A real middle class bailout

[bigbadberry3]

Temporary band-aid but it's still better than nothing

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100810/ap_ ... _jobs_bill

States really need to start working on their books because this should not be considered a regular source of income for state budgets.

[wingFeather]

What's a few billion & trillion thrown here & there - we'll just print more money

[Cold_Zero]

I do not want to get into state funding for Education, as Indiana's methodology is really messed up. There is a reason why my daughter is going to private school.
I really hope this is a sarcastic title. I fail to see how bailing out states is a Middle Class bailout.

[bigbadberry3]

I was actually serious about it.

The bill is in theory paid for by taxes of corporations and the money is going towards middle class occupations. I already see it better than the "Too big to fail bailout."

[Cold_Zero]

Who do you think work for corporations? ME the middle class. The President, the Speaker and the Senate Majority Leader, as well as Senator Harkin were NOT interested in saving 1,600 middle class call center jobs in Panama City and Killeen (and the other 1,600 jobs across the country for my corporation alone) when they passed the Health Insurance 'reform' bill. A bill that ended the FFELP student loan program.
Jeez if you can see this as a re-election gimmick (pandering to the NEA and state teacher unions) you need to open your eyes.

[bigbadberry3]

Me and you are different constiuents here as this bail out will affect many of my friends and potentially myself as I'm in the education field.

You're going to have to offer me some links or something as I'm not aware of your particular circumstances. But the bill was interested in saving 300,000 teachers jobs and 150,000 law enforcement positions.

Regardless, I see this bill helping middle class americans even though it's less than 1% of them.

[Cold_Zero]

I was referring to last April's 'Health Care Bill' when talking about the layoffs at my company. Oh and I have skin in the game:
My wife
My father
My mother in law
My sister in law and two brother in laws
My sister
are all teachers and I still think this is a gimmick.

[bigbadberry3]

So if you have that much skin in the game you probably have an idea about how bad the public school funds are about now, unless they are all private schools.

[Cold_Zero]

Only my daughter attends a private/religious school. All family members are public (union) teachers, with only my sister and wife teaching in the inner city. I know that there are real problems in education with neither the democrats with their pandering and trying to throw money at the problem nor the republicans trying to thwart collective bargaining and establish vouchers having any real answers.

[bigbadberry3]

So I'm sure that you're aware of the budget slashing everywhere? Yes this package will help but it won't save them all, as it shouldn't as all of america is being downsized.

[stebo0728]

This was less about teachers and more about unions, it just so happened that it was teachers unions.

[Cold_Zero]

Here is my issue with this 26 Billion dollar states bailout. It will save these (union) jobs for what? A year? And when this money has to be paid back it not only will eliminate the jobs, but eliminate the chance for the capital to be used productively in the economy (because it has to come from somewhere). You saw that the BLS release numbers that said we were less productive than we have been (I have my own theories on this).

States are all too happy having the Federal Government pay for these types of budgetary items because they know they (states) wont have to jack up taxes to pay for it. So they not only get the benefit of having the Education or Emergency Services line items funded, but they dont have to be the bearer of bad news when taxes go up. Also, almost half of state and local Democrat delegates are union members and this is nothing but a gimmick to charge their base. If they were really interested in jobs, they would stop killing domestic jobs. The Democrats are more worried about not getting slaughtered in the mid term election than they are actually fixing the problems that this country faces. And by the way, I am in no way against labor unions (maybe the NEA) but not necessarily the local/state teachers unions.

To me, it is not worth mortgaging my daughter's or her kid's futures on a stop gap measure. When this President took office this country way 1 Trillion dollars in debt (not counting the Medicare, Medicaid and SSI) and now we are 4 Trillion dollars in the whole? Let's all work towards fixing our economic problems with real and lasting chagne.

[stebo0728]

This whole notion of "economic stimulation" sorta reminds me of making homemade pancakes. Too thin, add some more flour ... ahh shoot to thick now add a bit more milk ... ah f*ck it, wheres the bisquick?!?

[wingFeather]

you probably have an idea about how bad the public school funds are about now

Throwing more money at a broken system is not going to fix it. The system itself must be changed. A good start would be to get rid of the unions, limit administration salaries and computer purchases. Do kids really need new overpriced Macs each year?

[Cold_Zero]

Being well versed in the issues of Education.
1. Eliminating the Unions will not by itself fix the educational system. Taking away teachers' right to collective bargaining is tad amount to saying that you can't in an interview negotiate the best terms for your salary.
2. This is interesting as my wife's Superintendant gets a clothing allowance, a personal driver, and a cell phone allowance on top of his normal compensation. He actually had the gall to say that the teachers should forego a retroactive merit increase (.5%, .5% and 1% over three years) because the school system was simply out of money.
3. In a lot of cases these computers, like the snazzy Macs you refer to, are bought with grant money. Money that is either provided from the private sector (corporations) or from Federal funding. Why do school age kids need expensive Macs while the teachers roll with antiquated PC from 2002?? I have never understood that rationale.

But to be honest, these answers are still gimmicks. Until you can get true accountability from the Parents (thought I would say the schools or the teachers?) and get them actively involved with their child’s education, you can not hope to fix any of our problems with year round school schedules, vouchers, eliminating the teachers unions, No Child Left Behind or any of the other gimmicks floated by the Politicians who have never spent a day in a classroom. And in our state, I think the Public Schools are setup to fail by the stupid funding practices of the state, so that publich schools can be the 'whipping boy' for attempts of a voucher system.

[bigbadberry3]

I think most of you are trying to attack teacher unions as bad things only because you've heard that they are bad. Would you please substantiate these claims?

My understanding of this 26 billion was that it does not have to be paid back it is going to be covered by new taxes on corporations. If I'm wrong here let me know.

I don't think it's just the Dems not being able to create jobs I think they are hitting some road blocks, AKA the party of no, along the way. If people want jobs saved, more than likely there are going to be some eggs breaking.

[Cold_Zero]

I personally dont think that the teachers unions (locals) are bad, especially since my father use to be the president of his local. He worked hand and hand with administrators and teachers to be sensible in the day to day affairs of the school. I must say there are a lot of administrators that are idiots and try to pull stupid crap against the contract. Pure and simple attacking the teachers unions is a game. Republicans go after and attack the teachers unions because their members are the base of the Democrat Party. Democrats do the same thing by attacking the idea of vouchers, charter schools and private schools because the base of the Republican Party believe in these things.
Now the NEA, I don’t see any redeeming quality of that organization. The organization is dominated by California and New York representatives at the national convention that want to be the lap dog for the Democrat Party. I don’t understand why the NEA comes out and makes favorable statements on social or political issues like Illegal Immigration and Abortion when these issues are really not educational issues at their core and seem to be counter intuitive to support from the teachers’ perspective.

[stebo0728]

Being well versed in the issues of Education.
1. Eliminating the Unions will not by itself fix the educational system. Taking away teachers' right to collective bargaining is tad amount to saying that you can't in an interview negotiate the best terms for your salary.

Good point, however, teachers unions have been given a say in more than just salaries and benefits, they are involved in curriculum decisions, discipline policies, and other areas that have nothing to do with collective bargaining.

But to be honest, these answers are still gimmicks. Until you can get true accountability from the Parents (thought I would say the schools or the teachers?) and get them actively involved with their child’s education, you can not hope to fix any of our problems with year round school schedules, vouchers, eliminating the teachers unions, No Child Left Behind or any of the other gimmicks floated by the Politicians who have never spent a day in a classroom. And in our state, I think the Public Schools are setup to fail by the stupid funding practices of the state, so that publich schools can be the 'whipping boy' for attempts of a voucher system.

Parents have relegated school to no more than daycare so they can work (or play as the case may be). I agree that as long as parents are uninvolved, we wont get much further in this area. And school choice wont make much difference if unattentive parents dont really give a crap where their kids go as long as its somewhere besides home. I think if you did the study of other nations, youd find that school choice, and competitive education played a good role, but you would also find a larger parental involvement, and that needs to happen here as well. But heres the thing, what do you do when a 5th grader is suddenly better educated than his parents? Sure a good parent will encourage their children to exceed them, but it has to be hard to be completely supportive when u cant understand the subject matter coming home every day.

Ive debated fiercely for school choice, a system where the funding follows the child rather than the child following the funding. My youngest that is in school just started pre-K, and the program he is in is funded by our state lottery. I found the pre-K program I wanted him to attend, enrolled him, and the funding followed. How hard is that to emulate with the rest of the educational system? Its not

[Cold_Zero]

BBB,
I hope that this is not true.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08 ... nd-m-jobs/
Raiding foodstamp programs to pay for this? I can see why people would be outraged.

[bigbadberry3]

I agree. Accountability is the underlying factor but it is an extremely hard factor to judge.

When unions stay focused on their field, e.g. teacher unions working on education matters, I would support them. I also agree when the NEA goes out and talks about matters outside of its focus it has over stepped its bounds no doubt.

I think the main budgetary issue is pensions and that they are really the ticking time bomb here but everyone has the mentality that they have plenty of time before the checks have to be written and unfortunately that's not the case.

I just read over the foxnews link. Food stamps won't disappear immediately but will be reduced by about 60 dollars when 2014 comes around. Not nearly as dire as they title states.

[Cold_Zero]

Being well versed in the issues of Education.
1. Eliminating the Unions will not by itself fix the educational system. Taking away teachers' right to collective bargaining is tad amount to saying that you can't in an interview negotiate the best terms for your salary.

Good point, however, teachers unions have been given a say in more than just salaries and benefits, they are involved in curriculum decisions, discipline policies, and other areas that have nothing to do with collective bargaining.

Why wouldn't they have a part in this process? They represent the teachers or are you implying that the teachers should have no say/input in the process?

what do you do when a 5th grader is suddenly better educated than his parents? Sure a good parent will encourage their children to exceed them, but it has to be hard to be completely supportive when u cant understand the subject matter coming home every day.

I am not seening the issue here. That is why we have teachers, counselor, tutors and learning centers.

Ive debated fiercely for school choice, a system where the funding follows the child rather than the child following the funding. My youngest that is in school just started pre-K, and the program he is in is funded by our state lottery. I found the pre-K program I wanted him to attend, enrolled him, and the funding followed. How hard is that to emulate with the rest of the educational system? Its not

Because the whole policy is predicated on eliminating a political party's base. While I am not against school choice or vouchers, it is not the be all/end all resolution to our educational problems. And to be honest, I pay twice in the whole grand scheme of things. I pay my property taxes to the state to fund public education and pay my daughter's tuition out of my pocket. I am really not looking for a handout or even my money back.

[Cold_Zero]

I think the main budgetary issue is pensions and that they are really the ticking time bomb here but everyone has the mentality that they have plenty of time before the checks have to be written and unfortunately that's not the case.

To be honest guys, this really is a states issue. Each state is different and I don't think that the Federal Government can resolve the issue by applying what is good for California on to other states (to use an example). Lack of solvency regarding the teachers' pension funds was a big issue here in Indiana because the Legislature had borrowed against it for years. And when teachers retired they were being told, "tough luck." What made the teachers’ pension fund solvent was our Governor leasing he toll road and putting part of the proceeds back into the fund. While Indiana may have had this issue, some states like Pennsylvania have a very solvent pension fund that they actually makes money for the fund.

[AZhitman]

Quick comment on this:

Here in AZ, the techers' unions are screaming and flailing to protect the jobs of a bunch of teachers who are not being cut exclusively because of the budget shortfall - they're being cut because the enrollment numbers don't support their retention.

When student enrollment decreases, it stands to reason that teacher positions be cut to maintain an established teacher:student ratio. Their opposition to the "natural order" of things is absurd. If you wanted a guaranteed position, maybe teaching wasn't the best choice of careers - or maybe you should be willing to relocate to a place where the ratio is more favorable.

Another comment on teachers unions - Do you have any idea how HARD it is to "get rid of" a bad teacher? Any other industry, many of these people would be shown the door.

[stebo0728]

Why wouldn't they have a part in this process? They represent the teachers or are you implying that the teachers should have no say/input in the process?

Unions are for arbitrating employee <-> employer relations. Curriculum and discipline policies more teacher <-> parent <-> student relations.

Its typically hard to get rid of ANY union employee, and even worse when affirmative action is at play.

[Cold_Zero]

To be honest, the curriculum is made at a state level and handed down to localities. Unions get involved at that level because they represent a key stake holder. Why the other key stake holders aren't a part of this process? Not sure.

AZ,
So you are asking why it is so hard to get rid of a teacher because the Administrators dont follow the rules (contract?) Not a clue. I know that typically if they (administrators) follow the 'rules' it is a whole lot easier than not following them. But I am sure what administrators are driving at, when they belly ache about this, is that they dont have sole dictatorial power to fire people at their discretion.

It took a year to get ride of the Art teacher in my wife's building. She was placed on an action plan by the Principal and the IEA Rep. She was told what she had to do to improve and what she could not do according to the curriculum. When she didnt meet her plan she was removed from her position. Now what I dont understand is why she was allowed to keep her pay and substitute in the district? Not sure. Sounds like the district agreed to something they should not have in the contract.