My governor is a retard.

[patrikman]

lots and lots of info.

All of your charts are fine and dandy, but the problem is WI teachers often make barely above half of the median average listed in that chart. The teachers are who stand to lose the most in this deal. Our education system (just like everybody else in the country right now) is understaffed, underpaid, and there is no relief in sight. Attendance isn't getting lower and budgets for arts & culture are already severely hampered.

[rookdubdoc]

Wisconsin huh?
Well, don't state governors have to be residents of that state?
If they disallowed retarded candidates, would anybody in Wisconsin be eligible to run for that office?

With all due respect, even I had to chuckle at this coming from someone in Tennessee.

I am loving the debate and both sides being presented. Seems like the "majority" of posters are siding with the WI Governor. Interesting.

[spockcat]

All of your charts are fine and dandy, but the problem is WI teachers often make barely above half of the median average listed in that chart. The teachers are who stand to lose the most in this deal. Our education system (just like everybody else in the country right now) is understaffed, underpaid, and there is no relief in sight. Attendance isn't getting lower and budgets for arts & culture are already severely hampered.

Really? So what is the median average of the others? This page indicates they make pretty good dough:

http://www.teacher-world.com/teacher...wisconsin.html

What is the cost of living in WI compared to places where teachers make twice that? CT isn't much higher than WI in teaching salaries and our cost of living is quite high:

http://www.teacher-world.com/teacher...nnecticut.html

Wisconsin Teaching Salaries and Benefits
People often believe that teachers don't make a lot of money. Those in the know, though, are aware that compensation in the education industry can be quite generous, especially when you factor in the great vacation schedule and the comprehensive benefits packages that usually go along with teaching. In Wisconsin, teaching salaries averaged $52,644 in 2009-10, according to the National Education Association, with most school districts offering benefits that range from health insurance to retirement plans. (1)

The average Wisconsin teacher salary does vary, however. One major source of salary variation is what grade level you teach. In May 2009, preschool teachers in Wisconsin earned an average salary of $23,460, elementary school teachers earned $51,240, and secondary school teachers earned $49,400. (2) Education and experience level also make a difference in teacher salaries: secondary school teachers in the 90th wage percentile earned $69,550, while the entry-level teacher salary is generally in the $30,000s. (3)

Geographic location is another significant reason for variation in Wisconsin teaching salaries. Areas that have a higher cost of living often pay correspondingly higher salaries. Below are average annual earnings for secondary school teachers in five of the largest metropolitan areas in the state: (4)

* Green Bay: $55,110
* Kenosha: $68,400
* Madison: $50,770
* Milwaukee: $54,620
* Racine: $49,710

However, the greatest benefit to becoming an educator has nothing to do with Wisconsin teaching salaries. At the end of the day, the intrinsic rewards of helping children learn and shaping their knowledge for the future are arguably far more satisfying.

If you're thinking of becoming a teacher in Wisconsin, find the education degree that's right for you, and start your future today!

Sources:
(1) Milwaukee Public Schools
(2) Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development
(3) Wisconsin's Worknet
(4) U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Back to Wisconsin Teacher Certification/Credentialing
Or, Steps to become a teacher in Wisconsin

Connecticut Teacher Salary Information
Connecticut Teacher Salaries have been among the top Teaching Salaries in the nation for many years. Connecticut citizens and public officials have displayed their support of Connecticut Educators by creating an atmosphere of support.

Below is a list of Connecticut Teaching Salaries for a couple Public School Districts. We encourage you to examine particular Connecticut School District Teacher Salaries and costs of living in the area to decide whether you will be satisfied.

As you can see below, you can greatly increase your earning potential as a Connecticut Teacher if you acquire an advanced degree such as a Master's degree or a Doctorate degree.

** Salaries are from the 2006-2007 Connecticut Teaching salaries for Waterbury Public Schools and Westport Public Schools

Waterbury Public Schools Teaching Salaries

Degree Level Step 1 Teaching Salary Step 6 Teaching Salary
Bachelor's Degree $40,657 $51,909
Master's Degree $43,484 $54,705
Doctorate Degree $49,504 $62,504


Westport Public Schools Teaching Salaries

Degree Level Step 3 Teaching Salary Step 9 Teaching Salary
Bachelor's Degree $41,997 $54,467
Master's Degree $45,126 $58,460

[Yo Teach]

And I have to laugh at Yo Teach. He contends that collective bargaining needs to be retained, yet he eschews group-think. Now that's what I call irony.

Collective bargaining does not necessarily reflect group think. In fact, I think it is one of the more deliberative things one can do.

[garageless]

Your governor is a shrewd ass. For some reason average people in this country truly believe this crap about unions. Governments are insolvent because we have been lowering taxes and voting for additional programs for 50 years. While America was becoming great we were investing in education and infrastructure. The top income tax rate in the 50s was around 90%! Lowering this has not resulted in higher wages and more jobs for the bottom 40, 50 or 60%. We've just lowered the goal posts so that people self-identify as middle class if they are just above the poverty level.

It kills me that the response to defined contribution retirements being such a crap deal is an attack on defined benefit. Why not insist on them instead of trying to get them eliminated.

DISCLOSURE: I am a public employee with collective bargaining rights. In hard times my pay and benefits look awesome. In good times we have a hard time attracting quality applicants and people leave for greener pastures. I consciously traded possible higher private sector compensation for financial security. If defined benefit pensions were more prevalent and better regulated in the private sector I'd be inclined to leave my very dangerous profession.

[20DYNAMITE07]

Your governor is a shrewd ass. For some reason average people in this country truly believe this crap about unions. Governments are insolvent because we have been lowering taxes and voting for additional programs for 50 years. While America was becoming great we were investing in education and infrastructure. The top income tax rate in the 50s was around 90%! Lowering this has not resulted in higher wages and more jobs for the bottom 40, 50 or 60%. We've just lowered the goal posts so that people self-identify as middle class if they are just above the poverty level.

It kills me that the response to defined contribution retirements being such a crap deal is an attack on defined benefit. Why not insist on them instead of trying to get them eliminated.

QFT

[22AudiQ]

I'll be quite honest, I usually fall on one side or the other in a political debate, but I don't know where I stand on this one.

I'm a conservative Libertarian. I'm not fond of unions as I believe them to be, in general, an outdated set of institutions whose main purpose is more to lobby for Democrats than actually help workers. I believe many of our problems are due to unions (i.e. auto-industry bailout, companies leaving the US to look for cheaper labor, etc.). I've never worked a union job-- and talking to many who have worked for unions, they do encourage mediocrity and complacency. Why work hard if you cannot be fired? If unions are truly about choice and those who they represent, why is it nearly impossible to opt out of being a part of a union in a unionized workplace? Seems more than hypocritical to me.

I'm all for budget cuts and bringing spending to a minimum, but I really question taking away the power of teachers, police and fire. These are the people society relies on and, without them, we're sunk. They're not paid particularly well (aside from the cases where they are allowed to retire and then re-retire, abuse the system, become lazy and protected by unions, etc.) to begin with.

If America is going to advance as a nation, we need to put more effort into education. Not even necessarily money, but cultural importance. If you look at many Asian and Indian immigrants, they're surpassing kids born in America. I went to a high school dominated by the two groups, and it wasn't that they were more intelligent by any means. Their family and culture simply pushed them harder and demanded good results. If we can attract better people to teaching through better salaries and thus reverse some of the anti-education feelings in this country, the better we'll be.

I'd rather pay a teacher more today than pay the welfare system more tomorrow.

What we need to do here is not ban them from having collective bargaining, but just tell the unions we're not playing their games anymore. These great people ARE public servants and chose this line of work. They SHOULD be paid a fair wage and given good benefits, but within reason.

If this is really about children, preventing crime and fires, then lets have the governors and unions sit down and figure out how to best work towards a common goal.




By the way, thanks Baby Boomers. Gen X has a lot to thank you all for.

[2Cor]

It kills me that the response to defined contribution retirements being such a crap deal is an attack on defined benefit. Why not insist on them instead of trying to get them eliminated.

Because the private sector pays the publics benefits. The private sector can't just demand them and expect their companies to go take from all the citizens in the land to fund such largess? Public sector pay is often on par or greater than private.

[rimtrim]

I'd rather pay a teacher more today than pay the welfare system more tomorrow.

What we need to do here is not ban them from having collective bargaining, but just tell the unions we're not playing their games anymore. These great people ARE public servants and chose this line of work. They SHOULD be paid a fair wage and given good benefits, but within reason.

If this is really about children, preventing crime and fires, then lets have the governors and unions sit down and figure out how to best work towards a common goal.

Thanks for being a reasonable conservative Libertarian! Maybe you can give lessons to some of the others

As for paying the welfare system more tomorrow...don't worry, the Republicans will just cut that too. Then they'll eliminate the minimum wage, and create plenty of $2/hr jobs for the new, starving, uneducated peasant underclass. That solves the whole shipping-jobs-overseas thing!

I'm actually not sure if I was being sarcastic or dead serious just then. That's how bad things have gotten in the US political sphere IMHO.

-Andrew L

[garageless]

Because the private sector pays the publics benefits. The private sector can't just demand them and expect their companies to go take from all the citizens in the land to fund such largess? Public sector pay is often on par or greater than private.

The private sector does pay for government. This is the whole point of having a representative government. We all decide what to have and how to pay for it. Do you want the cheapest least skilled to be the labour pool for public enterprise? I work with some extraordinary people in the public sector. I pay 10% of my salary each month to fund my retirement. My employer pays more. The idea that someone can retire to a secure and comfortable lifestyle by setting aside a few 100 per month is just crazy. Most Americans nearing retirement age are woefully unprepared. Don't blame union workers for choosing their lot. FYI, public sector pay trails behind the private sector when level of education is taken into account.

[patrikman]

Really? So what is the median average of the others? This page indicates they make pretty good dough:

I know several teachers with less ten years experience and they all started at about half the median and haven't moved very much at all. This last ten years have been brutal on our teachers and the schools are a mess.

Talking to both students and teachers it seems much more institutionalized than a learning environment. I really enjoyed my public schooling and it seems like a much different era now.

I am a renter so I can't really comment too much on cost of living as it corresponds directly with "how nice of an apt. do we want?" According to those numbers it seems like despite being the smallest city on that list, the cost of living is quite high. Most of the teachers I know teach in much smaller districts though.

[22AudiQ]

Thanks for being a reasonable conservative Libertarian! Maybe you can give lessons to some of the others

As for paying the welfare system more tomorrow...don't worry, the Republicans will just cut that too. Then they'll eliminate the minimum wage, and create plenty of $2/hr jobs for the new, starving, uneducated peasant underclass. That solves the whole shipping-jobs-overseas thing!

I'm actually not sure if I was being sarcastic or dead serious just then. That's how bad things have gotten in the US political sphere IMHO.

-Andrew L

Hold, let me break that reasonable streak.

A bit off topic, but going to mention it: I'm a near minimum wage earner, and I hate that OH has a constantly rising minimum wage. Ohio's minimum wage was around $7.20/hour when I started at my current job at $8/hour. I still make the same amount (it's a small business with not a lot of cash flow) and now the minimum wage is closer to $7.70. Do you know what it's accomplished?

Inflation. Now when I go out, I pay more for my food, more for my movie tickets, etc. because other employers are having to recoup the difference.

The only thing it does is give Democrats and liberals a good reputation for caring about "the worker", when what it truly does is increase prices.

Just an idea to ponder: if Democrat's voting base has a high concentration of low-income/poor voters, what is their motivation to move these people into a more successful position in life? Don't tell me they're all just benevolent.

I'm not a Republican or a Democrat, but I sincerely doubt the legitimacy or skill that many in the Democratic Party claim.

[22AudiQ]

Talking to both students and teachers it seems much more institutionalized than a learning environment. I really enjoyed my public schooling and it seems like a much different era now.

Thanks, No Child Left Behind.

I went to an upper-middle/upper class public high school where kids drove to school in Lamborghinis, while both parents had PhD's. Kids were graduating with 4.8 GPA's. The top 100 in my brother's graduating class all had a 4.0 or over...

Guess what? We had to pass the same tests that kids in the inner city were passing.

I'm not suggesting we were more intelligent, but the level of education of our parents, overall socio-economic positioning and opportunities were FAR greater. We had every advantage over them.

Why is it that we've basically dumbed down our education system, thus rendering great public school districts average?

I never learned basic personal finance or how to actively interpret messages from advertisers, but damned if I didn't know how to bubble in a Scantron test like the kids in inner-city Cleveland.

EDIT: Holy crap, I was off topic here. *shrug*

[GeoffD]

You'll notice that all the people leaping to defend the status quo in this thread profit from the system.

[Yo Teach]

This thread reminds me of:

[GeoffD]

This thread reminds me of:

I hate to be a reality check but "It's a Wonderful Life" is fiction.

[Yo Teach]

I hate to be a reality check but "It's a Wonderful Life" is fiction.

Movies aren't real?!?!?! No way!

[SOAR]

[turbinepowered]

School is the same tempurature , regardless of students or not .......

Not around here it isn't. School's out for summer, you have one week of climate control before they shut those puppies down and go to half-lighting. Ditto for any break longer than a weekend during the school year, three or more days out of school means the climate control gets shut off at 8PM the last school day before the break and is automatically turned back on at just past midnight on the last day of the break.

One of the fancy new additions when they renovated and redesigned, the district office can remotely control all the climate control units in the district.

[Tornado2dr]

You're obviously not a smart person.

Wealthy people that donate to charity are awesome and should be celebrated. Having the government take money to waste on nonsense, however, is not cool.

Sarcasm. We need a sarcastic smiley.

[FlashRedGLS1.8T]

You'll notice that all the people leaping to defend the status quo in this thread profit from the system.

I hope this fails unless firefighters and police are added.

Either all in or all out, no weak kneed BS politics.

[2.FOH!!]

As for paying the welfare system more tomorrow...don't worry, the Republicans will just cut that too. Then they'll eliminate the minimum wage, and create plenty of $2/hr jobs for the new, starving, uneducated peasant underclass. That solves the whole shipping-jobs-overseas thing!

Hyperbolic post is hyperbolic.

[Mk1Racer]

Collective bargaining does not necessarily reflect group think. In fact, I think it is one of the more deliberative things one can do.

Is collective bargaining group think? No, but collective bargaining certainly has a lot of the characteristics of group think.

Governments are insolvent because we have been lowering taxes and voting for additional programs for 50 years

I'm curious as to what data you used to come to this conclusion. There may have been some change to the tax rates at the federal level for individuals, or for businesses in general, but I can tell you that in the last 25 years my property tax, sales tax, and state income tax have all gone up.

I do agree that Christmas-tree spending goes on on both sides of the aisle. It's what politicians do to try and insure that they get re-elected.

Do you want the cheapest least skilled to be the labour pool for public enterprise?

Do you want public enterprise to be comprised of a labor pool that has no motivation to do a better job and is actually discouraged from doing so? Do you want it to be comprised of a labor pool that is discouraged from increasing efficiency, and has no reason to worry about spending as they are not saddled w/ that draconian concept of profitability? Do you want an environment where it is nearly impossible to get rid of incompetent or under-performing workers? And yet those same workers get the same salaries and raises that people that are actually good at their job get.

Governments are insolvent because they are grossly over-sized and inefficient, and that they've sold out to special-interest groups like labor unions for years. And those special programs you refer to are predominantly from the democrat side of the aisle. That's the same side of the aisle that your union supports.

[spockcat]

I am a renter so I can't really comment too much on cost of living as it corresponds directly with "how nice of an apt. do we want?" According to those numbers it seems like despite being the smallest city on that list, the cost of living is quite high. Most of the teachers I know teach in much smaller districts though.

So how much is a 500 sq ft one bedroom apartment in your area? Where my son is going to school he is paying $1500/mo to his school for such an apartment. Such an apartment not school owned would be closer to $2000/mo. He is in Palo Alto, CA. He could have gone to school in St. Louis and his housing costs would have been more like $600/mo. That is quite a difference in cost of living.

[SomeRandomGuy]

Then they'll eliminate the minimum wage, and create plenty of $2/hr jobs for the new, starving, uneducated peasant underclass.

If a job is only worth $2/hr, why on earth should an employer be coerced to pay more?

[zukiphile]

If a job is only worth $2/hr, why on earth should an employer be coerced to pay more?

If your work is worth $2 an hour, why does the government make it illegal for you to agree with an employer to pay you what your labor is worth?

[SomeRandomGuy]

If your work is worth $2 an hour, why does the government make it illegal for you to agree with an employer to pay you what your labor is worth?

You get paid by the word, or something?

[zukiphile]

You get paid by the word, or something?

Yes. Bill forthcoming.*


* /no charge

[2Cor]

The private sector does pay for government. This is the whole point of having a representative government. We all decide what to have and how to pay for it.

Representative government is flawed. We don't all decide what we get. Politicians make decisions for convenience and votes.

Do you want the cheapest least skilled to be the labour pool for public enterprise?

Strawman

I work with some extraordinary people in the public sector. I pay 10% of my salary each month to fund my retirement. My employer pays more.

Which isn't much.

The idea that someone can retire to a secure and comfortable lifestyle by setting aside a few 100 per month is just crazy.

Isn't that what you just said you do?

Most Americans nearing retirement age are woefully unprepared. Don't blame union workers for choosing their lot. FYI, public sector pay trails behind the private sector when level of education is taken into account.

Can you prove the bold? Does that correct for anomalies such as executives making 2.5million? Provide a link, please. Most Americans are woefully unprepared. Ultimately the government is going to end up taking peoples retirements and defaulting on public pensions. The question is when. There are going to be tens of millions of people with nothing, and it's going to be ugly.

[.LSinLV.]

Boo-hoo. If you don't like it get a real job... "Publik servants" have it entirely too good and should step back and take a look at the rest of the nation's work force. You've got it pretty damn good...

And this is coming from a publik servant. All our union does it look out for the POS loser that doesn't want to do his job properly and knows he can never get fired, short of Congress stepping in. They're more concerned with stupid **** like that than anything else.... Which is why I'm not a member anymore.

after nearly 20 years in the private sector, I became a public employee protected by collective bargaining. The issue with most public employees is not the benefits, it's the union and the mentality that it creates. I took a 50% cut in pay to come to the County. it will take me 15 years to reach back to the level of pay I was once at, but now with all of the cuts in pay, no more COLA,, and a cap on merit pay increases, I will probably never see the income level I was at in the private sector....not to mention the roughly $200K I've already passed in hopes of attaining a higher pay grade The retirement program is better than any 401K, but it's self funded, and if managed properly will be very financial stable.

entitlement mentality brought about by the unions is the greatest issue/problem, and this then creates issues, as most current agreements are based on seniority, NOT merit. if one thing in the contract(s) needs to change, it's that public employee's should be treated more like private sector employees, and have to EARN their raises; this issue alone should solve most if not all problems with public sector employees, as it will force them to work hard and smart, or not receive better pay, or better, loss of employment from lack of performance.

[rimtrim]

For those of you talking about removing the minimum wage...first of all, you do realize how far out of mainstream American opinion you are, right? I bet even most Republicans wouldn't vote for that. You're entitled to your opinion, but when you're that far out of the norm, you have to have a hell of a compelling argument rather than acting like your approach is obviously correct and I must be representing the Soviet Marxist point of view.

Anyway, as we've found in these kind of debates before, a lot of it is about values. I don't want to live in a society where I'm surrounded by abject poverty and misery...even if I'm smart enough to avoid those circumstances myself. I want to live in a society that gives everyone enough to have a basic level of human dignity. If you want to be the fat cat in a place where most people make a few bucks a day, there are plenty of countries in Africa that I'm sure would be glad to have you.

Finally, for 22AudiQ...I don't want to get gratuitously personal but you chose to use yourself as an example. Frankly I don't believe that your primary income is near-minimum-wage and you're driving a 2002 WRX. You could barely pay the insurance on a WRX at minimum wage. So it's hard for me to take your case as representative of the typical minimum wage earner. I know people who actually do have to get buy on near-minumum-wage with no other support, and the last thing they're concerned about is the price of a movie ticket.

-Andrew L

[2Cor]

The retirement program is better than any 401K, but it's self funded, and if managed properly will be very financial stable.

Your retirement is not self funded. You may pay into it, but I doubt you are absorbing the full cost.

[rimtrim]

Hyperbolic post is hyperbolic.

You say it's hyperbolic, and then our resident economic conservatives come along and say it sounds like a great idea to them. See why I'm concerned? Fortunately I don't think most of the American public has gone that far off the deep end...yet.

-Andrew L

[2.FOH!!]

For those of you talking about removing the minimum wage...first of all, you do realize how far out of mainstream American opinion you are, right? I bet even most Republicans wouldn't vote for that. You're entitled to your opinion, but when you're that far out of the norm, you have to have a hell of a compelling argument rather than acting like your approach is obviously correct and I must be representing the Soviet Marxist point of view.

You brought it up.
You were just kidding then?

Anyway, as we've found in these kind of debates before, a lot of it is about values. I don't want to live in a society where I'm surrounded by abject poverty and misery...

Who does?

even if I'm smart enough to avoid those circumstances myself. I want to live in a society that gives everyone enough to have a basic level of human dignity. If you want to be the fat cat in a place where most people make a few bucks a day, there are plenty of countries in Africa that I'm sure would be glad to have you.

You realize you aren't even close to describing the US, right?

Finally, for 22AudiQ...I don't want to get gratuitously personal but you chose to use yourself as an example. Frankly I don't believe that your primary income is near-minimum-wage and you're driving a 2002 WRX. You could barely pay the insurance on a WRX at minimum wage. So it's hard for me to take your case as representative of the typical minimum wage earner.

Yet you have no problem making blanket statements that aren't representative of the society
we (the US) live in.

[garageless]

You'll notice that all the people leaping to defend the status quo in this thread profit from the system.

Everyone has profitted from the status quo. From the air we breath to the roads we drive on to the 40 hour work week and on and on. Our total tax burden, particularly for high earners, has fallen precipitously over the last 50 years. Right now in a hypocritical fit of "shared sacrifice" the hurt is on public workers. In California most public sector workers had furloughs amounting to a 14% pay cut. They had the same workload as before, just three fewer days each month to accomplish it. We could have balanced our budget with an across the board 1% of salary income tax increase. This would amount to a huge tax increase for most californians, ranging from an effective rate increase of 20% to 100%. The shared sacrifice for workers when you calculate the furlough as a tax is from 2% of income to 16% of income, an 800% increase! Shared sacrifice my a$$. How much waste is left? Not much in personnel. State budget has fallen over 5 years from 124B to 87B.

In WI the budget shortfall is mostly caused by a 117M tax cut!