"The way you wrote it sure sounded like you were lumping public school teachers together in one big lump"
You are right. That was the way I wrote it. I should not have written it that way.
"First of all, if you think $51,000 is excessive for someone with a Master's degree and 20 years of experience (I believe that's about where you have to be on the chart to make that kind of money teaching), then I think you're undervaluing teachers."
You know what? I don't mind this for the valuable ones. However, with the presence of the tenure system, and lack of merit pay, the bad ones get paid as well as the good ones. At least near me. I'm sure you might have seen some like that in your school.
"Also, I was part of the union, although it was optional"
That can make a big difference. An optional union is required to be accountable to its members. In contrast, the organizations that get people to join and pay them no matter what are basically corrupt in nature, lack accountability, and bring out the worst in people. I'm surrounded by such non-optional unions.
How about getting rid of incumbency? Let them run as much as they want for a different office each time, or for the same office if they sit out an election. Abusing the power of the office to campaign on the public dime to keep the seat is now the rule rather than the exception.
"We already have that. Such schools are called public schools"
If any school is (by your definition) a "public school" just because it admits everyone, then none of these vouchers would go to private schools due to my "clause" that would require all private schools on vouchers to take everyone. Hey, they'd all go to public schools!
"Vaucher solution makes about as much sense as saying "Graduate students are smarter, so let's admit everybody to graduate school" or "Olympic runners are thin, let's send all the fat kids to run in the Olympics"
Only if you think that a good education is the right of only a tiny handful of elite achievers.
"Because the teacher's unions don't want to have to compete with anyone."
This is true. The unions are usually the big money behind the efforts against vouchers. This is often done with money stolen (exact definition of the word) from teachers. Why are they against vouchers? Because this might mean a growing proportion of teachers teaching in private schools, where teachers aren't forced to give money to the union. This directly impacts the gravy train of the union bosses, who make very princely wages off of forced donations. Follow the money.
Thanks for the very enlightening explanation. I've heard it claimed that these guys said this, but I'd not heard them before, as it is pretty deeply buried. The Vice President claim is actually the much stronger one.
You have to interpret Bush's letter just right to say it connects Saddam to Bin Laden, but I see how it can be done. Myself, I saw it clearly as a mention of international terrorists (a set that includes Saddam).... "including" the sub-set of the 9/11 guys. (and that the "necessary actions" were to be against all of the international terrorists, not just the 9/11 guys). Thanks for the "smoking gun" anyway.
"So, since it's a topic I do care about, what do I think will make the biggest difference? Smaller class sizes"
I agree, and working against this is the "What's in it for me FIRST, and then think about the kids" mentality of both the teachers' unions and the ever-growing bloated administration that many schools are bogged down with. The money could be used for much more "mission critical" uses, including hiring MORE teachers (to cause smaller class sizes).
"What I really don't understand is why you hate public school teachers so much"
I only hate the ones that willingly participate in the teachers' union and its program of doing as little to educate as possible and getting the most money possible for it. This is less of a problem in "right to work" places where teachers aren't bullied to join the union. If you and your colleagues were not loafing on the picket line, then I really wasn't talking about you, was I?
I've seen plenty of this problem at nearby public schools: including strikes where the bad-guy teachers crowed about the "victory" of getting their pay to increase deeper into the upper crust (from $49,000 to $51,000)....to be paid for through money that they obtained by forcing the schools to cut educational programs, bussing, supplies, etc.
No doubt in your environment, perhaps without the union waging war against education so much, the public school teachers are indeed more dedicated professionals. I apologize for lumping you in with the bad guys, as they are what I know from my local schools.
"As the son of a teacher I can tell you authoritatively that in the vast majority of school districts teachers don't make a living wage"
The "living wage" is an entirely vapourous concept that is not the same amount for any two people, and is based on lifestyle choices, ability/disability, and many other factors. Other than that, if the teachers are alive, they are making some sort of living wage.
"Only if the private schools accept them, which they aren't required to do."
I favor "strings attached" to vouchers so that if a private school accepts any voucher applicant, they have to accept all.
"Which is why I think that the government's job should be to ensure the best education for all. This means a public education system."
to accept all.
You have a narrow definition of "public" which means "government controlled". I think of public education as to what is avialable to the public, just like private hospitals are part of the overall public health care picture. Vouchers improve and expand education, and improve the situation of "the best education for all". Something that is clearly not met with the government-controlled schools.
"Legally, and without any cause can the police spend taxpayer dollars following me around and videotaping me just in case I might commit a crime"
Please clarify something. Do the cops need a warrant or something to one of those "stakeouts" in which they park near your house to see you go in and out, follow you in unmarked cars, etc?
" An agent of the government acting in their official capacity does not have the same rights as everyone else"
More "devil's advocate". If the government could not do this, could a private agency do it? Or is a "Private Eye" allowed to do what is described in the first sentence at the top?
"Private schools cater to students from families with higher incomes, more stable home situations, and better command of english at home."
No surprise, since the poor kids can't afford to go there! Vouchers for the "poor, non-native speaking, single-parent familied" would change that. To use the car analogy again, right now only the families with "higher incomes" can get the Cadillac education. I myself think it education is too important to limit it this way, and would like to see "poor, non-native speaking, single-parent familied" have the same opportunities for the Cadillac education instead of being stuck with the 1985 Yugo.
" In fact, the cars of today are much smaller and lighter than the cars of forty years ago, yet they are also much safer."
Actually, they are less safe (more likely to be smooshed like a bug when hit by a semi), flimsier, and have too little cargo room. (bigger cars could have much larger crumple zones!). That is why SUV's got so popular. The CAFE laws prevented the auto companies from making cars in the classification "automobile" that people wanted, but there is a loophole that considers the car-like more substantial SUV's to be "trucks", so buyers go through that loophole and the car companies are only happy to supply them the "cars" they need in the form of an SUV instead of the flimsy pseudo-cars the government thinks they need.
"hell if you dont want one of the security cameras outside being able to see in your home simply set up a cheap laser firing into it's lens when it points at your home."
If you are going to have people engaged in violent gun crimes to "Stop the Cameras" and use lasers to "intrude" into public property to destroy things, why not use the lasers also to blind any passersby who might look at you too?
"it's because they [private schools] can "cut off poor, misbehaving, lazy, underperforming students". Emphasis primarily on misbehaving, as I understand it."
News flash: public schools DO suspend AND expel misbehaving students. There goes that excuse.
Part of the reason public schools do better is that they tend to get a better grade of teacher: those who are out to teach instead of to get rich. The work ethic encouraged in the public school system is shown by the lazy thug "teacher" loafing on a picket line to try to get more money instead of making positive effort in the classroom. Private schools have much less tolerance for these loafing thugs and will clear out the deadwood if this happened.
"How can it be a free society when there is ubiquitous surveillance and police presence? How can people be free when they are afraid that any abberation in behavior will bring police action upon them?"
There's already peeping eyes and lots of cops all over, especially in crowded areas.
"You don't have arrest and prosecute to squash free speech and free assembly."
It's pretty hard to do it any other way. The "harassment" you mention is closely related to arrest, and should be included above.
"so cameras feeding video to a PC that decides whether or not I am doing something wrong does indeed represent a change in privacy."
Even if privacy has 100 grades intead of 2 grades (binary), there is 0 change if these are looking at public streets, because you don't have privacy to prevent you from being looked at there anyway.
"Private schools can pick and chose whom they wish to educate, and can cut off poor, misbehaving, lazy, underperforming students at any time."
Easily taken care of if all schools that participate in the voucher program are required to take all applicants. Sure beats students being forced to go to inferior government-monopoly schools engineered to make employees wealthy and to produce ", underperforming students".
Slashdot Mirror
"You don't clean sulfuric ashtrays everyday, do you?"
I see we have at least one guy here who has never held down a gig as the devil's butler! Sheesh!
What market are you referring to? Which specific area?
"Where does the dirty part come into play?"
That's how you have to talk to the guy during the step 0) obtaining of sample.
"I want you to study T'Pol in depth and at at length and have a report on my desk by next Tuesday. Hopefully, there will be some hot eruptions."
1) Coprophagologist
"The way you wrote it sure sounded like you were lumping public school teachers together in one big lump"
You are right. That was the way I wrote it. I should not have written it that way.
"First of all, if you think $51,000 is excessive for someone with a Master's degree and 20 years of experience (I believe that's about where you have to be on the chart to make that kind of money teaching), then I think you're undervaluing teachers."
You know what? I don't mind this for the valuable ones. However, with the presence of the tenure system, and lack of merit pay, the bad ones get paid as well as the good ones. At least near me. I'm sure you might have seen some like that in your school.
"Also, I was part of the union, although it was optional"
That can make a big difference. An optional union is required to be accountable to its members. In contrast, the organizations that get people to join and pay them no matter what are basically corrupt in nature, lack accountability, and bring out the worst in people. I'm surrounded by such non-optional unions.
"The average age is rising due to emcumbancy."
How about getting rid of incumbency? Let them run as much as they want for a different office each time, or for the same office if they sit out an election. Abusing the power of the office to campaign on the public dime to keep the seat is now the rule rather than the exception.
"We already have that. Such schools are called public schools"
If any school is (by your definition) a "public school" just because it admits everyone, then none of these vouchers would go to private schools due to my "clause" that would require all private schools on vouchers to take everyone. Hey, they'd all go to public schools!
"Vaucher solution makes about as much sense as saying "Graduate students are smarter, so let's admit everybody to graduate school" or "Olympic runners are thin, let's send all the fat kids to run in the Olympics"
Only if you think that a good education is the right of only a tiny handful of elite achievers.
Were you opposing the POW car license plate bill?
"Because the teacher's unions don't want to have to compete with anyone."
This is true. The unions are usually the big money behind the efforts against vouchers. This is often done with money stolen (exact definition of the word) from teachers. Why are they against vouchers? Because this might mean a growing proportion of teachers teaching in private schools, where teachers aren't forced to give money to the union. This directly impacts the gravy train of the union bosses, who make very princely wages off of forced donations. Follow the money.
Thanks for the very enlightening explanation. I've heard it claimed that these guys said this, but I'd not heard them before, as it is pretty deeply buried. The Vice President claim is actually the much stronger one. You have to interpret Bush's letter just right to say it connects Saddam to Bin Laden, but I see how it can be done. Myself, I saw it clearly as a mention of international terrorists (a set that includes Saddam).... "including" the sub-set of the 9/11 guys. (and that the "necessary actions" were to be against all of the international terrorists, not just the 9/11 guys). Thanks for the "smoking gun" anyway.
"So, since it's a topic I do care about, what do I think will make the biggest difference? Smaller class sizes"
I agree, and working against this is the "What's in it for me FIRST, and then think about the kids" mentality of both the teachers' unions and the ever-growing bloated administration that many schools are bogged down with. The money could be used for much more "mission critical" uses, including hiring MORE teachers (to cause smaller class sizes).
"What I really don't understand is why you hate public school teachers so much"
I only hate the ones that willingly participate in the teachers' union and its program of doing as little to educate as possible and getting the most money possible for it. This is less of a problem in "right to work" places where teachers aren't bullied to join the union. If you and your colleagues were not loafing on the picket line, then I really wasn't talking about you, was I?
I've seen plenty of this problem at nearby public schools: including strikes where the bad-guy teachers crowed about the "victory" of getting their pay to increase deeper into the upper crust (from $49,000 to $51,000)....to be paid for through money that they obtained by forcing the schools to cut educational programs, bussing, supplies, etc.
No doubt in your environment, perhaps without the union waging war against education so much, the public school teachers are indeed more dedicated professionals. I apologize for lumping you in with the bad guys, as they are what I know from my local schools.
"As the son of a teacher I can tell you authoritatively that in the vast majority of school districts teachers don't make a living wage"
The "living wage" is an entirely vapourous concept that is not the same amount for any two people, and is based on lifestyle choices, ability/disability, and many other factors. Other than that, if the teachers are alive, they are making some sort of living wage.
"Only if the private schools accept them, which they aren't required to do."
I favor "strings attached" to vouchers so that if a private school accepts any voucher applicant, they have to accept all.
"Which is why I think that the government's job should be to ensure the best education for all. This means a public education system." to accept all.
You have a narrow definition of "public" which means "government controlled". I think of public education as to what is avialable to the public, just like private hospitals are part of the overall public health care picture. Vouchers improve and expand education, and improve the situation of "the best education for all". Something that is clearly not met with the government-controlled schools.
"Legally, and without any cause can the police spend taxpayer dollars following me around and videotaping me just in case I might commit a crime"
Please clarify something. Do the cops need a warrant or something to one of those "stakeouts" in which they park near your house to see you go in and out, follow you in unmarked cars, etc?
" An agent of the government acting in their official capacity does not have the same rights as everyone else"
More "devil's advocate". If the government could not do this, could a private agency do it? Or is a "Private Eye" allowed to do what is described in the first sentence at the top?
"Private schools cater to students from families with higher incomes, more stable home situations, and better command of english at home."
No surprise, since the poor kids can't afford to go there! Vouchers for the "poor, non-native speaking, single-parent familied" would change that. To use the car analogy again, right now only the families with "higher incomes" can get the Cadillac education. I myself think it education is too important to limit it this way, and would like to see "poor, non-native speaking, single-parent familied" have the same opportunities for the Cadillac education instead of being stuck with the 1985 Yugo.
" In fact, the cars of today are much smaller and lighter than the cars of forty years ago, yet they are also much safer."
Actually, they are less safe (more likely to be smooshed like a bug when hit by a semi), flimsier, and have too little cargo room. (bigger cars could have much larger crumple zones!). That is why SUV's got so popular. The CAFE laws prevented the auto companies from making cars in the classification "automobile" that people wanted, but there is a loophole that considers the car-like more substantial SUV's to be "trucks", so buyers go through that loophole and the car companies are only happy to supply them the "cars" they need in the form of an SUV instead of the flimsy pseudo-cars the government thinks they need.
" Too bad libertarians "balance" that with a thorough and naive mis-understanding of human psychology, social dynamics, and economic theory."
Substitute "marxists" for "libertarians" and you are entirely correct.
"hell if you dont want one of the security cameras outside being able to see in your home simply set up a cheap laser firing into it's lens when it points at your home."
If you are going to have people engaged in violent gun crimes to "Stop the Cameras" and use lasers to "intrude" into public property to destroy things, why not use the lasers also to blind any passersby who might look at you too?
"it's because they [private schools] can "cut off poor, misbehaving, lazy, underperforming students". Emphasis primarily on misbehaving, as I understand it."
News flash: public schools DO suspend AND expel misbehaving students. There goes that excuse.
Part of the reason public schools do better is that they tend to get a better grade of teacher: those who are out to teach instead of to get rich. The work ethic encouraged in the public school system is shown by the lazy thug "teacher" loafing on a picket line to try to get more money instead of making positive effort in the classroom. Private schools have much less tolerance for these loafing thugs and will clear out the deadwood if this happened.
"How can it be a free society when there is ubiquitous surveillance and police presence? How can people be free when they are afraid that any abberation in behavior will bring police action upon them?"
There's already peeping eyes and lots of cops all over, especially in crowded areas.
"You don't have arrest and prosecute to squash free speech and free assembly."
It's pretty hard to do it any other way. The "harassment" you mention is closely related to arrest, and should be included above.
"so cameras feeding video to a PC that decides whether or not I am doing something wrong does indeed represent a change in privacy."
Even if privacy has 100 grades intead of 2 grades (binary), there is 0 change if these are looking at public streets, because you don't have privacy to prevent you from being looked at there anyway.
"Private schools can pick and chose whom they wish to educate, and can cut off poor, misbehaving, lazy, underperforming students at any time."
Easily taken care of if all schools that participate in the voucher program are required to take all applicants. Sure beats students being forced to go to inferior government-monopoly schools engineered to make employees wealthy and to produce ", underperforming students".
"Do you also believe that Saddam was behind 9/11?"
Would be nice to find one instance of Limbaugh or even "Bush and Cheney" ever saying this.