education at all. It was also a huge power grab by the federal govt. so I'm surprised you support it.

I'm not supporting it, but I do like the idea of accountability since there is a monopoly in the school system ran by unions. And schools aren't there to provide adequate education, it is to provide exorbitant benefits and salaries to union bosses, who live it up at taxpayer expense.

It's amazing that Unions are a pale shadow of what they were 30 years ago, but everything possible is still blamed on them.

When the economy is booming, and there are opportunities galore, you don't hear the same kind of envy towards government employed public service workers such as teachers or police, who have forgone other opportunities and committed themselves long term to pubic service.

But now that we are in a depression, we see all of this envy. Quoting elliemae from recently, "Sometimes, people just plain suck."

marcus says

When the economy is booming, and there are opportunities galore, you don't hear the same kind of envy towards government employed public service workers such as teachers or police, who have forgone other opportunities and committed themselves long term to pubic service.

What envy? It is a disgust at how corrupt our system has become. An average teacher starts at 40~ grand, which in CA isn't a lot, and in any turmoil gets kicked to the curb while the union thug bosses raid the tax payer funded benefits and live it up.

That seniority system is crap, and so are the union rules that protect incompetent lazy and complacent. Why would a teacher want to be a good teacher when they will be replaced by some thug who will do the minimum and get paid more and have more job security anyway.

I have in the past worked for government too, I couldn't stand it, and for that reason left, good riddance. It was a program that was supposed to help the poor, but the way it was ran it was like some ugly money laundering operation, and employees were nothing more than a public dog and pony show.

Interesting.

FortWayne says

n average teacher starts at 40~ grand

Only in some states, and not necessarily just the wealthier or most populous ones. Florida and Texas for example.

FortWayne says

That seniority system is crap, and so are the union rules that protect incompetent lazy and complacent. Why would a teacher want to be a good teacher when they will be replaced by some thug who will do the minimum and get paid more and have more job security anyway.

Why would I want to respond to something as stupid and nonsensical as this ? But okay, I took you off of ignore, again out of curiosity. And I will respond again to your trollish bullcrap.

I'm not saying that you are stupid Chris, but most everything you say about unions is way off the charts stupid and makes no sense.

I've asked you many times, who are the union thugs in education ?

Every teacher I know was hired by a principal, usually with hep from department chair and others in the interview process. These applicants are people who are attracted to the job, in part because of the decent pay and benefits (market principles at work). And they often have advanced degrees, if they are teaching high school.

So the "market" attracts applicants based on the pay and benefits. And because those pay and benefits are so decent there are good applicants. The best of those applicants are selected.

Please tell me exactly how having a union, the function of which was to negotiate the pay scale and benefits (all other functions of the union are insignificant in comparison and like those are negotiable), affects the quality of teachers.

The only thing you could reasonably come up with is that once tenure kicks in the teachers just stop trying, and stop caring about the children. This would imply that all along they only went in to teaching with the long term plan of screwing over the children and the tax payer.

Do you realize what believing this says about you ? That is, do you understand that only a complete and total scumbag could believe such a thing ?

You assume incorrectly that a lot of other people are like you.

In many states, teachers start wit as little as the low $30s... such as in the Dakotas. Teaching is not a high paying profession. The real money in edcation is in higher education: $100k + for 15 hours of work a week. Can't beat that. College professors live a comfy life.

Fort Wayne, if govt. workers are so well paid, then why are you not one? I always hear people compkaing about overpaid subway workers here in NYC. So I ask them why they did not take the last exam to get hired. I hear silence every single time. Govt. workers have it so good, yet all these peopel whining and complaining won't make a single effort to land one of these jobs.

HousingWatcher says

he real money in edcation is in higher education: $100k + for 15 hours of work a week. Can't beat that. College professors live a comfy life.

Most college profs don't actually make that much. There are tons of junior faculty and postdocs with PhDs who don't make very much.

I've found that a lot of people don't actually know the real story of what certain professions make. They assume certain qualifications guarantee you a 6-figure job, but it's not always true.

marcus says

I've asked you many times, who are the union thugs in education ?

And I answered it many times marcus. It's the leadership sitting high and mighty at the top in their gluttony, screwing the system, screwing the education, screwing public programs and the children who should be benefiting from it. And the politicians who they buy.

And those who abuse the system.

HousingWatcher says

In many states, teachers start wit as little as the low $30s... such as in the Dakotas. Teaching is not a high paying profession. The real money in edcation is in higher education: $100k + for 15 hours of work a week. Can't beat that. College professors live a comfy life.

ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR DAMN MIND?!!!

My wife is a college professor, and after years of agonizing Phd living like paupers, then postdoc, and more agonizing years of working towards tenure, she is finally a "real professor". But our COMBINED salary is needed to break $100K. There is no "comfy life" about it, every hour of teaching means multiple hours outside the classroom preparing, grading, etc. The summers are taken up with research work, if she's not also teaching then too. We still both do more hours of work after our son goes to sleep at night. She talked about taking a new positions at a higher-tier University, but they didn't offer tenure she'd have to restart that clock again so it boiled down to "would you like to disappear from your son's life *again* for another 3+ years?", so that was a NO!

Anyone who thinks college professor life is a cakewalk hasn't lived with one.

I should have been more specific.... professors on the graduate level make good money. Many law school professors make over $150k even though they spend more time writing law review articles than teaching.

FortWayne says

It's the leadership sitting high and mighty at the top in their gluttony, screwing the system, screwing the education, screwing public programs and the children who should be benefiting from it. And the politicians who they buy.

This is totally made up bs.The leadership of my union, one of the biggest in the country is paid the same as teachers (or maybe slightly higher because of less time off).

That's another thing that speaks volumes about the kind of person you are, you are comfortable spouting made up bs, more than anyone (even Shrek) without EVER providing a source or a shred of evidence for what you don't realize are LIES.

The only the worse than being a liar, is using your intellectual laziness as cover for your lying.

Back to ignore. I hope I've made it clear what I think of you.

So it's people who run the schools then, not the teachers? Your referring to superintendants?

HousingWatcher says

I should have been more specific.... professors on the graduate level make good money. Many law school professors make over $150k even though they spend more time writing law review articles than teaching.

I'm not sure what "professors on the graduate level" means.

She has graduate students doing research, and teaches graduate courses in Engineering, not making $150K either.

I'm sure you can find some college professor in a high-priced profession someplace who makes $150K, so what? Most of them do not. Law & Medical are expensive. I tangled with Mish once over his article blasting overpaid profs one time, had to point out everyone on his top 10 list was either a "teacher" only in the sense they were heart surgeons at the University hospital, or a coach. OK I have to agree no coach should make over $150K but college athletic programs think otherwise. YMMV.

But college professors do work less than K-12 teachers. Don't they spend a lot of time doing research instead of teaching?

HousingWatcher says

But college professors do work less than K-12 teachers. Don't they spend a lot of time doing research instead of teaching?

I'm not sure why you think research means "less work". Graduate student work must be guided, labs have to be funded and maintained, grant proposals written, journal papers submitted, Phd theses must be rigorously checked over, committees have to be sat on, conferences must be attended, insane students who decide to steal lab work and leave the country have to be criminally prosecuted, shall I go on? There's plenty more. This is why our "summer off" is usually no vacation at all, it just means that finally some money is brought in on contracts, which goes to a lot of university overhead, that funds some of the graduate students the rest of the year.

Yeah, but do students really benefit from all that research? Kids coming out of college today are complete idiots, many of whom have no idea who we fougt in WWII or the Revolutionary War. Wouln't it be better to get rid of all this research and just concentrate on teaching, instead letting the govt. and the private sector handle research?

HousingWatcher says

Yeah, but do students really benefit from all that research? Kids coming out of college today are complete idiots, many of whom have no idea who we fougt in WWII or the Revolutionary War. Wouln't it be better to get rid of all this research and just concentrate on teaching, instead letting the govt. and the private sector handle research?

Some Universities and schools have differing proportions of teaching versus research. Like I suspect if you went to someplace like I dunno Embry Riddle with no graduate program well it's almost entirely teaching. On the other hand you go to Georgia Tech which is where I went, that's a research machine with teaching bolted on. So it's a "free market" and you as a student can pick your poison. If you just want an undergrad degree in basket weaving there's no need for research there. You want a degree in Mechanical Engineering from a top-tier school expect there to be research work going on. That's the way it is, you want to change it feel free. Not going to debate "how should colleges be" further, it is what it is.

Oh yeah, plus you never know when a student might pop off and start killing people. Yes it's a fat life, everyone should try it!

HousingWatcher says

I should have been more specific.... professors on the graduate level make good money. Many law school professors make over $150k even though they spend more time writing law review articles than teaching.

Some law school professors do, but only at the top schools and in many cases after several years of being a prof. At many state law schools, the salaries are lower than what you're describing -- even at UC, which is saddled by a high cost of living and likely has cost of living adjustments vs. other universities. Law and medicine (and maybe business) are slightly different because their public and private sector equivalent salaries tend to be higher, but even law professors don't make $150K or above for a while.

I'm not sure what you mean by "graduate level." That's not a meaningful distinction, as Vicente said.

This salary information is public -- here are UC's salary scale, and they start much much lower than $100K generally:

http://www.ucop.edu/acadpersonnel/0910/

Even as a law prof, you have to be a "Professor IV" to make $150K or more, and that's in your 10th year according to the chart:

http://www.ucop.edu/acadpersonnel/0910/table8.pdf

Most college professors do not make $150K. Maybe if you limited it to tenured people at top schools, but there are probably 4000 colleges in the U.S., so that's a tiny percentage. Lecturers, Adjuncts and junior profs don't make much and generally have few protections against job loss. Some faculty members have multiple jobs just to get by.

Let's not even talk about postdocs and residents, who may be faculty members and may have teaching duties:

http://www.ucop.edu/acadpersonnel/rev_postdoc_salscales2011.html
http://www.ucop.edu/acadpersonnel/residents_salscale.html

HousingWatcher says

But college professors do work less than K-12 teachers. Don't they spend a lot of time doing research instead of teaching?

Why is research not considered work? The results of their research are still owned by the university and still benefit students. The amount of time spent on research is relatively high, and this is part of what faculty are being paid for.

Vicente says

Not going to debate "how should colleges be" further, it is what it is.

Yeah, fundamentally changing the nature of college is a different thread. The complaint was about high salaries, and that has been debunked.

Throwing out strawmen about who fought whom in WWII or the Revolutionary War is a waste of time. If anything, the typical complaint is that college students learn TOO much about history and other liberal arts, instead of real job-related qualifications. HousingWatcher is in fact saying the opposite, which is truly bizarre.

I'm not debtating that. But when someone is paying $40,000 a year for a degree, they shoudl know BASIC history.

Is that asking too much?

HousingWatcher says

I'm not debtating that. But when someone is paying $40,000 a year for a degree, they shoudl know BASIC history.

First of all, how many people pay $40K/year for a degree? Second, how many of those in #1 don't know the answer to the two questions you asked (namely 1) who fought in WWII?, 2) who fought in the American Revolutionary War?)?

Seems like a strawman to me.