Protests In Wisconsin

[AOEforme]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

What I am saying is that they are elected to serve all their constituents not just the majority that elected them. This means that they show up for their work at the assigned location and do their job. One does not flee their state because you want to protect your job. IMO this is not an acceptable practice. This goes for anyone who wishes to use this practice whether Republican or Democrat. I was being facetious in my remarks.

By that count, Republicans voting for the bill should be taking cpnsideration from all those in their constituency protesting, and vote no. Or vote "1/2 no, 1/2 yes".

In addition, showing up to the capitol building is not equal to doing their job. They aren't taking vacationing in Rockford, IL. They are doing their job by blocking the passage of the bill. By "not showing up to work", they have ensured that coverage of the bill will go on longer, and more pressure will be applied to those Republican voters who are wavering on passage of the bill. In addition, this gives more time for negotiation, so perhaps the collective barganing agreements can be changed.

Finally, how does fleeing the state protect their jobs? I'm hoping you are talking about the Texas Eleven here, because there is no way these senators are protecting their jobs by leaving the state. They are making a bold move to try and protect what the constituents desire.

[AOEforme]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

If I am not mistaken the Governor of WI is suggesting these cutbacks in order to keep from laying off teachers. The whole thing is that the Unions feel threatened. The hell with the kids that these teachers were hired to teach. It is all about the teacher and the power of the Union. I would fire them all and hire from the ranks of the numerous college grads who are underemployed/unemployed.

Please see the financial report linked above. There is no need to lay off teachers if other unnecessary programs pushed through in the last few weeks had not been pulled.

[ThetaDancer]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

If I am not mistaken the Governor of WI is suggesting these cutbacks in order to keep from laying off teachers. The whole thing is that the Unions feel threatened. The hell with the kids that these teachers were hired to teach. It is all about the teacher and the power of the Union. I would fire them all and hire from the ranks of the numerous college grads who are underemployed/unemployed.

You are, actually. He initially told us his alternative was dropping 200,000 kids from Meidcaid, but that's not exactly legal. He then acknowledged he "didn't check before making the statement."

According to the State's Fiscal Bureau, Wisconsin was actually supposed to have a surplus. Read the memo here.

Walker&Co then gave away hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks, effectively creating a crisis.

He then proposed taking away the rights of union workers and called it "budget repair," despite the obvious disconnect. I mean, if he wants to bust the unions he should just say that; instead, he's pretending it's about the budget.

[AOEforme]

Originally Posted by ThetaDancer

He then proposed taking away the rights of union workers and called it "budget repair" despite the obvious disconnect. I mean, if he wants to bust the unions he should just say that; instead, he's pretending it's about the budget.

Wasn't there an article about how someone proposed to keep the cut in benefits but allow for collective barganing and union dues to remain, and he shot them down, saying it wouldn't save the crisis?

I wish I could find that article: it really speaks to what is going on with this bill.

[Ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by AOEforme

Please see the financial report linked above. There is no need to lay off teachers if other unnecessary programs pushed through in the last few weeks had not been pulled.

I read the link and it addresses the fiscal year 2011. The projection is for a 3.6 billion budget shortfall for the next 2 years. Read this:

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/...n_state_budget#

[AOEforme]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

I read the link and it addresses the fiscal year 2011. The projection is for a 3.6 billion budget shortfall for the next 2 years. Read this:

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/...n_state_budget#

Correct. The budget shortfall is for the next 2 years, because of the additional $140 million/year in highway costs, $68 billion in employer benefits, and other programs Walker pushed through.

If he wanted to fix the fiscal crisis, he SHOULD NOT have caused it.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by AOEforme

Correct. The budget shortfall is for the next 2 years, because of the additional $140 million/year in highway costs, $68 billion in employer benefits, and other programs Walker pushed through.

If he wanted to fix the fiscal crisis, he SHOULD NOT have caused it.

It's the Republican way. The rich get richer, the middle class and poor get poorer. And then that same person will gripe about how other countries are beating us out in math and science test scores. Well of course, because you aren't going to attract the brightest and best to teaching jobs if you aren't paying them enough to live on.

[Ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by AGDee

It's the Republican way. The rich get richer, the middle class and poor get poorer. And then that same person will gripe about how other countries are beating us out in math and science test scores. Well of course, because you aren't going to attract the brightest and best to teaching jobs if you aren't paying them enough to live on.

A typical teacher in Milwaukee makes ~$60K in salary with another ~40K in benefits thrown in.

My daughter who teaches in NC makes ~$35K in salary and another $25K in benefits. She lives in one of the most expensive areas of NC which is very comparable to Milwaukee.

I have been to WI numerous times on business trips and the standard of living there vs. NC is not very different.

The teachers in WI are not the "poor" by any stretch of the imagination.

I suggest all those out there who say not enough taxes are taken from the "rich" make a pledge to file only 1040 EZ so they pay the maximum amount of taxes without the deductions offered on the long form. That way you can pay your fair share before you take from others. After that is done by the Gates, the Kennedy's, the Heinz-Kerry's, the Pelosi's, the Boxer's, the Huffington's, the Clinton's, the Gore's of the land I will no longer call them hypocrites. Don't tell me I am not paying enough when loopholes are there and used by these libs to their own benefit. Time for all these people to put their money where their mouth is. Maybe a check off box is needed on the forms that allows only the maximum taxes to be calculated and paid. This should help the poor and soothe the consciences of the liberals. But I bet nobody would check off the box.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

A typical teacher in Milwaukee makes ~$60K in salary with another ~40K in benefits thrown in.

This is wrong. The mean annual wage in Wisconsin for an Elementary School teacher is $51,240/year. (Bureau of Labor Statistics) For middle school it's $50,950, and for high school it's $54,720. Typical implies average, and mean and median refer to average, but the "typical" teacher is, in fact, not making "about $60,000."

In Milwaukee, specifically, according to Salary.com, the median wages for an elementary school teacher is $52,401/year. For high school it's $54,639. According to the BLS the mean for elementary is $56,370, for middle school is $52,610, and for high school is $54,620.

Also, these numbers are the MEANS and MEDIANS, meaning, there are people above and below these numbers because they don't account for experience, number of years teaching, educational background, etc. There sure are teachers making $60,000 a year - but they've been in that district for a while. While we're at it, the 10% and 25% marks run from $32,962 to $43,292, which is quite a bit less than $60,000. 90% tops out at $72,865, which is $12,000 more than $60,000.

ETA because I was curious: According to Salary.com the area with the most parity to Milwaukee in terms of cost of living in NC is the Charlotte area, which is 4.4% lower than Milwaukee. The median salary for an elementary school teacher in that area is $50,974, and for high school is $53,151.

If an elementary teacher making the median from Milwaukee (making $52,401 per year) were to move to Charlotte, NC, to make the median there ($50,974), according to the cost of living calculator on salary.com they would have a $22/year negative net change in disposable income.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

A typical teacher in Milwaukee makes ~$60K in salary with another ~40K in benefits thrown in.

My daughter who teaches in NC makes ~$35K in salary and another $25K in benefits. She lives in one of the most expensive areas of NC which is very comparable to Milwaukee.

It's really hard to use personal evidence and weigh it against statistics, since you have no idea what the "average" teacher tenure is in Milwaukee (maybe it's 20 years!), or what the educational requirements are (some districts still allow teachers to be licensed with just a BA, while others require one Master's and will increase your salary considerably if you get a second).

I'm not sure what they want--do they not want to pay more for their retirement and health benefits, or do they want to keep collective bargaining?

To the first, I say welcome to the real world. I pay considerably more than these people do towards my 401(k) and health care, and I have what are considered "excellent benefits" for the private sector. Also, the fact that you're still guaranteed a pension is nothing short of amazing. Its the complaints I've been hearing about this which is probably why they're not getting a whole ton of sympathy about this from the rest of the state and country.

To the second, I can see keeping collective bargaining. I'm union-neutral at best (probably just anti-union), but I understand how it can help public employees to some extent.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

I'm not sure what they want--do they not want to pay more for their retirement and health benefits, or do they want to keep collective bargaining?

To the first, I say welcome to the real world. I pay considerably more than these people do towards my 401(k) and health care, and I have what are considered "excellent benefits" for the private sector. Also, the fact that you're still guaranteed a pension is nothing short of amazing. Its the complaints I've been hearing about this which is probably why they're not getting a whole ton of sympathy about this from the rest of the state and country.

To the second, I can see keeping collective bargaining. I'm union-neutral at best (probably just anti-union), but I understand how it can help public employees to some extent.

I think it's both, but more the keeping collective bargaining at this point. Reports are that the Governor never even went to the unions for concessions in the first place (which is what some state governors are doing in order to fix their budget crises).

[Elephant Walk]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

If I am not mistaken the Governor of WI is suggesting these cutbacks in order to keep from laying off teachers. The whole thing is that the Unions feel threatened. The hell with the kids that these teachers were hired to teach. It is all about the teacher and the power of the Union. I would fire them all and hire from the ranks of the numerous college grads who are underemployed/unemployed.

This is traditionally what happens with unions (and no wonder it makes no sense to form a union). The unions begin to price themselves out of the market which results in a) layoffs or b) unprofitability which will ultimately result in layoffs...making the unions self-destructive at best. Now, the government doesn't have to worry about profitability, which means public debt is at stake.

[Ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by agzg

Also, these numbers are the MEANS and MEDIANS, meaning, there are people above and below these numbers because they don't account for experience, number of years teaching, educational background, etc. There sure are teachers making $60,000 a year - but they've been in that district for a while. While we're at it, the 10% and 25% marks run from $32,962 to $43,292, which is quite a bit less than $60,000. 90% tops out at $72,865, which is $12,000 more than $60,000.

ETA because I was curious: According to Salary.com the area with the most parity to Milwaukee in terms of cost of living in NC is the Charlotte area, which is 4.4% lower than Milwaukee. The median salary for an elementary school teacher in that area is $50,974, and for high school is $53,151.

If an elementary teacher making the median from Milwaukee (making $52,401 per year) were to move to Charlotte, NC, to make the median there ($50,974), according to the cost of living calculator on salary.com they would have a $22/year negative net change in disposable income.

I am sitting here doing my taxes for my daughter who is in her 4th year teaching High School and she made ~34K salary. So I know what I am talking about. Her salary has been frozen for all 4 years due to the NC budget crunch (with Dems in charge). She lives in the Charlotte area of which you compared means (usual average) and median (mid point of population). The little ~ means approximately. So if Milwaukee teachers in High School make 54K+ than I consider that the ~ neighborhood. The ~ 60K I gave as typical is probably within 3 standard deviations of the mean but I have not crunched the data. I will not use the term typical for semantics purposes again, but you get my point. They are certainly not poor as most would define poor.

[Ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by AOEforme

Correct. The budget shortfall is for the next 2 years, because of the additional $140 million/year in highway costs, $68 billion in employer benefits, and other programs Walker pushed through.

If he wanted to fix the fiscal crisis, he SHOULD NOT have caused it.

He caused this all by himself? He has been in office 6 weeks.

Are you sure about that $68 B number? I have not seen that one.

You do know who ultimately pays the taxes put on corporations or businesses don't you? They are passed on to the consumer through the price of the goods or services.

Cutting the tax burden on businesses ultimately allows them to better compete in the marketplace and may lead to lower prices and higher employment.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

I am sitting here doing my taxes for my daughter who is in her 4th year teaching High School and she made ~34K salary. So I know what I am talking about. Her salary has been frozen for all 4 years due to the NC budget crunch (with Dems in charge). She lives in the Charlotte area of which you compared means (usual average) and median (mid point of population). The little ~ means approximately. So if Milwaukee teachers in High School make 54K+ than I consider that the ~ neighborhood. The ~ 60K I gave as typical is probably within 3 standard deviations of the mean but I have not crunched the data. I will not use the term typical for semantics purposes again, but you get my point. They are certainly not poor as most would define poor.

I strongly suspect that the "median" or "average" tenure of a Milwaukee public school teacher is more than 4 years. You're comparing apples with ping-pong balls here, son.

As I said before:

"It's really hard to use personal evidence and weigh it against statistics, since you have no idea what the "average" teacher tenure is in Milwaukee (maybe it's 20 years!), or what the educational requirements are (some districts still allow teachers to be licensed with just a BA, while others require one Master's and will increase your salary considerably if you get a second)."