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 I guess you either totally ignored (because it doesn't fit your narrative) or can't read the point that THERE IS NO TEACHERS UNION IN AZ.
The school staff in AZ are on their own in each district hence the pay disparity across the state. Understand now?
PHOENIX - Organizers for the Red for Ed campaign say they will be back at the Arizona Capitol on Monday.
Joe Thomas, the President of the Arizona Education Association, announced during the Friday rally that supporters should prepare to come back on Monday and walkout of their classrooms for a third day.
I think a bigger issue is the whole economic system that's causing these tax fights.
We have a couple things going for us:
1) Affordability of housing - mainly driven by supply/demand of land/density and/or units per sq mile, various interest groups attempt to rig local municipalities to work in the land-owners favor (stopping new construction to let the market drive up housing prices) - also the demand for new construction is ridiculous (who in their right mind NEEDS 2500-3000 sq feet?) People in Europe do just fine a much smaller sq ft house. Why can't we?
2) Affordability of healthcare - mainly driven by for-profit institutions who rig the tax laws in their favor
3) Investors (the minority) are getting all the profits from everyday spending done by everyone else - driven by low capital gains taxation, constantly reducing taxes on wealthier people and not taxing investments more heavily based on wealth/assets
4) Low financial education - people in the US aren't really that knowledgeable about their own finances and therefore, spend liberally versus rather conservatively (the stats are pretty scary), not knowing how the stock market works, how 401k works, how federal taxes work, etc..
5) Banking system - a for-profit, shareholder driven system mainly capitalizing on people's own selfish desires to buy stuff they cannot afford but will give them a loan anyways and shackle them to debt
So add all those major factors up and we have a perfect storm of wanting to increase taxes to pay for teachers, but cannot find the money to increase taxes to tax without making our taxation system very very very progressive.
So if you haven't noticed, fundamentally, it's our consumer-driven, conspicuous consumption culture that drives up prices at the heart of it. We want more things, bigger homes, ever nicer cars, and will go deeply into debt for it rather than investing our hard earned money.
Totally true! People do spend liberally today and much more then they should. That's why so many are in debt. But then we also have to pay more for health insurance, gas, going out to eat, internet bills. It's pretty much out of the question not to have internet, pay for family needs, and ect. I know a teacher than has taught for 20 years and him and his wife have to get a roommate to help pay the bills. The couple could barely take a trip to California because of the funds. I know another teacher that really can't even have a car. I pick her up on the way to school because she only has a one car that doesn't always work. I think it all boils down to fact that teachers spend 4-6 years in school, no pay for student teaching, no help with student loans, and to make a meager salary. I love teaching and will continue to teach despite the pay, but maybe these strikes will let our politicians know something. Heck, Colorado legalized weed and they said the taxes would go to education, and we haven't seen a jump in our pay. Those taxes go to those high ranking politicians that get paid to make speeches to improve nothing. The taxes don't go to teachers, police officers, and governments workers. But they won't give teachers an increase, despite that the cost of college to become a teacher has increased, despite the cost of everything in general has increased, as well as minimum wage in states is going up. I realize a degree doesn't mean that you will even get a job or become rich, but when someone spends so long getting a teaching degree and so much to pay back, it's kind of hard. The amount of new grads becoming teachers is dropping significantly.
Talking to a lot of neighbors and people at the Gym are all staying we should march to Capital & to each school district School Board demand they Fire Teachers !!!!
The times have changed. When I was the son of a single parent (teacher) in the 1950's, none of us were doing free lunches and breakfasts or marching for more money. We mowed peoples' lawns, babysat and delivered newspapers to make ends meet. Teachers found summer jobs. Having children and being responsible for them was different then and now. The teachers I see protesting on TV look like fat gangstas with stinky tennis shoes. I hope things turn out for everyone. The teachers I see protesting don't look like my mom or her teacher friends of 60 years ago.
The times have changed. When I was the son of a single parent (teacher) in the 1950's, none of us were doing free lunches and breakfasts or marching for more money. We mowed peoples' lawns, babysat and delivered newspapers to make ends meet. Teachers found summer jobs. Having children and being responsible for them was different then and now. The teachers I see protesting on TV look like fat gangstas with stinky tennis shoes. I hope things turn out for everyone. The teachers I see protesting don't look like my mom or her teacher friends of 60 years ago.
20% raise + extra 100 million for schools is dam good !! But I'm hearing more & more now from a lot of different sources & boards , that it's all Political, It all about that Red for Ed backs a Democratic running for the governor and their trying to destroy the governor.
20% raise + extra 100 million for schools is dam good !! But I'm hearing more & more now from a lot of different sources & boards , that it's all Political, It all about that Red for Ed backs a Democratic running for the governor and their trying to destroy the governor.
Another claiming that the #RedForEd is for Democrat governors. Is this some new conspiracy theory gaining steam on right-wing outlets? I don't think it is. Sure, I am not voting Ducey and for the #RedForEd, but it isn't mutually exclusive for everyone. Many point to Trump leaning teachers who are siding with #RedForEd. There is little no proof that #RedForEd was started by Democratic donors like many claiming it was. I've asked for proof several times and I haven't seen it other than people continuing the conspiracy theory that it is by Democratic donors.
I am for the new deal that Ducey and the legislature has put forth but Ducey has no concept of anything and I can't vote for that. Just listen to him talk and you hear him make gymnastics or failures in logic or the real world. He has previously said administration COULD give 20% raises to teachers however there are many districts with blocked out funding already. He'll be open to talk to teachers but not the #RedForEd or AEA groups. Two days before he announced his original version of 20 by 2020 plan, he said he was only going for the already planned 1% raise. He doesn't realize how "anyone" could vote against the plan in the legislature, yet the fiscal conservatives are leery on the economic projections of a no-tax proposal (a rare moment I'll agree with fiscal conservatives here because what will happen if there is another recession like many economists fear with or without the Trump trade wars?) Also Ducey has pushed for means that haven't helped truly bring education funding back to 2008 levels until now after a walkout. Then also there is the issue of how fast it could be voted (I'm not sure if the bill the Senate voted on Thursday was or wasn't a part of the deal.)
I know it is hard to do based on your apparent bias against education spending (and more so higher taxes), but you need to realize that the fact of the matter is that Ducey is wrong for education and is a total fool. We cannot have another four years of this. I cannot vote for him. I will vote for Ken Bennett in the Republican primary and in the general, well it depends if Bennett wins the primary but I won't vote Ducey, that's for sure.
Also it is hard to fire the teachers for walking out even though it is certainly possible to do so. See many teachers actually planned calling out for that day. I know in the district I work for (I'm support staff and highly underpaid and under-represented in the talks by politicians) shut down for Thursday (Friday and Monday were scheduled closures) due to over half of the teachers calling out across the district. If the teacher used personal leave, how can they truly walk out? AFAIK a true walk out would be just a no-call no-show.
The times have changed. When I was the son of a single parent (teacher) in the 1950's, none of us were doing free lunches and breakfasts or marching for more money. We mowed peoples' lawns, babysat and delivered newspapers to make ends meet. Teachers found summer jobs. Having children and being responsible for them was different then and now. The teachers I see protesting on TV look like fat gangstas with stinky tennis shoes. I hope things turn out for everyone. The teachers I see protesting don't look like my mom or her teacher friends of 60 years ago.
I understand this. As a teacher, I do get a second job in the summer. However, we have to plan, get started for the next year, make sure our curriculum is in check, and make sure we are good to go at least 2 weeks before school starts. Back then, from what I've heard, teachers didn't need this, and they off from Memorial Day to Labor Day. Teachers during these times could discipline the kids that didn't want to do the work and they didn't have to be a counselor like they do now and constantly watch their back. During the 1950's, teachers didn't have to spend time after school mending the peace for those who didn't want to come to school. In the 1950's, it also wasn't the teachers fault if the kid didn't like the class or was angry because he/she didn't pass or move on, especially in the middle/ high school level. Now, we have to make sure pretty much everyone is happy as well as making sure everyone learns the required material at the same time. It's not the same as it was back then, at least in my opinion. This dread is making it's way to colleges now. It's all about enrollment numbers, and national standardize passing rates, which weren't an issue back then. Things have changed now. It's takes someone to be really bad before they get kicked out, and since the no child left behind act, it makes it very hard for some teachers when someone is in the class that causes chaos . That was not an issue back in the 1950's.
You have to understand that many retirees who live strictly on Social Security (or perhaps small pensions or investment income) are often more limited on what they can afford. This is why any increase in taxes will hurt them financially. Besides, many of them worked hard, contributed to society, paid their taxes, raised families, and even served their country ... that's hardly selfish! A lot of them also desire to live among their own age group and don't want to have to contend with obnoxious kids. This is why age restricted communities are so popular. They deserve a break!
The same could be said on multiple fronts. Tough sh_t if you smoked, didn't eat healthy, didn't work out and you got sick, didn't put on sun screen and got cancer, etc etc. Too bad that you didn't save more and now you struggle as a retiree. Or maybe they should have studied more or worked harder and smarter because retirees extract (on average) waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than they put in. Tough if you didn't save for a rainy day and now you want unemployment. I could go on for an hour longer. My point is if you want to be a purist and the litmus test is full fledged personal responsibility, I bet I could find a half dozen that you have taken advantage of in your lifetime. We all have.
Look at it this way. You can point to our less than ideal test score results and assume that the USA is inept with public K-12. If that is the case, why is it that we are 5% of the worlds population and generate and hold 20-25% (depending which survey) of the wealth? Maybe a subset of people actually took advantage of their opportunity with their public education. I'm one of those kids who had procreating parents (6 kids) and we didn't have a pot to p_ss in. I rallied while my brothers didn't. Cut, paste, repeat with my wife except she had 8, under achieving siblings. We broke the cycle and our kids are doing as well (pending doctor son and current Dentist daughter). They did this with an average test score public HS. Yet the school was well funded so they could take advantage of the quality school. So while 20% didn't pass their standardized tests and another 60% barely understood the basic material, a solid 20% of the kids kicked butt. The "averages" were dismal. That didn't mean the schools didn't do their jobs. They did. What's the saying; you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make them drink. Some people decided they didn't care (bad parenting) and they have mentally unplugged. So just because a private school have better averages doesn't mean they are better. They simply have kids who attend who parent better. Anybody who has studied this topic understands what I just typed.
Using your approach (parents pay), my broke parents would have had no option but to put us in crappy school. Do you think I would have earned a degree as an electrical engineer and broke the poverty cycle? My theory is the 80:20 rule. 20% pay for the other 80%. So forget the averages, if we adopt your approach and slash school budgets for procreating broke people, you pretty much guarantee no outliers are going to make it out. My point is that "I got mine" in K-12 on someone else's back. Think free lunches, subsidized housing and WELL FUNDED schools, subsidized colleges, etc.
I'm all for personal responsibility. If you and I had the magic wand, we could fix all kinds of problems. A wand would be needed because politics are always present. But your personal hot button on school taxes isn't going to be fixed anytime soon. However flawed it is (and the school system IS flawed), we still have the bulk of the world wealth. I propose a lot of it is because we didn't use your approach. So while I see obvious issues, your solution (only the parents pay) is kind of.. well... Not so smart.
Oh.. Disclaimer: to date, I have never voted for a single Democrat. So people can quit with the "liberal" label. Close to 50% of conservatives plug their noses and vote for more school funding. It's ain't perfect. The last thing that makes sense is to demotivate teachers. Even if they eventually got their way and get a raise, the damage has been done.
I hate waste and taxes just as much as the next guy. I've had to write out some massive federal taxes in some good years plus state, local, sales tax, etc etc. There is a TON of waste every single topic. I'm less upset with K-12 waste. So until I get the magic wand, I am in favor of making sure AZ teachers are paid fairly. I don't have any kids in the system and I am paying taxes in two homes. IMHO, educational classes need to be taught on how to parent. If people actually learned how to do a good job, that would have a lot of impact on test scores. a.k.a. being more involved.
Last edited by MN-Born-n-Raised; 04-29-2018 at 06:01 AM..
Another claiming that the #RedForEd is for Democrat governors. Is this some new conspiracy theory gaining steam on right-wing outlets? I don't think it is. Sure, I am not voting Ducey and for the #RedForEd, but it isn't mutually exclusive for everyone. Many point to Trump leaning teachers who are siding with #RedForEd. There is little no proof that #RedForEd was started by Democratic donors like many claiming it was. I've asked for proof several times and I haven't seen it other than people continuing the conspiracy theory that it is by Democratic donors.
I am for the new deal that Ducey and the legislature has put forth but Ducey has no concept of anything and I can't vote for that. Just listen to him talk and you hear him make gymnastics or failures in logic or the real world. He has previously said administration COULD give 20% raises to teachers however there are many districts with blocked out funding already. He'll be open to talk to teachers but not the #RedForEd or AEA groups. Two days before he announced his original version of 20 by 2020 plan, he said he was only going for the already planned 1% raise. He doesn't realize how "anyone" could vote against the plan in the legislature, yet the fiscal conservatives are leery on the economic projections of a no-tax proposal (a rare moment I'll agree with fiscal conservatives here because what will happen if there is another recession like many economists fear with or without the Trump trade wars?) Also Ducey has pushed for means that haven't helped truly bring education funding back to 2008 levels until now after a walkout. Then also there is the issue of how fast it could be voted (I'm not sure if the bill the Senate voted on Thursday was or wasn't a part of the deal.)
I know it is hard to do based on your apparent bias against education spending (and more so higher taxes), but you need to realize that the fact of the matter is that Ducey is wrong for education and is a total fool. We cannot have another four years of this. I cannot vote for him. I will vote for Ken Bennett in the Republican primary and in the general, well it depends if Bennett wins the primary but I won't vote Ducey, that's for sure.
Also it is hard to fire the teachers for walking out even though it is certainly possible to do so. See many teachers actually planned calling out for that day. I know in the district I work for (I'm support staff and highly underpaid and under-represented in the talks by politicians) shut down for Thursday (Friday and Monday were scheduled closures) due to over half of the teachers calling out across the district. If the teacher used personal leave, how can they truly walk out? AFAIK a true walk out would be just a no-call no-show.
All the non stop TV & Radio commercials by the Teachers Unions attacking the Gov. Talk about wasting money, but it's for the kids, NOT !! It's for Political Reasons and Teachers GREED !!!! Everyone's saying AZ will never see a School District Budget override or School prop passed by voters ever again, The Teachers & Unions did serious damage & most people lost respect for them and the teachers are look at as Greedy SOB's
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.
Maybe a subset of people actually took advantage of their opportunity with their public education. I'm one of those kids who had procreating parents (6 kids) and we didn't have a pot to p_ss in. I rallied while my brothers didn't. Cut, paste, repeat with my wife except she had 8, under achieving siblings. We broke the cycle and our kids are doing as well (pending doctor son and current Dentist daughter). They did this with an average test score public HS. Yet the school was well funded so they could take advantage of the quality school. So while 20% didn't pass their standardized tests and another 60% barely understood the basic material, a solid 20% of the kids kicked butt. The "averages" were dismal. That didn't mean the schools didn't do their jobs. They did. What's the saying; you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make them drink. Some people decided they didn't care (bad parenting) and they have mentally unplugged. So just because a private school have better averages doesn't mean they are better. They simply have kids who attend who parent better. Anybody who has studied this topic understands what I just typed.
So while I see obvious issues, your solution (only the parents pay) is kind of.. well... Not so smart.
