Website Home   or   Forum Home

Register or log in (lost password?):

Username:
Password:

Remember me

Riverside Info » About Riverside

21. mr
    Member

    Another reason school administrators are paid so much is because of what we pay teachers. I know PE teachers who are paid $120,000 or more for 180 days of work. They get compensated for unused sick days, they retire at age 55. They have a lucrative pension program with guaranteed yearly increases.

    The salary of the highest paid teacher is the base for the administrators. Who would not agree that a school administrator has more responsibility than a PE teacher, guiidance counselor, art teacher? If we paid teachers less,a superintendent would not be worth as much.

    Posted Sunday Jan 30, 2011 17:28 #

22. spatny
    Member

    But then, of course, one might say - and many/some do - what is more important than teaching the kids who will come after us? So should a teacher who is tasked with teaching your kids be paid less than, say, an auto mechanic, who fixes your car? I think one can gauge the results of a teacher by what the students learn, how they test, their attitudes, etc. But what does the Supe have to do with that? A lot? A little? How?

    As for SS or unemployment, people paid into that/those funds. They did so with the undestanding that they would get benefits later if they qualified, needed - or maybe not needed - them, and of course if the money was still there. If it is deducted by the gov and used for something else, does the responsibility to pay go away? Or, for example, why should a young person who is 20 now and starting out and looking at deductions that are going to you - or me - want to do that? And if they decide not to do that, or we decide we can't now afford the payments that were promised when we hired them, can we just change our mind?

    When I was researching the Dam Removal issue, I spent hours going through the old newspapers - on film - from the 1950s. I saw where we just were hiring Riverside's 7th policeman in june of 1950. Today we are hiring the 19th, I think. The town is the same size in area, roughly the same population. Naturally costs are far greater now, per officer. I don't know about benefits, but I suspect those too. So with the same tax base each resident must now pay a great deal more for these services, even adjusted for inflation, becuase the number of officers is more than doubled. Andi t's the same across the board. So how do we - or rather you, cope.

    Aren't you glad i started this thread?

    Posted Sunday Jan 30, 2011 19:06 #

23. KimJ
    Member

    Interesting news about the pension system.

    Loophole allows superintendents to jump state lines to collect pensions along with six-figure salaries
    January 29, 2011|By Diane Rado and Duaa Eldeib, Tribune reporters

    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-01-29/news/ct-met-superintendent-pensions-20110129_1_public-school-pension-state-pension-pension-checks

    Posted Sunday Jan 30, 2011 22:03 #

24. mrt
    Member

    --but is social security constitutional? After all, it forces, mandates, all - or is it almost all since teachers apparently do not have it - to have it?

    I just read that the new health care law was ruled unconstitutional by a Florida federal judge (hey, recall FLorida in 2000?) because it forces all to have insurance. I thought that the health care law was similar to medicare and soc sec, and therefore would have the same constitutional grounding.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/us/01ruling.html?_r=1&hp

    talking about this decision is probably better served in the Health care thread that is already started. But my question on soc sec in this thread still stands.

    Posted Monday Jan 31, 2011 15:03 #

25. anonymous
    Member

    It probably isn't. The difference is, no one challenged it.

    Posted Monday Jan 31, 2011 17:27 #

26. mr
    Member

    I disagree with Mr. Spatney on the SS Security issue. This program was passed with the understanding that every one who paid would get something. It would not have passed otherwise. It never was sold as an income redistribution scheme. Starting ten years before you collect, you get an account statement that estimates what you are going to get. It is a compulsory program for both individual and employers. There are no choices. If this becomes just another income redistribution program, it will lose public support. With the money the worker and the employer paid, most people could buy an annuity that had their name on it. I do not believe most people know they have no right to the benefits. What politician has the guts to say that you have no guarantees with this program?. If they did, people would not want their money to go there. You could put your money in an insured bank account and have more.

    As for the constitutionality of SS, it apparently is so because it is a "tax" vs. a "premium" for an annuity. State employees were not forced into it because supposedly the states are "sovereign". The states can include their employees on a voluntary basis. Some state and municipal employees in Illinois do participate in Social Security.

    That is why the Obama administration has gone back and forth about calling the penalty for non compliance with the health care mandated purchase "tax" vs. "penalty". This supposedly is why the IRS is the agency that will review your insurance policy and decide whether it meets the standards of the health care law - because they want to call the penalty a tax.

    That's why, from a constituional perspective, the single payer is the only viable choice if you believe in national health care. Only providing everyone with the program via "taxes" will be deemed to be constitutional.

    Posted Monday Jan 31, 2011 18:00 #

27. mr
    Member

    Mr. Spatny, there are a lot of professions that serve the public good other than teaching. The Medical Profession is not as important? The whole system of commerce is facilitated by insurance and banking. These industries makes risk taking possible. What do you think of farming? We do need to eat, don't you agree?

    I worked for the Census this year. I saw all kinds of teachers applying for those positions who scored pretty low on the test. To get the minimum score of 70, you had to get 10 out of 28 correct. The people who corrected the tests wanted to write the school where they worked and report the score to their employer. The scores were appalling. This was not a tough test - basic map reading, word definition, math - knowing where to place a decimal, following instructions. I saw one Northwestern MBA that had a score in the low 70s. I saw someone that taught at a two year college that did not pass.

    One former policeman that I worked with felt that no one should teach until they were at least 50. Another one that I worked with said that Guidance Counselors never did a thing for her kids - she wondered if they were spending all of their time with other kids. If some of our teachers had worked in other professions prior to teaching, our students would be much better educated. Our citizens are financially illiterate - and that is why some people actually think educator salaries and pensions are appropriate and sustainable.

    Posted Monday Jan 31, 2011 18:16 #

28. spatny
    Member

    mr - Maybe I didn't explain my view. All - or at least most - professions are important. Before the advent of email the postman was a critical component of the financial profession, health care, etc. But we didn't think they were doctors. My wife has taught school - k-8, since the sixties. She stopped full time about 20 years ago but still occasionally subs in Riverside. She never made anything approaching what teachers get today, even corrected for inflation. I think there are poor performing teaches, cops, doctors, ministers, etc. And some good ones. I recently saw a program on the difference between U.S. education - k-8, and that in several other countries like France, Korea, etc. Korea had much longer schooldays, 12 months, etc. I think the number was every 3-4 years they gain an additional year of instruction vs. the U.S. Comparative testing shows we need "mo better." I have no idea how we do it. I think we should have more advanced vocational training, and as a nation we had better learn to produce things - not just consume them. If we don't have manufacturing that provides good jobs/incomes - our position will steadily erode.

    I just read where Egypt with 84 million has 40 million plus under 30. Indonesia is the fifth largest country in the world, population-wise. Given an equal chance at enlightenment - or job training - where do you think the growth will be?

    I'm watching an interesting series on DVD I got from the Library - "Commanding Heights - The Battle for the World Economy." An eye-opener. It may be on the PBS website.

    Posted Monday Jan 31, 2011 20:06 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.