Discussion in 'Debate & Marathon Threads Archive' started by John Lee, Oct 27, 2012.
Nov 4, 2012
Did I say anything bad about them?
If anyone, cops and firefighters do deserve everything they can get, because their lives can be over at any given moment.
It's interesting that I hear from so many people here on the boards that there is such a negative attitude towards teachers (and I believe it) but I have never met anyone with that kind of attitude. It may have to do with the people I surround myself with. But - naively - I still don't get why would anyone attack teachers and blame them for anything?
In regards to 30:
It's adding a quarter percent onto the sales tax.. that amounts to adding a penny occasionally to your purchases.
I don't understand why anybody who makes below 250k would oppose that.. it's not like it's costing you much more unless you're making a large purchase.
Public safety retirement is a whole other problem. Unless you want cops and firefighters working into their sixties, you need a low retirement age.
If you ask me, the main problem is that contributions in all sectors of public employment are too low. The fact is that people live longer. But many politicians view the remedy to that issue as raising the retirement age. That is not the answer, however, because just because people live longer doesn't mean they can work longer. Especially in jobs like law enforcement, firefighting, and teaching.
It's easy for someone who sits behind a desk all day to say that people can work until they're 70. But for any job that requires a heightened level of alertness and mobility (and that means us), there needs to be some flexibility in retirement age. In order to have that flexibility, the contribution needs to be higher.
Many that we know are buying second homes, Mercedes, airplanes.
I don't think many California teachers are buying airplanes. Some might be because some teachers are rich because their spouse has a very high salary. Most are not in this situation.
State retirement requires that at least half of the money into the system is paid by teachers out of their pay checks. This is their money and shouldn't it be there when they retire plus the amount that the stock market goes up? (the stock market has gone up from 2,000 to over 13,000 in the last 25 years.) Only the match is a cost to the taxpayers. Spend 10 years in the classroom and see if you feel your overpaid or your benefits are too high. I highly doubt it.
I don't know about you, but when I signed on, they handed everyone a sheet allowing you to opt-out of donating portions of your paycheck for union political reasons and allowed you to redirect it to a charity instead.
And it's not "non-contract" if they require you to do it within your contract.
I've heard many radio ads recently talking about the "evil teachers unions" and raging about how "evil teachers" are able to get away with everything from molesting children to failing their children.
It's not just talked about, it's advertised.
I've heard many try to make the distinction about how they don't hate teachers but they do hate teacher's unions for trying to get involved with politics, and then turn around and sneer about how much vacation time we get and how we are in salaried positions.
I am around a lot of republicans because of my family though.
Some of the people I am referring to are teachers. They own second homes or condos or rentals. The police and firemen are doing very well; retiring at 50 on 100,000 or more. They live very well, especially if they had an upper level position. It's very expensive for us to keep funding such generous pensions, imo. I am almost positive that LA unified, largest school district in CA, has given retired employess and their families lifetime health benefits. It's very expensive. In CA, it is a fact, that our financial obligations are more than we are bringing in. And mounting.
Yes, we love the people and what they do for us, but I do resent the pension burdens that are mounting up here in CA. That is from professions that I previously listed, not as much the teachers. This observation isn't really aimed at anyone, just stating a fact. If we don't pass this tax (it will pass, imo) who will pay for it? EDUCATION, AGAIN...
In an interview for a volunteer position at a hospital I was asked by the hiring manager, "What do you want to be?" I replied, "I would like to be a teacher." She gave me this look like what a stupid choice. She had said after, "Why do you want to be a teacher." I could tell she doesn't like teachers.
Nov 5, 2012
"Non-contract" spending means all spending the union does that is not directly related to my work contract. That amounted to $421 last year.
As far as the check box, you don't honestly believe that matters do you? I checked the box and I have zero doubt that my $421 that were "pulled" from the non-contract pool were simply replaced by someone else's extra $421 that was. That money is NOT refunded to you unless you resign your membership from the union. It still goes into the union kitty.
As far as the "1/4 cent is nothing comment" goes, then why not 1/2 cent? Why not 3/4? I mean, it's not like it would matter right? The point isn't the amount. The point is what is done with that money.
Do people generally tend to vote for the thing that will specifically help them, even if it isn't in the overall best interests? For example, I saw how there was some measure that porn stars are fighting for/against. In that measure, I'm sure there is a sensible opposing side. Do specific people (in this case porn stars) simply tend to vote their "side", figuring everyone else (not part of their group) will vote the other way, thereby thinking they should vote their side regardless to balance the scales so to speak.
(Does that all make sense?)
I'm thinking, do I have a "duty" to vote for matters that are purported to be for education, figuring the rest of the general public will vote (to oppose it)?
You have a duty to vote for what is best for your state/country. I think most people, however, tend to vote selfishly as you imply which is why I think the initiative system of creating law is a sick mess.
Nov 6, 2012
I for one am not convinced that the initiative and referendum processes should be abolished (and I'm guessing, Rockguykevin, that you probably approve of the outcome of the gubernatorial recall a few years ago). The initiative process in particular suffers, however, from looking vaguely like a hammer in a world that appears full of nails.
I sometimes wish there were THREE ways to vote on a given proposition: in favor, against, and "great idea but rotten execution".
Just some perspective: I'm a Catholic school teacher and my school matches up to 2% into an IRA for me, plus of course, social security. They also do the medical coverage until 65.
Your pension sounds very good.
You can't compare a defined benefit public pension payout to that of social security....unless I am misunderstanding California correctly - do they still do defined benefit pensions?
If you vote yes on 30 that means that the govener will not make a 6 billion dollar cut to K-12, Community college, and university education. 83% of the funds raised by the tax will go to K-12 and Community college education. If you vote no on 30 then there will be automatic cuts to k- university education including the state college systems CSU and UC. As a teaching student who has see my tuition raise by 40% since I started two years ago at a CSU I would yet again be asked to pay the school hundred to thousands of dollars more for this semester (after having already paid) and in continueing semesters. Less students will be able to get into the state college because they will not be able to afford to enroll those students. I was in a geology graduate progrom prior to the crediential program but left because if this measure is voted down they are cutting the department and students most likly will be required to start over again at a nearby university and I could not afford to redo my masters degree. They would also lose funding to run scientific equiptment and so many of the other people in science masters programs may not be able to finish there thesis and so there money would be wasted.(This is how this measure effects me).
As a future teacher if this measure does not pass then it is likly that more cuts will be made and more teachers will be laid off.
If 38 passes then the govener will still cut 6 billion dollars from the k-12, community college, and university budgets but some of the money will be given back to K-12 education in the form of a tax to help offset the 6 billion in cuts that will occur if 30 does not pass. it more or less means if 38 passes instead of 30 then K-12 will have approximatly the same funding as it has right now but not more and colleges and universities will be cut without any kind of cushion. I beleive this measure also funds early childhood education programs.
If both measures pass the one with the most votes will be the one that is actully used, and the other is discounted.
Personally I think 30 is a better bet as it allows for education to get money beyond today's level of funding and does not hurt college and universities who are hurting already. (EX. There are buildings in use at my school that were slated for being torn down due to the fact that they are not up to code and will fail in a earthquake, they also have a out of control rat and roach problem. Instead of tearing them down they moved science out of the building and replaced it with liberal arts and Teacher Education classes). The community college are full to bursting because so many people are taking classes and most majors are so full they are empacked so no one is graduateing on time.
Just remember to read the fine print on all of the Propositions before voting because some are kinda hard to figure out.
I should note that the above is just my understanding of the measures. Everyone should do their own research into the measures before voting and deciding which measure is right or not right for them.
TG for President!!!
(Insert here TG running screaming from the room.)
Nov 7, 2012
No, I wasn't happy. I think it was the wrong way to do it. I can happily go to my grave knowing I never cast a vote for Arnold.
That said, there have been initiatives I've been happy with, that doesn't mean I support the process that led to them. Just because the ends are what I hoped for doesn't make it so the means are what I'd support.