NationStates Jolt Archive

I, for one, am sick and tired of those high paid teachers. Their
hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work nine or ten months a year!
It's time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they
do...baby-sit! We can get that for less than minimum wage.
That's right...I would give them $3.00 dollars an hour and only the
hours they worked, not any of that silly planning time.
That would be 15 dollars a day.
Each parent should pay 15 dollars a day for these teachers to baby-sit
their children. Now, how many do they teach in a day.... maybe 25.

Then that's 15 X 25=$375 a day.
But remember they only work 180 days a year!
I'm not going to pay them for any vacations. Let's see...
*that's 375 x180=$67,500.00

(Hold on, my calculator must need batteries!)

What about those special teachers or the ones with master's degrees?
Well, we could pay them minimum wage just to be fair. Let's round


it off to $6.00 an hour. That would be $6 times 5 hours times 25



children times 180 days =$135,000.00 per year.

Wait a minute, there is something wrong here!!!

There sure is....

That would've been even funnier if I hadn't seen that like 4 years ago...

*claps*

very good! Took me a bit to figure out you weren't serious though. Not particularly bright today.

I, for one, am sick and tired of those high paid teachers. Their
hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work nine or ten months a year!
It's time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they
do...baby-sit! We can get that for less than minimum wage.
That's right...I would give them $3.00 dollars an hour and only the
hours they worked, not any of that silly planning time.
That would be 15 dollars a day.
Each parent should pay 15 dollars a day for these teachers to baby-sit
their children. Now, how many do they teach in a day.... maybe 25.

Then that's 15 X 25=$375 a day.
But remember they only work 180 days a year!
I'm not going to pay them for any vacations. Let's see...
*that's 375 x180=$67,500.00

(Hold on, my calculator must need batteries!)

What about those special teachers or the ones with master's degrees?
Well, we could pay them minimum wage just to be fair. Let's round


it off to $6.00 an hour. That would be $6 times 5 hours times 25



children times 180 days =$135,000.00 per year.

Wait a minute, there is something wrong here!!!

There sure is....

lets all realise that babysitters actually make more money than teachers

I appreciate it, although the idea that teachers are babysitters is just sad.

Although I like the idea of getting paid for each kid you teach. It's like combining babysitting jobs into a daycare! :p

A better solution to reduce education taxes would be to eliminate much of the school control at the federal and state level. Return it to local roots, where the schools have the best chance of running. If states and the feds helped at all, it should be giving vouchers to those who want to use them.

Teachers are NOT overpaid. Sure they get paid a fair amount (but not that much, my parents are teachers and get about 70 000 a year and that's after almost 30 years seniority), but you don't even know the kind of stuff they have to deal with. It's not just "babysitting", they are called TEACHERS for a reason, it's because they teach. They are psychologists, who often help in detecting learning disabilities (the primary teachers at least).

Also, I'm pretty sure you don't take 7 years of post secondary schooling just to become a babysitter. One reason they get paid so much because the more schooling you have, the more you get paid. Like the guy who makes the insoles for my feet. Those damn things were 400 dollars, and he probably only spent 3 or 4 hours at the most making them. It's because you are paying for his expertise.

I'm sorry but if you seriously think that teachers just babysit than you are an ignorant asshole and oughta become a teacher's assistant just so you can see what it's like.

...Jerk.

I'd rather see teachers paid as much as doctors, or perhaps more. Teachers spend more time raising children than the parents do. Their influence often ends up being more fundamental to the kids than that of the parents. Teachers do so much more than teach.

Dude--I think Katganistan was making a point in favor of teachers. You know, like saying they're a touch underpaid for the work they do?

Edit: this was for Euro Disneyland

I have a good friend who teaches middle and high school.
He's been teaching in the city I live for about ten years.
Only recently, is he making enough money to buy a house and take the ocassional vacation.
Keep in mind that the district I live in is one of the highest paid districts in the state.
He still makes less than 35k a year.

About the same as a paramedic, or Firefighter, or policeman.


Yet, look at how much money we pay people to play sports.

Something wrong with this picture?

Well, I've got little issue with the amount of money that team owners pay their athletes--I have great issue with taxpayers footing the bill for arenas for professional teams, but that's another discussion altogether.

But teachers ought to be paid more than they are, certainly. I'll tell you one major improvement that would take place if teachers were paid more--you'd get a more intelligent quality of person going into the profession. No insult to your friend Squatch--I'm sure he's an intelligent guy--but when I taught college English as a grad student, my worst students--no exceptions, even worse than the athletes and the marketing students--were education majors. Dumb as rocks. It was sad.

But if you're smart enough to go to law school or med school or become an engineer and make 3 times what a teacher makes, why not do it? The only exceptions to the dumb teacher rule I've ever found--and this includes meeting my daughter's teachers over the years--are people who got degrees in their specialties and then later went back and got certified to teach. They generally had their shit together.

Dude--I think Katganistan was making a point in favor of teachers. You know, like saying they're a touch underpaid for the work they do?

Edit: this was for Euro Disneyland

Given that Katganistan is a teacher IRL, that's a pretty safe bet ;)

Ah--didn't know that.

Ah--didn't know that.

Yes she is and we've had many conversation on IRC and I'd say from what I could tell, a damn fine teacher at that.

Teaching is one of if not the most nobel professions on the planet. Yet, they get treated like garbage by our governments. Who pays the price? Our children. It's nice to know though that there are teachers out there like Kat, she is a credit to her profession.

Those who can't, teach. those who can, do.

But if you're smart enough to go to law school or med school or become an engineer and make 3 times what a teacher makes, why not do it? The only exceptions to the dumb teacher rule I've ever found--and this includes meeting my daughter's teachers over the years--are people who got degrees in their specialties and then later went back and got certified to teach. They generally had their shit together.

Well, I don't think that is the only exception. While you may be right about a vast majority of education major being stupid, I doubt every single one of them is. I'm intelligent enough to get into law school, but I don't want to be a lawyer, I want to be a teacher. Therefore I'm an education major. I think it's unfair to generalize in such a manner.

Those who can't, teach. those who can, do.

Okay, that's just asinine. Some of us want to become teachers to make a difference in the lives of children, because there is a lack of qualified teachers -- not because we can't do anything else.

Well, I don't think that is the only exception. While you may be right about a vast majority of education major being stupid, I doubt every single one of them is. I'm intelligent enough to get into law school, but I don't want to be a lawyer, I want to be a teacher. Therefore I'm an education major. I think it's unfair to generalize in such a manner.



Okay, that's just asinine. Some of us want to become teachers to make a difference in the lives of children, because there is a lack of qualified teachers -- not because we can't do anything else.

Nice post, but you might not want to let your students know you use the name "Sexy-Ass-Bitches" on the net.. LOL

I'm just teasing you ;)

Those who can't, teach. those who can, do.
and those who can't teach, teach gym.

Don't jump on me.. I just thought it was funny, and sadly, it is sort of true in public schools because they are so under-funded

That would've been even funnier if I hadn't seen that like 4 years ago...
at that time you were 4, according to your own words.

Teachers are NOT overpaid. Sure they get paid a fair amount (but not that much, my parents are teachers and get about 70 000 a year and that's after almost 30 years seniority), but you don't even know the kind of stuff they have to deal with. It's not just "babysitting", they are called TEACHERS for a reason, it's because they teach. They are psychologists, who often help in detecting learning disabilities (the primary teachers at least).

Also, I'm pretty sure you don't take 7 years of post secondary schooling just to become a babysitter. One reason they get paid so much because the more schooling you have, the more you get paid. Like the guy who makes the insoles for my feet. Those damn things were 400 dollars, and he probably only spent 3 or 4 hours at the most making them. It's because you are paying for his expertise.

I'm sorry but if you seriously think that teachers just babysit than you are an ignorant asshole and oughta become a teacher's assistant just so you can see what it's like.

...Jerk.
You're too funny. You know, Katganistan's actually a teacher herself. Jerk.

A better solution to reduce education taxes would be to eliminate much of the school control at the federal and state level. Return it to local roots, where the schools have the best chance of running. If states and the feds helped at all, it should be giving vouchers to those who want to use them.

Wow, I agree with Euclid on something (except for the vouchers).

This disturbs me, but I'm not sure why.

Oops, didn't notice that Steph had already pointed that out. *whistles innocently away*

Those who can't, teach. those who can, do.

And those who can do neither surround themselves with pithy cliches that are as stupid as they are offensive.

I have a good friend who teaches middle and high school.
He's been teaching in the city I live for about ten years.
Only recently, is he making enough money to buy a house and take the ocassional vacation.
Keep in mind that the district I live in is one of the highest paid districts in the state.
He still makes less than 35k a year.

About the same as a paramedic, or Firefighter, or policeman.


Yet, look at how much money we pay people to play sports.

Something wrong with this picture?

YEs teachers are underpaid. No argument. Although I can still think of a couple of teachers in high school that were propbably overpaid given how bad they were.... but that is another story.

However, as much as I agree that athelete salaries are rediculous in some sports, I also have to note another simple fact. No matter how good a programmer I am, I have yet to be able to convince 30,000 people to sit in a stadium at $50 per seat to watch me code. I tried. Couldn't sell the tickets. I also approched the networks about carrying it as a program to generate money by selling ad slots. They turned me down too. Smart of them I would imagine. And nor have the specialized jerseys with "Zeppo!" emblazoned across the back with that cool penguin logo on the chest been a particularly hot seller either.

Fact is - atheletes in certain sports earn a very good living. They do that by generating interest in their skills, putting butts in seats, and generating revenue.

As long as people will pay $100 to sit closer to the game, then the atheletes deserve their share. Because the other option is that the owner takes it all instead, and that would be an even dumber way of doing things.

-Z-

YEs teachers are underpaid. No argument. Although I can still think of a couple of teachers in high school that were propbably overpaid given how bad they were.... but that is another story.

However, as much as I agree that athelete salaries are rediculous in some sports, I also have to note another simple fact. No matter how good a programmer I am, I have yet to be able to convince 30,000 people to sit in a stadium at $50 per seat to watch me code. I tried. Couldn't sell the tickets. I also approched the networks about carrying it as a program to generate money by selling ad slots. They turned me down too. Smart of them I would imagine. And nor have the specialized jerseys with "Zeppo!" emblazoned across the back with that cool penguin logo on the chest been a particularly hot seller either.

Fact is - atheletes in certain sports earn a very good living. They do that by generating interest in their skills, putting butts in seats, and generating revenue.

As long as people will pay $100 to sit closer to the game, then the atheletes deserve their share. Because the other option is that the owner takes it all instead, and that would be an even dumber way of doing things.

-Z-

Obviously you're just not trying hard enough, Zep. Look at Bill Gates. He's got the whole world watching him code...

Obviously you're just not trying hard enough, Zep. Look at Bill Gates. He's got the whole world watching him code...


I frankly doubt that Bill could program a "Hello World" app anymore.... lol. But he DOES have the whole world buying the code that his staff produces. In his case, he is the team owner though, not the player.

A better solution to reduce education taxes would be to eliminate much of the school control at the federal and state level. Return it to local roots, where the schools have the best chance of running. If states and the feds helped at all, it should be giving vouchers to those who want to use them.

I don't agree with this. I'm assuming returning control to the local level means back to the cities, counties, and the people in the area. You expect everyone basically to pay for their own education all the way?

The reason we have federal and state support (and sometimes unfortunately control) is that the money isn't distributed evenly. So local control would mean some districts would have tons of money, while others couldn't even afford to pay their teachers or keep the school open.

A lot of the money problems are still occurring at the local level. Wealthy school districts raise a LOT more money through their PTSA and grants than poor school districts can. And all that money goes into school improvements. They can get the same fed and state funding, but still be better off because their local population is better off.

I agree that schools have the best chance of succeeding without all the restrictions imposed on them by the feds and the state. But you can't take away all restrictions, as it is possible for schools to be run poorly, even if the locals had control. There needs to be some way to ensure good schools.

I frankly doubt that Bill could program a "Hello World" app anymore.... lol. But he DOES have the whole world buying the code that his staff produces. In his case, he is the team owner though, not the player.

Okay, true enough. Maybe if you added some flaming hoops to your coding session and got John Williams to write a score?

I personaly was homeschooled but my mother taught colleage part time and before she had gotten married she worked full time at highschool and two students who had eight kids weren't married and lived of food stamps had better stuff then her because they didn't have to pay for food. she was worse off andshe had a masters (Now she has a Phd but shonly had a master and that is and extra 4 years of school).

Okay, true enough. Maybe if you added some flaming hoops to your coding session and got John Williams to write a score?



Hmmmmmmmmmm.... you might be on to something.

lol

I personaly was homeschooled but my mother taught colleage part time and before she had gotten married she worked full time at highschool and two students who had eight kids weren't married and lived of food stamps had better stuff then her because they didn't have to pay for food. she was worse off andshe had a masters (Now she has a Phd but shonly had a master and that is and extra 4 years of school).Nothing personal, but you realize that this post isn't making the best possible argument for home schooling, right?

Nice post, but you might not want to let your students know you use the name "Sexy-Ass-Bitches" on the net.. LOL

I'm just teasing you ;)

Ha ha!! Thanks, Steph!

Wow, I agree with Euclid on something (except for the vouchers).

This disturbs me, but I'm not sure why.
Is it because you are now hopelessly caught in conservative clutches?
MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't agree with this. I'm assuming returning control to the local level means back to the cities, counties, and the people in the area. You expect everyone basically to pay for their own education all the way?

The reason we have federal and state support (and sometimes unfortunately control) is that the money isn't distributed evenly. So local control would mean some districts would have tons of money, while others couldn't even afford to pay their teachers or keep the school open.

A lot of the money problems are still occurring at the local level. Wealthy school districts raise a LOT more money through their PTSA and grants than poor school districts can. And all that money goes into school improvements. They can get the same fed and state funding, but still be better off because their local population is better off.

I agree that schools have the best chance of succeeding without all the restrictions imposed on them by the feds and the state. But you can't take away all restrictions, as it is possible for schools to be run poorly, even if the locals had control. There needs to be some way to ensure good schools.
I didn't necessarily say return all funding to district levels. Rather, have most of the education bureaocracy controlled by a commissioner chosen at a county/parish level. Demographically, there are usually pockets of high property values in most every county. Besides, some inter-county coordination of resources wouldn't be bad. Just as long as it isn't the bloated system it is now.

Belated thanks to Steph, Matsu and Incertonia for leaping to my defense -- actually that was sent to me by one of my colleagues to remind me of the importance of what we do and how undervalued it is.

I've been educated for twenty two of the years I have been on this planet; that's compulsory ed, plus undergrad, plus two masters' worth of grad school.

I worked for Clear Channel and Katz Media for seven years -- and found having my own office and making money for television advertisers not terribly satisfying: morally, creatively, or just plain intelligence-wise. So I took a massive cut in pay, went back to school on my own dime, and became a teacher.

Those who can't, teach. those who can, do.

Yes. Those who can't think about themselves instead of others, teach. Those who can be smug, selfish, and insulting, do.

To give you an idea of how many students I typically deal with in a year, I teach five classes of 34 students per term.

I once figured out how many papers per term I need to grade...

Each marking period: three essays per child, plus 30 homeworks
This means 5610 papers per term.
I try to give a quiz at least twice a week.... so add in, conservatively, another 1700 papers for a total of 7310 papers a term. (Quizzes are typically VERY brief -- three to five questions, so I don't count them as a full paper.)

There are two terms in a year, so I must grade 14,620 papers MINIMUM a year.

Given an average of a very rushed five minutes per paper? (and I generally spend more time than that) that is an additional 1213.33 hours of work I need do on preps, and at home evenings and weekends.

For those of you who think a teacher's job is easy -- SHAME!!!