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.
Your attention to this matter belies a willful ignorance.
I didn't extrapolate a socialist agenda from Adam Smith. I'm not a socialist and neither was Adam Smith. I have no problem with profit. I have no problem with competition. However, because we are humans with the capacity for complex thought we can understand that their are limits to everything. When we live to perpetuate our institutions (i.e., free market capitalism), instead of using our institutions to perpetuate us, we suffer.
You don't pay teachers by demand for the several reasons I stated (and were conveniently ignored). Demand works if there is a threat of replacement. If the free market were working, a newly minted teacher out of CW Post would step out and replace someone more expensive (with more seniority/experience, previously charged with training one of those teachers during observation). We'd have nothing but new teachers. There would be no benefit to experience. As far as I can tell, teaching 8 year olds isn't like changing tires and hanging dry-wall. A lot is gained through experience; the longer you've done it the better you are at it. Dealing with humans involves wisdom as well as knowledge. This would certainly make the vocation far less attractive; people run out after 5 to 10 years by kids with fresh degrees. I mean, on its very face, this idea is very dull. You are just applying blanket ideas without thinking.
Now you may claim that I'm just jumping to conclusions, but because we can't jump into the future to view the consequences of our decisions we must use our capacity to use reason to consider what is likely to happen (deliberative thinking). Do you think in our present environment that more expensive teachers wouldn't be fired to save benefits, pay, and pension? They'd be replaced by the newer and younger ones.
Somehow you are exempt of criticism for Eval Kneival leaps? You get to claim that an institution that has never really ever existed in history would BENEFIT schools (ostensibly meaning that it would result in better education, though I suspect you just mean it would be cheaper). And you offer no evidence to support this. Moreover, it is counter-intuitive.
Accreditation may involve signaling, but it isn't "free market." It is "modern market," which isn't "free market." Free market would leave these bodies out of the process, allowing the invisible hand to guide right and wrong. You show me where any authority links free markets with accreditation.
A CPA wouldn't have a job in a free market because there wouldn't be an IRS and no uniform auditing standards. Tell me of a modern nation that successfully developed its own standards for accounting without government involvement.
I never claimed that the modern system solved sexual molestation of students. If we want to know what a free market school system actually looks like we have to go to the only empirical example we can find - that is in history (though we could probably look to rural Sudan or something too). Before "universal education" and land-grant schools we had a free market. Churches ran schools. In the north, boys and girls attended and reading was insisted upon. Those belonging to the church got to go. Those not belonging were invited to pound sand.
The south was suspicious of schools, like, forever. An earlier governor of Virginia wrote that educating people would make them smart, and unhappy about how they lived. Districts with money had exclusive schools that didn't let blacks or girls attend. The only southern state that attempted universal education before the evil federal government stepped in was North Carolina. It wasn't until the late 1800s that there was attempt at educating people. Note that your party is anchored in the south - and don't respond with the tired canard that the Tea Party isn't the GOP.
Pointing to a toaster on a price-aggregation site isn't a free market. It was probably flown or shipped to the US, protected by various navies. It probably has a chip in it that prevents fires, required by the government. If it doesn't use the US Postal Service to arrive at my house, it will use a private shipping service which will use the roads. The roads are somewhat save because of law enforcement. The roads are there because we paid for them. The price is what it is because the US protects the market from dumping (though we like to conveniently pretend that isn't happening).
P.S. May I point out how convenient it is that teachers get pounded on by your Tea Party. While locals may be upset with the cost of other services (Cops, Fire), they aren't attacking these unions. A recent story in Wisconsin has their Tea Party governor slashing public service union collective bargaining and benefits -- Except for Cops and Fire. Why is that? I think it is easier to beat on women than men.
Your attention to this matter belies a willful ignorance.
I didn't extrapolate a socialist agenda from Adam Smith. I'm not a socialist and neither was Adam Smith. I have no problem with profit. I have no problem with competition. However, because we are humans with the capacity for complex thought we can understand that their are limits to everything. When we live to perpetuate our institutions (i.e., free market capitalism), instead of using our institutions to perpetuate us, we suffer.
You don't pay teachers by demand for the several reasons I stated (and were conveniently ignored). Demand works if there is a threat of replacement. If the free market were working, a newly minted teacher out of CW Post would step out and replace someone more expensive (with more seniority/experience, previously charged with training one of those teachers during observation). We'd have nothing but new teachers. There would be no benefit to experience. As far as I can tell, teaching 8 year olds isn't like changing tires and hanging dry-wall. A lot is gained through experience; the longer you've done it the better you are at it. Dealing with humans involves wisdom as well as knowledge. This would certainly make the vocation far less attractive; people run out after 5 to 10 years by kids with fresh degrees. I mean, on its very face, this idea is very dull. You are just applying blanket ideas without thinking.
Now you may claim that I'm just jumping to conclusions, but because we can't jump into the future to view the consequences of our decisions we must use our capacity to use reason to consider what is likely to happen (deliberative thinking). Do you think in our present environment that more expensive teachers wouldn't be fired to save benefits, pay, and pension? They'd be replaced by the newer and younger ones.
Somehow you are exempt of criticism for Eval Kneival leaps? You get to claim that an institution that has never really ever existed in history would BENEFIT schools (ostensibly meaning that it would result in better education, though I suspect you just mean it would be cheaper). And you offer no evidence to support this. Moreover, it is counter-intuitive.
Accreditation may involve signaling, but it isn't "free market." It is "modern market," which isn't "free market." Free market would leave these bodies out of the process, allowing the invisible hand to guide right and wrong. You show me where any authority links free markets with accreditation.
A CPA wouldn't have a job in a free market because there wouldn't be an IRS and no uniform auditing standards. Tell me of a modern nation that successfully developed its own standards for accounting without government involvement.
I never claimed that the modern system solved sexual molestation of students. If we want to know what a free market school system actually looks like we have to go to the only empirical example we can find - that is in history (though we could probably look to rural Sudan or something too). Before "universal education" and land-grant schools we had a free market. Churches ran schools. In the north, boys and girls attended and reading was insisted upon. Those belonging to the church got to go. Those not belonging were invited to pound sand.
The south was suspicious of schools, like, forever. An earlier governor of Virginia wrote that educating people would make them smart, and unhappy about how they lived. Districts with money had exclusive schools that didn't let blacks or girls attend. The only southern state that attempted universal education before the evil federal government stepped in was North Carolina. It wasn't until the late 1800s that there was attempt at educating people. Note that your party is anchored in the south - and don't respond with the tired canard that the Tea Party isn't the GOP.
Pointing to a toaster on a price-aggregation site isn't a free market. It was probably flown or shipped to the US, protected by various navies. It probably has a chip in it that prevents fires, required by the government. If it doesn't use the US Postal Service to arrive at my house, it will use a private shipping service which will use the roads. The roads are somewhat save because of law enforcement. The roads are there because we paid for them. The price is what it is because the US protects the market from dumping (though we like to conveniently pretend that isn't happening).
P.S. May I point out how convenient it is that teachers get pounded on by your Tea Party. While locals may be upset with the cost of other services (Cops, Fire), they aren't attacking these unions. A recent story in Wisconsin has their Tea Party governor slashing public service union collective bargaining and benefits -- Except for Cops and Fire. Why is that? I think it is easier to beat on women than men.
Your attention to this matter belies a willful ignorance.
I didn't extrapolate a socialist agenda from Adam Smith. I'm not a socialist and neither was Adam Smith. I have no problem with profit. I have no problem with competition. However, because we are humans with the capacity for complex thought we can understand that their are limits to everything. When we live to perpetuate our institutions (i.e., free market capitalism), instead of using our institutions to perpetuate us, we suffer.
You don't pay teachers by demand for the several reasons I stated (and were conveniently ignored). Demand works if there is a threat of replacement. If the free market were working, a newly minted teacher out of CW Post would step out and replace someone more expensive (with more seniority/experience, previously charged with training one of those teachers during observation). We'd have nothing but new teachers. There would be no benefit to experience. As far as I can tell, teaching 8 year olds isn't like changing tires and hanging dry-wall. A lot is gained through experience; the longer you've done it the better you are at it. Dealing with humans involves wisdom as well as knowledge. This would certainly make the vocation far less attractive; people run out after 5 to 10 years by kids with fresh degrees. I mean, on its very face, this idea is very dull. You are just applying blanket ideas without thinking.
Now you may claim that I'm just jumping to conclusions, but because we can't jump into the future to view the consequences of our decisions we must use our capacity to use reason to consider what is likely to happen (deliberative thinking). Do you think in our present environment that more expensive teachers wouldn't be fired to save benefits, pay, and pension? They'd be replaced by the newer and younger ones.
Accreditation may involve signaling, but it isn't "free market." It is "modern market," which isn't "free market." Free market would leave these bodies out of the process, allowing the invisible hand to guide right and wrong. You show me where any authority links free markets with accreditation.
A CPA wouldn't have a job in a free market because there wouldn't be an IRS and no uniform auditing standards. Tell me of a modern nation that successfully developed its own standards for accounting without government involvement.
Pointing to a toaster on a price-aggregation site isn't a free market. It was probably flown or shipped to the US, protected by various navies. It probably has a chip in it that prevents fires, required by the government. If it doesn't use the US Postal Service to arrive at my house, it will use a private shipping service which will use the roads. The roads are somewhat save because of law enforcement. The roads are there because we paid for them. The price is what it is because the US protects the market from dumping (though we like to conveniently pretend that isn't happening).
P.S. May I point out how convenient it is that teachers get pounded on by your Tea Party. While locals may be upset with the cost of other services (Cops, Fire), they aren't attacking these unions. A recent story in Wisconsin has their Tea Party governor slashing public service union collective bargaining and benefits -- Except for Cops and Fire. Why is that? I think it is easier to beat on women than men.
I don't want to post too much of a reply to this because you're going way OT. It started with your socialist post #41 of this thread. I was never bashing teachers. I think the school system works fine (if it's a good district), then everyone benefits. I am not in a tea party, I'm in the taxpayer party. Locals have been talking about police pay much more frequently than teacher pay. Here's a 56 page thread on it at the top of this board> //www.city-data.com/forum/long-...nsions-55.html
There wouldn't be the need for such a large IRS if the government were right-sized to today's US economy. Remember what the IRS is there for - to collect taxes to pay for public services. Here's govt getting too big> some of the 500 agencies in cali (not including the hundreds of sub-agencies layered within these).
The chip in the toaster - the private sector making toasters came up with this first most likely because they were able to differentiate their product and earn a higher profit marketing the chip. The gov't probably did its job and made it mandatory. There's a big difference between playing referee and outright picking winners and losers (See GM/Chrysler/UAW Bailout + TARP, Stimulus 1, 2 and 3) and the $14.2 Trillion dollar soaring public debt.
Also, see my post here> //www.city-data.com/forum/17029324-post18.html
The gov't does have a role in providing essential services -- it's the unions that are corrupt and abuse this govt role through political blackmail and taxpayer abuse. USPS is a good example of one organization working well because it conducts itself more like a private enterprise. But remember, they are staying alive right now by stuffing people's mailboxes with billions of pounds of spam mail advertisements. They are actually damaging the environment to stay afloat. I don't see Fedex or UPS doing this. Didn't USPS just propose cutting service down to 5 days a week recently because of budget issues? Maybe it's not working as well as I thought. Anything with a defined-benefit pension program does not last in the real world. I bet if they didn't have a monopoly on home mailboxes and let other companies use the 100 million+ mailboxes around the US, we'd have 5 more better-run USPS' in the private sector.
To wrap it up, I totally understand accreditation and seniority. I think most people take issue with admin earning $150k-$400k with a benefit package unheard of in the private sector. TBH, while they are still more expensive than they should be, I think the value our 'good' school districts on LI offer are well worth it compared to the county services we receive. Although I think most people take issue with the defined-benefit pension and the healthcare for life that taxpayers are left with. I made a whole thread about the school/county ratio here.
And I understand that you would like people to "rise-up" and for the people to take back control of our corporations. But what came first, the Ford Model-T or the UAW? The private sector along with a mostly capitalist society made the US into what it is today. We could've easily gone the USSR route and life would be a lot different here.
let's hope other "FYIGM" unions don't go this far with other cuts coming..
I don't want to post too much of a reply to this because you're going way OT. It started with your socialist post #41 of this thread. I was never bashing teachers. I think the school system works fine (if it's a good district), then everyone benefits. I am not in a tea party, I'm in the taxpayer party. Locals have been talking about police pay much more frequently than teacher pay. Here's a 56 page thread on it at the top of this board> //www.city-data.com/forum/long-...nsions-55.html
There wouldn't be the need for such a large IRS if the government were right-sized to today's US economy. Remember what the IRS is there for - to collect taxes to pay for public services. Here's govt getting too big> some of the 500 agencies in cali (not including the hundreds of sub-agencies layered within these).
The chip in the toaster - the private sector making toasters came up with this first most likely because they were able to differentiate their product and earn a higher profit marketing the chip. The gov't probably did its job and made it mandatory. There's a big difference between playing referee and outright picking winners and losers (See GM/Chrysler/UAW Bailout + TARP, Stimulus 1, 2 and 3) and the $14.2 Trillion dollar soaring public debt.
Also, see my post here> //www.city-data.com/forum/17029324-post18.html
The gov't does have a role in providing essential services -- it's the unions that are corrupt and abuse this govt role through political blackmail and taxpayer abuse. USPS is a good example of one organization working well because it conducts itself more like a private enterprise. But remember, they are staying alive right now by stuffing people's mailboxes with billions of pounds of spam mail advertisements. They are actually damaging the environment to stay afloat. I don't see Fedex or UPS doing this. Didn't USPS just propose cutting service down to 5 days a week recently because of budget issues? Maybe it's not working as well as I thought. Anything with a defined-benefit pension program does not last in the real world. I bet if they didn't have a monopoly on home mailboxes and let other companies use the 100 million+ mailboxes around the US, we'd have 5 more better-run USPS' in the private sector.
To wrap it up, I totally understand accreditation and seniority. I think most people take issue with admin earning $150k-$400k with a benefit package unheard of in the private sector. TBH, while they are still more expensive than they should be, I think the value our 'good' school districts on LI offer are well worth it compared to the county services we receive. Although I think most people take issue with the defined-benefit pension and the healthcare for life that taxpayers are left with. I made a whole thread about the school/county ratio here.
And I understand that you would like people to "rise-up" and for the people to take back control of our corporations. But what came first, the Ford Model-T or the UAW? The private sector along with a mostly capitalist society made the US into what it is today. We could've easily gone the USSR route and life would be a lot different here.
let's hope other "FYIGM" unions don't go this far with other cuts coming..
You can't divorce these local matters from this national wave of anger and silliness that has drawn our attention to it. To date, no one has substantively countered my assertion that GDP continues to grow while we gripe that public servants are paid too much. If we taxed the money were it was at, we'd be fine. We just don't have the political will to do that and it's unfortunate.
By the way, if the mailboxes were open to anyone, the USPS would go broke. Why? Because a venture capitalist would operate at a loss for 5 years and bankrupt the USPS by low-balling. It would operate cheaper just as Southwest has because it structured itself in the post-pension era. In time Southwest's liabilities and prices will climb. For now, we get free baggage. I'm also not going to pretend to believe that opponents of the USPS are dismayed with its environmental impact.
Also, keep in mind that the market is open to school competition. No model has been shown to beat the present model. Diocese schools are shuttering everwhere, even though they are tax free and buttressed by the financial backing of a multi-billion dollar international corporation. Private for-profit schools have failed miserably where ever they've been introduced.
You use Fox to support the story that there was a union effort to sabotage NYC during the storm. Problem is, no one's been able to substantiate that story. It came from a city council member - an enemy of Bloomberg.
Listen, do I think teachers are paid absurdly? Kind of. Teachers are usually the worst students at the university. Problem is, if there were ways to filter out the dead wood within our schools so that the money could be wielded in a way that would attract good professionals, I'd be for continuing pay right where it is. Problem is, you have high pay and few if any performance measures. If a valid and reliable way to evaluate teacher performance (that wasn't test based) could be found and administrators or communities could be empowered to unload the worst teachers, I think the money could be put to very good use. I also fear such powers would be abused.
So, before the status quo is changed, I need to know that the proposals wouldn't produce more harm.
To date, no one has substantively countered my assertion that GDP continues to grow while we gripe that public servants are paid too much.
No one will, or needs to, because it's true. However, don't confuse causation with correlation. GDP might be going up in spite of all the problems we have.
Quote:
By the way, if the mailboxes were open to anyone, the USPS would go broke. Why? Because a venture capitalist would operate at a loss for 5 years and bankrupt the USPS by low-balling.
Yep, this has already happened. The companies are called Fed Ex and UPS. If you remember, the USPS used to ship packages, but they couldn't really compete with the private sector firms. UPS posted a 3.47 EPS and Fed Ex made 4.18 EPS. That's because the government isn't geared towards doing things efficiently. The funniest part is that part of the government realizes this, that's why the Navy contracts out their ship building instead of doing it in house.
Quote:
It would operate cheaper just as Southwest has because it structured itself in the post-pension era. In time Southwest's liabilities and prices will climb. For now, we get free baggage.
Southwest has been around since 1967. Well before the post-pension era, they have a steam lined business plan and a history of controlling costs more efficiently than their competitors. Amateur analysts have been writing their epitaph prematurely for decades. They made $0.61 per share last year in earnings. I'd be interested to hear how they would streamline education, they've proven they could do it in one of the most difficult industries on the planet.
Quote:
Also, keep in mind that the market is open to school competition. No model has been shown to beat the present model. Diocese schools are shuttering everwhere, even though they are tax free and buttressed by the financial backing of a multi-billion dollar international corporation. Private for-profit schools have failed miserably where ever they've been introduced.
Actually, private schools do very well. I'll give you an example. Cary Academy is down in North Carolina, 75% of the teachers have advanced degrees and many have actively practice in their fields of study, the total school size is 700 students (grades 6-12). They hand out over $1 million in private financial aid/grants. Every student is issued a tablet PC. They are a national blue ribbon school, have a "no cuts" policy for middle school activities, and the tuition is 18k/year. If you account for financial aid/grants they give to student, then the average tuition is just above 16k/year. Compare this to Long Island where the average public school spending for students is in the range of 25k per student per year. CA has a 100% admittance rate to 4-year colleges for their graduating students.
I challenge you, find me a school on Long Island that accomplishes these numbers for 120% of the spending per student that CA accomplishes this feat with.
Actually, private schools do very well. I'll give you an example. Cary Academy is down in North Carolina, 75% of the teachers have advanced degrees and many have actively practice in their fields of study, the total school size is 700 students (grades 6-12). They hand out over $1 million in private financial aid/grants. Every student is issued a tablet PC. They are a national blue ribbon school, have a "no cuts" policy for middle school activities, and the tuition is 18k/year. If you account for financial aid/grants they give to student, then the average tuition is just above 16k/year. Compare this to Long Island where the average public school spending for students is in the range of 25k per student per year. CA has a 100% admittance rate to 4-year colleges for their graduating students.
I challenge you, find me a school on Long Island that accomplishes these numbers for 120% of the spending per student that CA accomplishes this feat with.
Totally ridiculous argument. CA is SELECTIVE of the students they admit because they are a PRIVATE school...You know what private means, right? You can't just rent a basement apartment in the neighborhood and then expect to be welcomed to their incoming freshman class. To enter CA you need recommendations, as well as interviews, appropriate test scores, and involved parents who are interested in their kid's pursuit of a quality education. Public schools are not allowed to do any of these things to screen who they must educate. They are forced to teach students of ALL ability levels, as well as the mentally and physically disabled, the poor, the disadvantaged, the troublemakers, the delinquents AND my favorite from when I attended HS: the kids just waiting to turn 16 so they can drop out and subsequently go for their GEDs instead (making everyone else in the school miserable in the meantime). You couldn't possibly think that those hand-chosen Cary kids are a fair comparison to the knuckleheads our public schools have to contend with.
Another point: You conveniently left out that North Carolina, where CA is located, spends less than $8k/year for each public school student (yeah, just like cigarettes, public education costs less there too). So in fact, CA is charging more than DOUBLE (with financial aid) of what it costs to educate a child in their geographic area...that must be SOME tablet PC those kids are getting! Seems like a rip-off to me.
Does Cary Academy have to school every behavioral and learning challenged student who walks through its doors? Is it impossible to make a comparison between the two? Does "diversity" in Cary mean Asian? Is the average household income 30% greater than the rest of the state? Is it filled with the progeny of college professors from the research triangle? Is it filled with Northeastern transplants? Do you suspect that any of this makes your example unrepresentative. I'm a reasonable guy, and I'd give you just about any example you wanted, but you pulled out perhaps one of the LEAST representative private schools in the entire nation. Still, look up Cold Spring Harbor schools (also terribly unrepresentative). It spends $11,600 per pupil and does just as well.
Point is no one doubts that private schools work where rich people live. They can't replace working and lower class public schools. Those are the districts I'm concerned with.
As for the GDP and the school poverty matter, I don't get your point about causality. If GDP continues to grow while schools suffer, I'm saying that is immoral. It means not only is the money there, but MORE money is there. That a share of it hasn't been distributed to the schools is immoral. GDP is growing because of increased margin on sales, manufacturing, services, and financial services that have been outsourced. They've been outsourced because of free trade agreements. The free trade agreements were passed, we were told, because they would help EVERYONE. Well, GDP grows as projected and yet many are living poorer and poorer lives.
A friend of mine is teaching in Elwood. She teaches more than 30 students. She is on the chopping block at the end of this year. That means that volume of students will be folded into someone else's classroom. The average classroom size for elementary may begin to approach 40. Tell me that works. Tell me you would want your child in that classroom.
Let these schools deteriorate more and you have a bad mess on your hands. If property values drop further and you combine that with a property tax cap, and you have a southward spiral. It's just bad governance. It was stupid to throw every dollar of increased public revenue at these unions to begin with, but we are where we are. But let's not pretend that completely dismantling the school systems to create some "competitive" system will work because there is no reason to believe it would. As I noted before, no for-profit school system works. Show it will work in Central Islip.
FedEx and UPS work because they don't have to visit every PO Box and home (city apartments and farm houses) in the United States 6 days a week. I wasn't talking about package delivery - clearly. I don't believe the USPS CAN work at a profit or at cost. It is asked to do too much. Nor to I think any private system would or could do it. So, folding it would abandon pocketed communities all over the US. Look into the history of the USPS. There's a reason, a value, and a return for that bureaucracy.
I disagree, because if you really want to look at ALL assets, that would also mean looking at the value of retirement plans including (oh, the horror) the vested value of public sector workers. Can you imagine what would be the resultant of that? A county or school employee would be forced to pay higher taxes today based upon a value to be actually realized much further into the future.
Now, that would truly be a horrorshow!
Wait a sec, that makes no sense!? Why would a home be viewed as liquid, tangible wealth today when 3 out of 10 homeowners have little to no equity in their homes and more than 7 out of 10 have a mortgage?
I would place a smaller value on all pensions, illiquid retirement plans and homes when computing the CWR -- and a much higher value on liquid assets and savings accounts within a district. Who devised this CWR scheme to begin with?? And why are districts being punished with lower aid for having a larger commercial base (mainly south of the 495 in Nassau)?
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.
Very good!
