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.
I didnt mention his other experience because that wasnt the topic of the thread, nor did I expect so many people to display their ignorance of how teachers get paid. It was to show that some teachers are very well paid, and again, to compare their salary to a CEO is just plain ridiculous.. almost childish..
No discussion about how a janitor and a basketball player earns more, even though they are paid by the same organization? Shocking!!!
Janitor is a service. The NBA player is the product. Get it? Nothing to compare. One cleans and one is the reason the bills get paid.
And your still lying about your "friend" making 75K. But it is cool. You are just some random on an internet message board.
My money is on him not mention it because he made it up. I also remember him saying his friend had a masters and based on my experience, college professors need a doctorate unless they are grad assistants or in a community college setting. Grad assistants would not be given any credits upon entering a public school system.
Besides, History teachers are a dime a dozen and are not hard to find so it is highly doubtful that they (school district) would pay a 2nd year History teacher 75K when they could get two new teachers for that same amount.
but yeah, if his "friend" had 7.5 years college teaching experience he might start on that step in NYC.
And my money is on the fact that you arent a teacher, because any teacher would understand that you could get credits and teach without a teachers license.. and you would get credits for work experience not related to teaching.. My buddy was a professional lecturer, who was paid very well to tour the country and give speeches on historical events. But then hey.. you know more about NYC then NYC does.. right.. dont worry.. I believe you...
I didnt mention his other experience because that wasnt the topic of the thread, nor did I expect so many people to display their ignorance of how teachers get paid. It was to show that some teachers are very well paid, and again, to compare their salary to a CEO is just plain ridiculous.. almost childish..
No discussion about how a janitor and a basketball player earns more, even though they are paid by the same organization? Shocking!!!
The issue again wasn't trying to compare a CEO's pay to a teacher's pay. The issue was the same people who are going after the teachers contracts were up in arms if any of the millionaire CEO's who received taxpayer $$$ had to give concessions.
If people would actually watch the OP's link before posting maybe there wouldn't need to be 4 pages over something that wasn't the point. A large part of the hypocrisy Jon Stewart was showing was that FOX pundits are boo hooing over the poor wall street executive families who ONLY earns 250K, claiming that's almost poverty, they are barely making it, how will they pay their mortgage if they have to pay a dime more in taxes? However, when we change the subject to married teachers earning 100K between them, OMG they are rich, life is grand for them, they are living the high life, we must cut their pay and benefits.
The issue again wasn't trying to compare a CEO's pay to a teacher's pay. The issue was the same people who are going after the teachers contracts were up in arms if any of the millionaire CEO's who received taxpayer $$$ had to give concessions.
Because you cant compare the two without looking stupid..
1) Teachers contracts are paid by the taxpayers.
2) CEO and Wall Street was NOT... They were paid by the sale of assets to the US Treasury, or from loans.. Once you sell an asset, what you do with the cash is YOUR business.. Once you borrow money, again, what you do with the money is your business.. It wasnt until AFTER the loans were made that the government went back and demanded concessions, and it wasnt even the governments money.. Do you understand that once you sell something, the money you receive is your, not the buyers? Could you see the buyer of a home demanding the seller of the home take their money and do X, Y, Z with it?
If people would actually watch the OP's link before posting maybe there wouldn't need to be 4 pages over something that wasn't the point. The hypocrisy Jon Stewart was showing was that FOX pundits are boo hooing over the poor wall street executive families who ONLY earns 250K, claiming that's almost poverty, they are barely making it, how will they pay their mortgage? However, when we change the subject to married teachers earning 100K between them, OMG they are rich, life is grand for them, they are living the high life.
Because $100K for a teacher could be "living the high life" (especially this depends on where they live) and $250K for a Wall Street executive is poverty.. Again, its like comparing a janitors salary to the basketball player, even though they are paid from the same company.. A Janitor would be consider living it up on $100K salary, and NBA basketball player living poverty on $250,000 salary.. All things are relative and to take this out of context is just plain stupid...
Because $100K for a teacher could be "living the high life" (especially this depends on where they live) and $250K for a Wall Street executive is poverty.. Again, its like comparing a janitors salary to the basketball player, even though they are paid from the same company.. A Janitor would be consider living it up on $100K salary, and NBA basketball player living poverty on $250,000 salary.. All things are relative and to take this out of context is just plain stupid...
Let say they live in the same city, a salary is a salary, it's not relative. 100K can't be living the high life if 250K is near poverty. A basketball player making 250K is not near poverty, a janitor making 100K is doing fine.
Let say they live in the same city, a salary is a salary, it's not relative. 100K can't be living the high life if 250K is poverty.
Its indeed relative.. If you are earning $250,000 as an NBA basketball star, and your fellow players are earnign $2,500,000 a year, you dont think you would ask for more? Ooh I forgot, you would settle because you live next to a teacher who earned $100K a year. I bet you'd even ask for a paycut to match your neighbors. I highly doubt it..
Everthing is relative.. The market demands that CEO's earn millions, so yes, when they wanted to limit the salary to $250,000 or so, it does deserve criticism.. You want quality CEO's running corporations, especially when its tax dollars at risk.. Even Obamas "pay czar" had to conceed this is true when they couldnt find a qualified executive to run GM at the "low" salary they were offering.. High by most standards, something like $500,000 a year... but they couldnt find anyone qualified to leave another corporation, take a multimillion dollar pay cut, and run GM...
Growing up we lived in a lower/middle class income.. Our home was valued around $70K.. (this was the 1980's)... my dad was an electrical engineer, my mom a stay at home mom.. My next door neighbor, she was a teacher, but her husband worked, (or so I thought) for a financial firm.. I found out years later that he owned the financial firm which employed about 10,000 people. Upon his death his estate was worth tens of millions of dollars.. Are you telling me that he should have asked for less because he lived in a $70K neighborhood and my dad earned around $40K a year?
I disagree.. People are worth what they can get.. I have no problem with teachers earning a good pay.. I have no problem with CEO's earning fabulous pay.. You can find teachers to work for $50K, but its pretty dam hard to find a CEO to work for $250K if you have a quality company.. Yes, it is relative to consider the job, and yes the supply and demand of labor needs to be taken into account..
lets take this one step further.. Are you telling me teachers should get a pay cut because their neighbors are waitresses, work at retail jobs, or fast food joints? After all, according to your argument, its not fair for a teacher to earn $60-$70K a year, and people who work fast food joints work hard to make $20K... Think you can find teachers to earn $20K a year? After all, a salary is a slary right?
Its indeed relative.. If you are earning $250,000 as an NBA basketball star, and your fellow players are earnign $2,500,000 a year, you dont think you would ask for more? Ooh I forgot, you would settle because you live next to a teacher who earned $100K a year. I bet you'd even ask for a paycut to match your neighbors. I highly doubt it..
Everthing is relative.. The market demands that CEO's earn millions, so yes, when they wanted to limit the salary to $250,000 or so, it does deserve criticism.. You want quality CEO's running corporations, especially when its tax dollars at risk.. Even Obamas "pay czar" had to conceed this is true when they couldnt find a qualified executive to run GM at the "low" salary they were offering.. High by most standards, something like $500,000 a year... but they couldnt find anyone qualified to leave another corporation, take a multimillion dollar pay cut, and run GM...
Growing up we lived in a lower/middle class income.. Our home was valued around $70K.. (this was the 1980's)... my dad was an electrical engineer, my mom a stay at home mom.. My next door neighbor, she was a teacher, but her husband worked, (or so I thought) for a financial firm.. I found out years later that he owned the financial firm which employed about 10,000 people. Upon his death his estate was worth tens of millions of dollars.. Are you telling me that he should have asked for less because he lived in a $70K neighborhood and my dad earned around $40K a year?
I disagree.. People are worth what they can get.. I have no problem with teachers earning a good pay.. I have no problem with CEO's earning fabulous pay.. You can find teachers to work for $50K, but its pretty dam hard to find a CEO to work for $250K if you have a quality company.. Yes, it is relative to consider the job, and yes the supply and demand of labor needs to be taken into account..
Open the link or stop posting, you keep going on tangents that aren't relevant. The 250K was about taxes, not limiting their salary. Fox news was showing their hypocrisy by changing their tune to fit whatever issue they were for/against. 250K is poor because we want tax cuts for the weathy, 100K is rich because we want teachers pay cut.
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.
