patrick.net

ChrisLA says

education loans are high because government is intent on subsidizing the education bubble

Like Tot, you seem to confuse cause and effect a lot. I think it's administrative bloat among other reasons.

Maybe what you mean is that you think government could influence the bloat and the price increases by denying loans to students who need them.

I don't think so. That would be just one more nail in the coffin of the American Dream of upward mobility.

marcus says

just_passing_through says

brag about “surfing the web” instead of teaching the horrible kids

Right. That sounds like a lot of teachers I know.

just_passing_through says

Complete trash… Yacked about “can’t be fired”

Why just teachers ? Police and fireman have a union too. OBviously they are all lazy and incompetent too, right ?

Listening to the stupidity and arrogance of many of our right wing dim bulbs gets so fricking tiring.

Yeah yeah, I’m a teacher, a schill for the unions. So don’t listen to me.
That’s like saying you’re an American, so you can’t have a legitimate opinion about American foreign policy (which might be true in your case - as I saw your sad attempts to confuse what it is we mean when we talk about Palestine).

Marcus, that is just the most recent example and not a single data point - I've known other loser teachers. I really don't know you, haven't paid any attention to your comments and so have no comments about your situation.

I've had some young teachers (cousins) in my family that got into that sort of work, found out how hard it is (mostly they say due to lack of support from the parents these days) and changed careers.

That's a hellava lot better than being a frigin entitled parasite like the young lady I met at the party was.

Most that I've dated got into teaching because whatever prior career they'd trained for they decided was 'too hard' or whatever. They assumed teaching would be 'easy' and they wouldn't have to 'work too hard' and would get 'summers off to travel'. One traveled so much she ended up filing for bankruptcy from the debt she'd accumulated.

My career had some realities I had to face too (and still does) but I didn't need a Union. Things like idiots in the lab spreading toxics around multiple companies I worked for going out of business etc. Each time I hit the street it lit a fire under my rear to retrain and work that much harder to get a better job. I was poor for so many years relative to hi-tech workers around here. I slept on the floor of a studio for 4 years on a carpet that smelled of wet dog, ate what I could afford and so on to stay out of debt. Each time I got another job it was better. I earned where I'm at now which I jokingly refer to as "lower middle class" for the peninsula.

It was interesting hearing a bus driver tell me how he'd only been on the job for a few years and yet was making 2.5x my salary (at the time) and planned to go on disability soon like all of his buddies. He said driving buses makes their butt hurt and about 75% were on disability.

Public Unions are a joke. Nobody is forcing kids to breathe toxic coal mine dust these days. Too many of the workers gamed the system for too long and those of you working now won't be able to game it much longer - the game is up.

Those teachers who are passionate about their jobs (I know of one, but then I don't really hang out with teachers) have my respect, I know it's tough and thankless - like so many other jobs. Maybe you are one of them I don't know.

Also, I think you misunderstood my point about Palestine but so be it...

Thanks for the polite response. Clearly I was wrong about you, and you have my respect for what you have accomplished. My issue was with the generalization, based on what honestly sounds fictional (the teacher bragging about not doing right by the children).

It's true there are some unique aspects to teaching. When I went into teaching it was after taking some fairly big entrepreneurial risks in my earlier careers. There were three primary things attracting me to it.

1) One was the social aspect of interacting with people instead of a computers (although there is quite a yin and yan to this). As people to interact with go, children can be quite enjoyable or very difficult if they have major issues they are working out.

2) Yes, the job security. I like the job security with this type of job, and feel that it is a trade off for knowing you'll never be making great money.

3) The idea of doing something that has non monetary rewards beyond just excelling at what you are doing. That is rewarding. But if your work impacts peoples lives (which can be stressful in a kind of deep way), then I think it helps make difficult work more tolerable.

As for summers off, many teachers teach summer school. And most people have no idea the amount of grading and planning that is done during the school year on nights and weekends. Teachers would burn out without the good vacation time they get. You would have to do the job to understand. If you ever worked really hard in college or grad school, then you know the feeling of going on break at the holidays or at summer. It's the same for teachers, the break is needed, because the pace is much different than most jobs.

If schools were competitive in ways you suggest, I believe there would be problems you haven't considered. Especially ones addressing the needs of the poor and unmotivated children, who have parents who don't understand or appreciate the difference that education can make or who don't appreciate their children's potential.

But also, the blame placed on unions, and even the impact that unions have on education is greatly exaggerated. Bad teachers are pressured, and this is increasingly true because of the media focus on this.

If there weren't unions, then there would be less security with teaching. Obviously an average to slightly above average teacher who has worked their way to the top of the pay scale, might be replaced by new teachers for half the pay when budgets are tight (or even in interest of higher returns for stock holders), if it weren't for unions.

I know, I know, that's how it is in other fields. True. But if you are an engineer, you can bust ass and get your pay up to 150K or substantially higher in management. So if you want to take the job security away from teaching, and you still want good talented young people to devote themselves to teaching, please be willing to pay them more, to compensate for the fact that they might find themselves on the street when they are 57.

I think the truth is it isn't that teachers go in to it thinking it will be easy, it's pundits out there, including many on this site that think it's easy and have no respect for the actual job of teaching.

ChrisLA says:
"For whatever the reason internet is filled with bunch of 20somethings that have not lived a life and think they know the liberal answer to everything because they can write a post on the internet. Competition requires competitors, otherwise it might as well be called monopoly."

Wow, you really should do better with your insults and insinuations. There are other conservatives on this board who do it much better than you.

My actual age is 41. IRL I get mistaken for mid to early 30's all the time. I haven't been mistaken for a twentysomething since I was in my mid-thirties. I guess working with 18-25 year olds keeps me young. Lol!

Last time I checked, and I help people to get into colleges all the time as part of my work with 18-25 year olds, there is fierce competition in higher education. I finished my latest master's degree almost 6 years ago. The choices are so vast that it is difficult to choose. Public institutions compete with private institutions. Public institutions compete with each other as private institutions compete amongst themselves. In point of fact you can argue that costs have increased as choices have multiplied and private institutions gain market share. The facts show this. Is there a true cause and effect here? I think that's an interesting question to pursue as you make the assumption that somehow by eliminating public funding for all levels of education, privatizing all levels of education, and allowing comptition in the marketplace to pick the winners and the losers, you get lower costs and better quality. Right now the data doesn't support your hypthesis.

marcus says

If schools were competitive in ways you suggest

That was someone else not me. I just think "Public" Unions are a bad idea in general. In particular within bankrupt nations/states. Also, I think a lot of the problem is not necessarily the lower level public employees. There are fat cats in Unions too and the 'already retired' who are living large at your expense as well was that of tax payers.

I hear you about "finding yourself on the street" and no I'm not a engineer by degree. I'm a lowly biologist - picked up several SW Dev languages AFTER the dot-com bust. I'm now a bioinformatics scientist. My title is that of a 3rd level PhD yet I've only a BS. I don't know anyone in my shoes. Given what I've seen in biotechnology and my age I expect my career to end at age 45 - or maybe sooner given an unexpected layoff.

Maybe I'll buy a subway sandwich shop for my next career if I can save up enough dough. :)

As an aside, I'd like to nominate UTI for having the most unfortunate acronym for a university. Lol! :-)

UTI

I hope they subsidize cranberry juice.