Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So are you saying that long term teachers aren't making 6 figures?
Maybe a few , but its mostly the higher ups , same with every Union. The members really don't get anything out of a union , but they are forced to Union/
That's exactly what I said. He pulled an exception to use & pretended that it was across the board.
Exactly.
In order for a teacher to be making six figures, all of the stars have to align perfectly. One would have to be working in one of a handful of districts that pay very high salaries, would have to possess an earned doctorate degree, and have put in over 30 years of service in that district.
Yes, they do exist, but teachers making that kind of money are few and far between. As southbound stated, CC seized on an exceptional situation and made it seem like that was a typical teacher salary. Trust me--it is not typical by any means.
If I was to say that "Governors in the US are mordibly obese, repeatedly state that they are not interested in running for higher office--despite abundant evidence to the contrary, bully other people, and make outrageous generalizations that are not supported by facts", the naive may think that this refers to all governors, when in fact, it may only refer to one person.
Last edited by Retriever; 09-27-2011 at 05:25 AM..
So are you saying that long term teachers aren't making 6 figures?
I have this funny habit of not making statements that I have not confirmed from some source outside of my own personal opinion.
Accordingly, although I knew that you were wrong, I didn't offer any numbers because I hadn't actually looked for the answer.
Once again, this took me about 60 seconds to find, and it confirms that while a few (very few) teachers make $100k or above, saying that long term teachers earn 6 figures is both inaccurate and misleading.
As per this piece of research from The Star-Ledger, more than half of NJ teachers earn between $40,000 and $60,000.
Less than 2% earn over $100,000, and I would speculate that in those cases, if you scratched the surface I think that you would find many - shall we say - special situations.
So, throwing around that $100k figure may be provable in a few cases out at the margins of reality, but using it as a basis for any political assumptions is nothing more than an attempt to mislead.
I actually went to some website in NJ and looked up someone. She is in her mid 50's and has been teacher at least 20 years. Her salary came up at $89,000.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,693,648 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by camaro69
Now I know you're smoking something here.
Data Universe will clearly prove many teachers are making 6 figures in each school system.
I personally know teachers who've been working about 25 years making over $100,000 a year.
Even at 2%, that would mean over 2000 teachers in the state doing over $100,000 a year.
You are full of it, in my opinion. Check the South Jersey districts & see how many make 6 figures.
My sister & brother-in-law taught for 36 years in a South Jersey district & did not make 6 figures & knew of no one in their district or several neighboring districts who made 6 figures.
Gov. Chris Christie's approval rating has increased dramatically since he signed the pension and health benefit overhaul for public workers and publicly led the state through Hurricane Irene.
A Fairleigh Dickinson University PublicMind poll released this morning shows 54 percent of New Jersey voters approve of Christie's performance, while 36 percent disapprove. That's up from a 44 percent even split in May.
The latest scuttlebutt has CC's brother saying that CC will not run for POTUS. Of course, if brother is as truthful about this issue as he was regarding the legality of some of his equities trading, then...
Anyway, if CC does decide to run for POTUS, he will be intensely scrutinized by the press and by his possible opponents. Just to give you a hint of the ethical issues that could well blow up in his face, the following list was posted yesterday in one of The Star-Ledger's blogs, by someone with the screen name of Fair Guy. None of this is new information, but it is unusual to see all of these issues listed in one place:
"When Chris Christie first ran for Freeholder and was sued for defamation, it wasn't his fault and he did nothing wrong.
When Chris Christie went from "not a candidate for US Attorney" to being appointed US Attorney after he was directly responsible for raising hundreds of thousands (and his brother donated hundreds of thousands) for Bush, the donations had nothing to do with it.
And when many top NJ lawyers pointed out that Christie didn't have any experience in criminal law, and his appointment was directly connected to the above hundreds of thousands in donations for Bush, that was just a coincidence.
When Chris Christie suddenly got off the list of US Attorneys to be fired, at the same time he issued bogus subpoenas to Senator Menendez weeks before the 2006 election, the timing was just a coincidence and Christie's word should be trusted.
When Chris Christie gave his top aide, Michele Brown, a $46,000 loan and didn't report it on his tax return or other disclosure documents, that was just an oversight and not a conflict of interest.
When it was discovered that criminal-turned-informant Solomon Dwek, the man who Christie turned from bank ********* to briber-of-elected-Democrats, donated to Bush directly through Chris Christie, the two were in no way connected.
And, when Michele Brown pushed to have the Dwek bribery arrests of elected Democrats announced at an opportune time during the campaign, there was nothing wrong with that. The same Michele Brown that had the $46,000 unreported loan from her boss Chris Christie.
When Chris Christie gave his former boss, John ********, a no bid deal worth at least $30 million, despite ******** having no experience for this work, he demanded that he be given the benefit of the doubt.
When Christie's brother was not indicted, despite being found by the SEC to have made 1,600 illegal trades, bilking investors out of almost $1.5 million and netting himself $1.5 million, it was just a coincidence.
When the US Attorney from NY didn't prosecute his brother for securities fraud and then got a multi-million no bid deal from Christie himself, it was just a coincidence.
And when it was discovered that Chris Christie violated the Hatch Act by discussing running for Governor while still a US Attorney, that was "an attempt to smear him".
When Chris Christie also gave a multi-million no bid deal to buddies Herb Stern and John Inglesino, and then Inglesino raised tens of thousands for his campaign, there was no "quid pro quo".
When Assemblyman Richard Merkt said that same John Inglesino tried to bribe Merkt to drop out of the Governor's race with a "major position", it was denied, and Christie knew nothing about it anyway.
And when Chris Christie went the wrong way down a one way street, causing an accident, sending the biker he hit to a trauma center--then didn't get a ticket when he identified himself as US Attorney--he did nothing wrong.
And when Christie was caught in an apparent lie about being sued by that biker, that was just a misunderstanding and he had forgotten.
And when Chris Christie was stopped for speeding in an unregistered and uninsured vehicle, only to pull rank and not get a ticket, his position as US Attorney had nothing to do with him being able to leave without his car being towed.
When Christie hijacked the Race to the Top application process, only to lose $400 million for the state's students and then get caught in at least two apparent lies, that wasn't his fault--it was Obama's and Bret Schundler's.
When a DOJ report identified Chris Christie as being the biggest offender of overbilling the Government for extravagant and unsubstantiated travel expenses of all the US Attorneys, it was because nothing other than 5 star hotels and limos were available.
When Chris Christie recently was caught inflating numbers about the ARC tunnel cost, that wasn't done on purpose for political reasons.
And now Chris Christie has decided that he's a scientist, and doubts global warming, he should be trusted to be skeptical?
Let's face it. The man has a carefully-crafted false bravado persona that is in direct contrast to the layer upon layer of lie, conflict, hypocrisy, insider deals, abuse of authority, quick-tempered emotional decisions, and favoritism. And quite honestly, if he was a Democrat and not Republican, he'd be skewered, mocked and hated by the right--and rightfully so.
He consistently is defensive about anyone daring to ask about the long list of his actions and behavior--always saying that he deserves the benefit of the doubt. T hat he should be trusted. That he is right. He has lost that right--although I'm not sure he ever deserved it in the first place."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
