Paid leave for state worker while none for the taxpayers?

 Making a case for paid leave in Delaware , The News Journal

Legislation would offer paid leave to state workers following childbirth or adaption

Nothing personal against state worker whom are value assets to the community but if we’re all one community such a law should apply to all. State workers pay less for healthcare , have pension and get healthcare after retirement. Whereas, many workers in the private sector pay out the ass for healthcare, have no pension, get no healthcare after retirement and have no pension.  Such a law should be for all

A bill in the state Legislature would give full-time state workers employed for at least one year 12 weeks of paid leave upon the birth or adoption of a child under 6 years old. This law would not apply to private sector workers, but would help teachers like Lori.

Wow News Journal you went from legislation would offer paid leave to state worker following childbirth or adaption ( I think NJ meant adoption) to state legislature would give full-time state workers paid leave. What about part-time state workers?

When Mr & Mrs Kilroy “planned” the birth of baby Kilroy they started saving money so that Mrs. Kilroy could take an unpaid 6 weeks off. Mr. Kilroy worked a full-time job up to 60 hours a week an a part-time job about 30 hours a week. Mr. Kilroy work both full time and part part for seven year and there was a time Kilroy attended college at night. State works which include teachers are again valued assets! However, what gives them the right to have such luxuries over those footing the bill?

The 12 weeks would expire one year after birth or adoption. If both parents are state workers, they’d each be eligible for 12 weeks.

Employees would still be able to use accrued sick leave on top of those weeks.

“It’s time for Delaware to lead on leave,” said Rep. Debra Heffernan, D-Edgemoor, the prime sponsor of the legislation.

Wow!!!!!!!!! So if mom and dad are state workers they both can take off 12 weeks at the same time and get paid! Come on Hef ! Tell the Mrs. this is insane.

Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have expressed a desire to reform paid family leave in the United States and President Barack Obama’s 2016 budget includes more than $2 billion in new funds to encourage states to create paid leave plans.

2 billion dollars to encourage states to create paid leave plans. Sound like the Race to The Top scam! The feds won’t dictate but will $$$ encourage ! Looks like Hillary and Sanders support all the $$ bells and whistles for fed and state works while fucking the common Joe.

Personally I feel there is room for compromise! If a child is born healthy with no serious medical condition I don’t support this legislation. HOWEVER , if a child is born with a medical condition requiring intensive care, damn right I support it.   

For those of you who want to come in here an rip me because I question this law, I’ll asked why are you defending “full-time” state worker and no all employees state and private workers?  I think it is a disgrace legislatures sees full time state workers as those who are entitled to such benefit.  

Advertisements

46 responses to “Paid leave for state worker while none for the taxpayers?

  1. If the state required it of private businesses you’d be ripping the state for that. The fact is we are the only country with our level of wealth and means which does not offer paid leave. Having had four children myself, and having lost time and pay for the six week timeframe I’m allowed, I will tell you it is not about the health of the child. It’s about the bonding, the sleepless nights, and the dedication to family values. My third child was born completely healthy, but before that he had to be delivered via emergency c-section and almost died in the womb. Don’t you dare say that just because he was healthy I shouldn’t have been given more time with him and the security of pay so I wasn’t stressed about having to return to work so early. There is nothing wrong with this legislation, and if you want the government to force private businesses to follow suit then I’d suggest you vote for Bernie Sanders because that’s exactly the type of legislation he would support.

    Like

    • kilroysdelaware

      There is a thing called personal responsibility!! My wife and I worked and save so that we could $$$ endure the 6 weeks she was off with no pay!

      The point I am making , this proposed law only applies to full time state workers! And that 6 weeks is now 12 weeks three months! As far as the bonding with the child !! Is that only reserved for full time state workers? Also, both mom and dad full time state workers can take off 12 weeks at the same time! OMG!

      What about charter school teachers who are state workers. The charter school have to pay them “and” their full-time sub?

      As far as the private sector the real concern is livable wages for all. Job growth and start up businesses have been stagnate because of Obama Care and so has expansion of full time employment!

      “If the state required it of private businesses you’d be ripping the state for that.”

      Such good usage of I-messages !

      “I will tell you it is not about the health of the child. It’s about the bonding, the sleepless nights, and the dedication to family values. ”

      Hard to believe but I’ve been there! Bonding is a life long process and children who don’t have privilege parents who can’t have paid leave don’t go on to develop attachment disorders. Legislators will who on this to shore-up the union support. Classic example of who get’s served first! If this bill is soe important to quality of life for children why doesn’t it apply to everyone?

      Liked by 1 person

    • And how to you feel about the Affordable Care Act being forced upon private businesses? Or higher minimum wages? I’m in agreement that it should be for everyone, but this is a start and doesn’t cause potential governmental overreach. In a society where wages are so low and costs of living are so high and families need to work so long and hard just to support a family, I see it as important to provide a good start. Families aren’t always planned, and do you have any idea how long it takes to save up sick leave and money when you only get 10 days a year and are living paycheck to paycheck? I’m sure you do, and this type of legislation is vital but I do not see it as the government’s job to force private sector to offer it. In fact, I see that as being a way to kill the legislation because those private sector lobbyists will make sure it is tanked.

      Like

    • kilroysdelaware

      Kevin, are you saying both your wife’s and your employer gave 6 weeks “paid” time off?

      Like

    • kilroysdelaware

      “And how to you feel about the Affordable Care Act being forced upon private businesses?”

      I think the backlash is less full-time employment. How do feel about the passage of the Affordable Care Act where those who voted for it are in the exchange? I have mixed feeling about it.

      “or higher minimum wages?”

      $15.00 x 40 hours a week = $600.00 x 53 weeks = $31.200.00 there goes the Obama Health Care credit. The big question is, those employees (starting at minimum wage with same employer) through years of service and wage increased making $15.00 an hour now will be cheated. Should their pay be bumped up? If McDonald’s how to pay $15.00 an hour how much would they have to increase the price of a hamburger? Honest it would be great but what will be the impact on the cost of services and goods? Will $31,000 become the new benchmark for poverty?

      “Families aren’t always planned, and do you have any idea how long it takes to save up sick leave and money when you only get 10 days a year and are living paycheck to paycheck?”

      I’ve there and I know what its like to no take sick days where you are so that you can reserve that time off when your kid is sick. I’ve lived paycheck to paycheck and when my job was loss to the recession, it was back to basic cable , hot dogs, no takeout food, very little for Christmas and much more. Our washer broke and we went to the laundromat for about 4 month until Spring that you when I had more work and I put on Home Depot no interest for 6 months. I do the same with car repairs at Firestone.

      The question as to the demand for $15.00 an hour has this tone “you owe me”. Did the employer force some of their workers to drop out of school? Did the employer force some of their worker to have I-Phones with all the bells and Whistles. BUT their are hard working people and parents fighting to survive! I get it ! What will help low-wage earners and the next generation of workers is end corporate and political China kiss-ass!

      Or higher minimum wages?

      Like

  2. How is it that having (or not having) a child is a personal/private decision, yet it is a public responsibility?

    Like

    • lastDEconservative

      Takers take, John. It’s all they know. You have it, so you must (not should) “share” it. Most makers need coercion to give up what they worked for, so govt becomes the gun. One point made above you can always count on … “it’s a start.”

      Like

  3. A lot of private corporations will pay you for this kind of thing. When my son was born, both the companies my wife and I worked for granted six weeks after a child was born. She took the first six weeks and then I took the six weeks after. In Europe, this is par for the course.

    Liked by 1 person

    • kilroysdelaware

      Kevin, are you saying both your wife’s and your employer gave 6 weeks “paid” time off?

      Like

    • Yup! I worked for Chase Manhattan Mortgage when I lived out in San Diego.

      Like

    • This was back in 2004.

      Like

    • lastDEconservative

      LOL, Arthur. You used the word yourself … pander. “A cuddly new baby … and you, you heartless (and probably stupid, selfish, and what’s the other one, M?) SOB, you don’t want to pay these “public servants” to sit home with their decision, I mean, child ? And you want to complain about the free dental for life, too?” “This is why we have to take your money by force; you wouldn’t redistribute it on your own.”

      Like

    • Chase Manhattan was bailed out and fined heavily for its mortgage operations and investments, so we know who was really footing the bill.

      Like

    • Ironically, I was doing loss mitigation and helping folks who were in foreclosure. Back then, anyone and everyone were getting approved for mortgages.

      Like

    • lastDEconservative

      “Back then, anyone and everyone were getting approved for mortgages.”

      Sure were. And why? Because the progressives/liberals/socialists, i.e., the We-Know-Best crowd, the same lot that continues to control the govt schooling (not education) system (and sooooo many other failing institutions) took the tack espoused (and/or parroted) by Kilroy denizens kavips, Mike O., pandora, et.al., that being that it just wasn’t fair (this was before “equitable” came into vogue) that folks that couldn’t afford a home couldn’t afford a home. Solution? Simple. Get out the gun, force the lenders to give them the money (“give” chosen, not randomly typed) to buy a house. They knew it had to collapse, but that by the time it did, boobus America, heart strings dangling, would fall for the quintessential ruse of “oh, wow, look, catastrophe, step aside while we fix this.” And the solution we have now — worse, as always is the case. Dodd-Frank, which if you know the names tells you all you need to know, is such a mess, that the next fix could be our last as a nation. By the way, pay no attention to the fact that equity is slipping back in to the lending rules, setting up the next round of rampant foreclosures. And who will foot the bill? Yep, the makers, the workers, the savers, the do-righters, not Messrs. Dodd or Frank or the legions of kavipses that so obligingly work to keep the smoke screen up, the lullaby playing, the destruction full speed ahead. And certainly not the takers, the ones who collapsed. See: responsibility, personal, gone.

      WELCOME, “K.” Kindred souls always welcome.

      Like

  4. A) state workers are now the largest employed group in the state. Ergo, the largest group for politicians to pander to.
    B) do state workers without kids, grown kids,etc get a bonus or extra pto for not having kids. I.e. Smokers getting 4-8 paid breaks a day while non smokers don’t?

    Like

    • lastDEconservative

      LOL, Arthur. You used the word yourself … pander. “A cuddly new baby … and you, you heartless (and probably stupid, selfish, and what’s the other one, M?) SOB, you don’t want to pay these “public servants” to sit home with their decision, I mean, child ? And you want to complain about the free dental for life, too?” “This is why we have to take your money by force; you wouldn’t redistribute it on your own.”

      Like

  5. lastDEconservative

    Sorry, above misplaced comment.

    So, Angos, “par for the course in Europe.” So it should be here, too. After all, European socialism is all the rage among the intelligentsia, and of course, has been. Only of late have enough of the American Wise come to realize that Scandinavian/European/Asian govt schooling (not education) is oh, so, much better. We can only hope that all the Bernie’s the country can muster will win their way into enough positions of power to tip that and the rest of the scales.

    Like

    • I didn’t say I completely agree with the European ways of doing things. I lived in Sweden for a couple years in the mid 90’s, I paid 40% taxes right off the bat for every hour I worked. And on top of that, every single item you bought had a 25% “value-added tax”. Sure, I got free health-care, but I wouldn’t say it was the greatest health-care in the world. It was pretty similar to here: long lines, waiting for hours, etc.

      Like

    • lastDEconservative

      Free is still free, right? That’s all that matters, is it not?

      Like

  6. Really? The question entirely should be: why is this not mandated for both corporate and public employees? Approaching $2 trillion alone in American corporate profits every 65 working days, there is plenty of money on hand to afford the millions of things we obligingly went without, so that shareholders of our employers could earn far more than they would have if we’d actually had what should have rightfully come to us….

    For those too young to remember, it used to be that corporate entities would pay every worker enough to keep his/her family surviving on one income…. The other stayed home. That simply was the price of labor. That price has tumbled. Now both partners need to work to keep a family “surviving”. All know: it is impossible on one income of what people are paid today, to take care of an entire family. Because of that now, it is necessary to give paid leave.

    When we see the educational damage that no paid-leave has put upon our impoverished preschoolers as they go through 5 years of neglect by both parents working for nothing other than keeping the three of them alive one more week, the cost to corporations of paid-leave is far less than the cost to society which has to scramble to pay for cleaning up a mess caused to too-low wages, that should have never occurred in the first place.

    So why don’t we force corporations to ante up and pay full leave for child bearing? Because some of that $2 trillion every 65 days goes to buy John Carney, Chris Coons, Tom Carper and the other 532 representatives working in the Capitol Building of Washington, DC…

    Giant money has less clout in state legislatures which is why this initiative should here go forward. State employees should get what our grandparents once had… the financial security to raise their children well. Once that becomes set in stone, we need to insure it becomes a universal right both private and public and that part of that $2 trillion currently sucked out of our economy every 65 working days, gets to stay here in the USA…

    Every problem we have from guns to education, is a direct result of allowing Republicans to game the system so you always have to always pay more… and corporations (who own our three US representatives) always get to pay less.

    That will continue as long as more than 30% of us continue to vote Republican… When we as a nation simply wake up, look around, see the damage our past habits have caused us; that is when our lives begin to improve and our children begin to have the hope most of us had growing up, that every year we’d be better off than the last because we are American.

    That should be the standard. Nothing else. Today we have so much money wasted by being siphoned into corporate profits…

    We could turn everything around completely in 5 years… (if you just wanted it bad enough)… But whenever you vote Republican… then obviously it is your fault. You don’t want it bad enough.

    But in the future, whenever any dork out there says…. “American private workers don’t get paid leave”, the correct answer is: “Why not? They make almost $2 trillion every 65 working days!”

    Liked by 1 person

    • lastDEconservative

      May have just figured it out. kavips is not one painfully ignorant, misguided soul. kavips must be at least a battalion strong in order to marshal THAT much misunderstanding about how this nation works (even though staggered).

      Like

    • lastDEconservative

      “They make almost $2 trillion every 65 working days!”

      And if the kavips regiments get their way, on the 66th day, America would fold, as all the money to fund the next day’s wages and raw materials of production and plant maintenance and office space rent payments, etc., etc., would be confiscated, redistributed to “worthy” causes … and the engine that powers all the ridiculous schemes it DOES carry while keeping on keeping on would grind to a halt. The goose would expire.

      Like

  7. Aren’t the state workers actually employed by the taxpayers? Why do they continue to reap better benefits than their employers, ie the taxpayers? I have three children. My husband and I worked hard and saved all that we could (no dinners out, no movies, no entertainment, etc.) so that we could survive for the time that I would not be paid. Why should my husband and I pay for someone else who fails (or doesn’t even try) to save for their own child? Enough is enough. We have not had a pay raise in years. We are paying much, much more for our health insurance. Our taxes have gone up. Prices of goods have gone up. We certainly do not have a pension (although we do invest in a 401K). And, now the state employees want more from our pocket? If a private business wants to offer paid leave in order to employ good help, that is their choice. But, to continue to force taxpayers to pay for more and larger perks and benefits is completely unreasonable.

    Like

    • lastDEconservative

      “But, to continue to force taxpayers to pay for more and larger perks and benefits is completely unreasonable.”

      Yep. Welcome to the new world order, developing apace through 100 years of dedicated, destructive progressivism. Self reliance, out. Personal responsibility, out. Vilification of the underpinning of the nation, check. Dedication to collapsing the system, check. Patron saint: Saul Alinsky (in latter days, kavips, Mike O., pandora, to name a few Kilroy denizens).

      Keep asking why you should pay for someone else’s choices, K. Turning the ship of state here in the People’s Republic of DE may be out of the question in our lifetimes, but maybe we can turn the direction enough that our kids and grands might survive and thrive. On their own merit, not out of the generous wisdom of such as kavips.

      Like

    • The logic of “I pay your salary” is actually circular. All who pay taxes pay for all things, so it could be argued that state employees are paying their own salaries in part. Those who are employed by businesses are paid by those who patronize those businesses, including those of us who also pay taxes which are used in part for state and federal employee salaries. I’d argue that the question isn’t “why should they get” but instead “why don’t we all get”.

      Also, please don’t make the mistake of assuming that no one but those who save are making sacrifices to have families. Including saving.

      Like

    • lastDEconservative

      ” … it could be argued that state employees are paying their own salaries in part.”

      I love it love it love it when a newbie flushes out the old guard commies among us! Thanks, K, for cogent, pointed arguments against the status quo that forces some of the destroyers to come out and attempt to refute and diminish and attack.

      The shame is that jax’s statement above will actually receive a nod of “understanding” from so many govt schooled (not educated) denizens of Delaware. I’m reminded again of the day I disabused our top Ctooge, Carper, who said in a business conference setting during which he extolled the virtues of the nascent OcommieCare, that he did not, in fact, pay 30% of his own health insurance cost, and that We the Makers in the room paid 100% of it, inasmuch as we paid 100% of his salary and benefits. Neither he, nor the majority of the Makers in the room had ever thought about that particular big lie.

      Like

    • K.

      Sorry to break it to you, but you and your husband are being exploited… Why is your boss paying you so low? Are you a bad worker? Have you been excessively written up? Or does he pay you so little so he can have more money for himself? Does he deserve all that money? Does he work harder than the two of you? Does he have to cut expenses at home to make ends meet like you do?

      No, Don’t blame state workers who do their job. Blame you boss. You’re his employee. Ask him why does he pay you so little? And why do you stick with it? You should be making $10,000 a year more? That is how much per person corporation profits have increases over 2008 levels, before the recession. Why aren’t you and your husband together not earning $20,000 more? Go on strike.. It’s what millionaires do when they don’t get their way…

      Bottom line, is that if you are really pinching as you say, you aren’t paying enough in state taxes to pay for anyone’s leave, … it is corporations making much, much more who would be… If you are really that concerned, have your legislator put up a bill that requires every Delawarean to have paid leave paid in full by their employer, money of which is earmarked to come out of their excess corporate profits…

      Just so you are aware, anyone who says: I don’t get benefits from my employer, how come you do from the state, needs to address the issue with their employer… Because not to long ago, corporate benefits were identical to the state. Society suffers when corporates stop paying what used to be accepted as their duty. It suffers doubly when you try to make states stop paying as well. Then the economy tailspins twice as fast….

      The more the rich lose in taxes, the better the middle class does… Raise their taxes a tiny bit, we do a tiny bit better. Raise their taxes sky high, we do sky high better too…

      The proof is from 1945 to 2000…

      ..

      Like

    • The traditional bargain for state employees was that you would forego the higher wages and more opportunity in the private sector, but in return you would have job security and more robust benefits including pension. That bargain was how you could attract better qualified people to state employment, instead of bottom-fishing for an ever-changing parade of lowest bidders to run our public services.

      But now, real wages in the private sector have not kept up and have shrunk dramatically, so the deal doesn’t look the same.

      Throwbacks like Lost DE Conservative will say: Fine, then cut state wages too! But in case you weren’t aware, the country is largely in agreement that wages are too low – all the Presidential candidates agree on that but differ only in their proposed remedies.

      Like

    • lastDEconservative

      It’s incredible that the legions of kavips and the mindless Mike O. could have been raised in the US and be so ignorant.

      Like

  8. With private business, you have the choice of patronizing them or not. Taxpayers do not get to choose whether or not they pay taxes. That is done by force or threat of force. Why don’t we all get?? Are you kidding me? Work for it. Don’t expect it to be handed to you just because you are. It would be much easier for my husband and I to save for our kids and their education if the government didn’t have its collective hand so deep in our pocket. The more money the government steals from the taxpayers, the less money (or work product) those taxpayers have to do with as they choose.

    Like

    • Wow. First, no, in today’s market we do not have the ability to patronize certain businesses. Especially not based on things like what they pay their employees and the health care. Think for a minute about what would be needed for that to happen.

      Furthermore, how much individually goes from your pocket to each person you’re claiming to be paying? Not much, since you’re paying for a lot of other things, too. Things I NEVER hear people complaining about paying for. Like roadwork. Or contracts to consultants doing the work the employees of the company could be doing. And keeping state and national parks open.

      Perhaps kavips could break down how much the average Delaware taxpayer actually spends annually in taxes on wages and benefits for the average state employee. Until we know, I’d say it probably isn’t that much, and we can stop claiming to be better than one another for that reason.

      Like

    • The largest employer in DE is the state government. Add to that municipal and county employees. And, then there would be Federal employees. All of their salaries and benefits are paid for by the taxpayers. How much does my individual pocket contribute to an individual worker. Probably not very much. However, it is the fact that my little tiny pocket has to contribute to so many individual pockets that makes my take home oh so small. The government should stick to what they were supposed to do. And, it should stop adding more and more things that it will do. They treat taxpayer money like it is an infinite resource, yet is it a very finite one.
      Want to know why so many school referendums fail? It is because they are the only time that the taxpayers have a chance to directly decide whether they want to pay more. Schools are actually being penalized because of the unchecked spending of so many other government programs.

      Like

    • I’d counter with voting being another way to send a message, but I gather by voting records that is either not very popular or not well-known as a way to send a message about taxation. At least in Delaware we pay lower taxes overall and aren’t taxed on shopping and food like other states.

      Like

    • Jax. Those non taxes we aren’t paying, the response is we don’t pay them YET. kavips and the state employees are just chomping at the bit to provide paid leave and where would the money come from? Yup, sales tax. Its coming to a democrat controlled Delaware near you, its just a matter of time.

      Like

  9. To the contrary, it’s hard for you to save for education because universities have become to act/behave like corporations, instead of the education institutions they are.

    Like

    • Just did a quick Google search. Assuming an average annual salary of $56,000 and a state employee caseload of 13,000 (which I think is insanely low but that’s what I found) the average taxpayer is spending $1.42 a year in salary for each individual state employee.

      Like

    • And it is hard to save for education because universities have been given a huge cash infusion from student loans and have not had any push back to lower costs. They then build swanky dorms and beautiful buildings. And they pay their staff much more than in the past. Imagine how much lower tuition would be if today’s students weren’t paying the pensions of professors and administrators who retired long before they even entered college. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hilary-gowins/college-out-of-reach-tuit_b_9384972.html

      Like

    • lastDEconservative

      Once again, John wrong, K right. The liberal/progressive/socialist cabal has long since wrecked the “institution” of higher learning, uh, just like they long since wrecked k-12. Both destructions have massive infusions of taxpayer takings (that’s money for the denizens) untethered from any expectation of results in common.

      And now comes the P word. A word of advice, K. Get out your asbestos undies. This lot really gets its back up about pensions and dental for life vis a vis our “public servants.”

      Like

  10. Elementary school classroom. 24 kids. 7.5 hours per day. 180 child/hours per day. 900 child/hrs/week. 32,400 child/hrs/year. Average babysitting rate in US is 2014 is $13.50 hr, just to sit and watch them play video games, never mind teaching them to read. Starting salary for a teacher is $38,000. Starting salary for a full time babysitter for just one child at $13.50 per hour is $27,000. You’re getting a bargain at $38,000. Thankfully there are people who work for other than just a paycheck.

    Like

    • lastDEconservative

      You know what, John, your argument actually works when you set aside any expectation of results in return for the $38,000 (or $60,000 more likely). And if you ignore the REST of the cost of the leviathan, the yawning abyss of which so many are forced to drop their children into 7.5 hours/day (soon to be 11, starting at birth). And if you pay no attention to the indoctrination the little ones are subjected to. And if you accept that for $38,000 (cough), having them learn the superiority of Islam, that self esteem trumps everything, feelings are paramount, that the world owes them … and so on and so on and shoobee doobee do wah.

      Like

    • Publius e decere

      Hoo boy … a babysitter costs $13.50 per hour so a teacher at $38,000 is a deal? This is a non-comparison.

      “Good” beer (not the kind Kilroy drinks) costs $1.00 per bottle. At 5% alcohol, the alcohol is therefore “worth” >$200/gallon. “So”, consider the market bulk price of $3.50/gallon … isn’t that a “deal”? Given the “proven” value of $200 per gallon, shouldn’t fuel blenders be willing to pay $10, $50, even $100/gallon for ethanol since the market value of $200 is proven?

      No. They will pay $3.50 per gallon. So let’s dispense with the truthy but irrelevant comparisons of babysitters and teachers.

      The market price of a teacher is $100,000 per year. $60,000-ish in salary plus $40,000-ish in benefits and fringes. Those with seniority plus degrees cost more, shorter-term and lesser-degreed teachers cost less. Shifting the pay level would have incremental (marginal) effects. The real issue is efficiency. A teacher with an average class size of 20 costs $5,000 per student. Class size of 10? Then $10,000 per student.

      The first reality is that class size has a cost which is rarely quantified when people start spouting off the “need”. The second reality is that at $5,000 per student for the teacher, where exactly is the other $7,000 per student being spent? My guess is that it is on substitutes, paras, “specials” and administritve overhead. In no particular order.

      Just to move from an average class size of 20 to 17 in a district of 10,000 students would cost $9 million per year — in teachers alone. If you were to scale the subs, paras, specials and admins then we’re talking about at least $15 million per year just to reduce class size by three students.

      The converse is true. Raise the average class size by a few students and save tens of millions.

      “More” is not the answer. “More effective” is the starting point for convincing the public of the merits.

      Publius

      Like

  11. Yeah, I’m really indoctrinated them with Algebra and Geometry. (holy cow…Algebra, an arabic word…heavens, how with the west survive). Your caricature is just that, an oversimplification of a complex situation that you don’t really want to understand. Quit reading Drudge. It’s embarrassing. You get what you pay for, by the way. Simple law of supply and demand. If you want to pay less than babysitter salary, expect a few babysitters…are all teachers excellent? No. Are all of them even good? No. Are there some that aren’t as good as other? Of course. I’m all for raising standards, and raising salaries to attract the very best. I’m also for the removal of the parochial oversight of professionals with multiple degrees, an evaluated internship, that is unlike any other profession with similar education. Imagine if your dentist had to submit to the kind of abuse teachers receive daily by people like you, because you don’t brush your teeth. But for the overwhelming majority who do this thankless job, be grateful that your property taxes are the 4th lowest in the country and that you get this pro bono work from all of us. The last time I checked, my former students are in med school, are engineers etc. We have the greatest nation on the planet because public school teacher have educated the overwhelming majority of its populace. You want to pretend that it’s in spite of our work. Pardon me, but you’re an idiot at times. Well, not really. But I think you enjoy playing one. An idiot with a great vocabulary. Wow. Your last sentence is really an embarrassment from a fellow conservative. You know about personal responsibility, and you certainly know the results of a lack of it. You know what a family is responsible for, and what the results are when a family doesn’t take that responsibility upon itself. Ask yourself, this…why is it that the very same problems you mention (feelings are paramount, world owes them etc…) are prevalent in graduates from private schools, charter schools, and in home-schooled children? And while your statement is full hyperbole, it is not, even in a limited sense, relegated only to public school graduates. I know many a spoiled private school students who believe the world owes him everything. That is called liberalism. Get a clue, especially with your moniker. And no, you aren’t the last. Become a teacher for a week. Walk into Kelly subs. It’s an easy thing to apply for. I dare you. You have no idea what we do.

    Like

    • lastDEconservative

      ” I’m also for the removal of the parochial oversight of professionals with multiple degrees, an evaluated internship, that is unlike any other profession with similar education. Imagine if your dentist had to submit to the kind of abuse teachers receive daily by people like you, because you don’t brush your teeth.”

      Sort of begs the “professional” question, does it not? I’m one (more rigorously educated probably), never paid a dollar in dues, never will, never got the same salary as 11,000 others, negotiated by a stranger in a limo, never got shielded from responsibility, nor from rules of productivity, have been fired for no good reason and without recourse provided by a versioin of said stranger in a limo …

      There’s a lot to be done. Come to the starting line, don’t slip in the middle of the race (argument). There is much we can agree on, but rise above the petty and see the whole picture.

      And those kids in the private schools — not my dime. Que sera, sera. Mine will be in charge, fully ready for the real world at my hand, not that of the leviathan.

      Like

  12. The typos are all mine…my secretary is on vacation.

    Like

  13. lastDEconservative

    Okay, that’s not bad.

    Like