This one's for "Hoffa" pBills

[pBills]

Then do the backwards math. If the principal & teachers complain that the school must get by on only $56k/year, yet the average cost for the district is $9k/student, wouldn't you want to see that $9k/student be spent in a better way, since most of that cost is for labor?

 

Why is math such a difficult concept for many liberals?

 

 

Spent in a better way? They are worried about supplies for the students, lunch programs, after school and summer programs, etc. How else should they spend the little money have? They are not blowing the money. Hell, just the increase in paper supplies for the kids has gone up a ton.

 

A major part of the problem is that the Board has it's preferred vendors to receive goods from. Even though the principal can find something cheaper someplace else her hands are tied and she can not make moves that will save money. Another part of the problem is the elected officials in the state who don't see or do not want to know that there is a problem. Just wanting to cut without digging deeper.

[Joe Miner]

And you can tell everyone they are wrong because you are on a message board. Great logic.

 

You still seem oblivious to the fact that a school cannot operate on an annual budget of $56,000/year.

 

I think you may need to look at exactly what this $56,000 budget is, because there is no way it is for the school as a whole.

[3rdnlng]

You still seem oblivious to the fact that a school cannot operate on an annual budget of $56,000/year.

 

I think you may need to look at exactly what this $56,000 budget is, because there is no way it is for the school as a whole.

 

But I was told that and it has to be true.

[IDBillzFan]

Spent in a better way? They are worried about supplies for the students, lunch programs, after school and summer programs, etc. How else should they spend the little money have? They are not blowing the money. Hell, just the increase in paper supplies for the kids has gone up a ton.

Just out of curiosity...how many teachers work at the school you keep referring to?

[pBills]

You still seem oblivious to the fact that a school cannot operate on an annual budget of $56,000/year.

 

I think you may need to look at exactly what this $56,000 budget is, because there is no way it is for the school as a whole.

 

 

No kidding which is why the meeting was held. To announce the possibility of more cuts, etc. If I could provide the transcript of the meeting I would. I just love it though how everyone who wasn't there is correct.

[pBills]

Just out of curiosity...how many teachers work at the school you keep referring to?

 

 

What does that have to do with anything? This budget does deal with teachers salaries. It deals with the operational costs outside of that

[GG]

What does that have to do with anything? This budget does deal with teachers salaries. It deals with the operational costs outside of that

 

See, Spot

 

See, Trees

 

See, Forest

[VABills]

No kidding which is why the meeting was held. To announce the possibility of more cuts, etc. If I could provide the transcript of the meeting I would. I just love it though how everyone who wasn't there is correct.

Actually you can. State law says that they must be kept and available.

 

Which school was it, or was it a county board meeting?

[Joe Miner]

What does that have to do with anything? This budget does deal with teachers salaries. It deals with the operational costs outside of that

 

You are truly clueless.

 

You aren't serving in some decision making capacity for this school are you?

 

I think you may need to look at exactly what this $56,000 budget is, because there is no way it is for the school as a whole.

 

What does that have to do with anything? This budget does deal with teachers salaries. It deals with the operational costs outside of that

 

In English this time, what exactly does this $56,000/year budget cover?

[3rdnlng]

You are truly clueless.

 

You aren't serving in some decision making capacity for this school are you?

 

 

 

 

 

In English this time, what exactly does this $56,000/year budget cover?

 

40 teachers, a Principle, an Assistant Principle, 10 bus drivers, 3 janitors, 4 people in the front office, a groundskeeper, all utilities, books, office supplies and a reserve equal to one new bus a year.

[pBills]

40 teachers, a Principle, an Assistant Principle, 10 bus drivers, 3 janitors, 4 people in the front office, a groundskeeper, all utilities, books, office supplies and a reserve equal to one new bus a year.

 

 

As stated, the part of the budget they were discussing DID NOT include labor. Teachers, Executive Staff, etc.

[Magox]

As stated, the part of the budget they were discussing DID NOT include labor. Teachers, Executive Staff, etc.

Hey PBills, I'm just trying to do you a solid, but I would just drop it. You can't argue math, at least not rationally anyway.

[3rdnlng]

What does that have to do with anything? This budget does deal with teachers salaries. It deals with the operational costs outside of that

 

Say what you mean and mean what you say then.

[VABills]

As stated, the part of the budget they were discussing DID NOT include labor. Teachers, Executive Staff, etc.

So it could be only the budget for rabbits to disect for science class. It could be the copier paper budget.

 

When you have a county with a 400 million dollar school budget, and 20 schools I doubt one of those schools only gets 56K total.

[pBills]

So it could be only the budget for rabbits to disect for science class. It could be the copier paper budget.

 

When you have a county with a 400 million dollar school budget, and 20 schools I doubt one of those schools only gets 56K total.

 

 

Frederick County has 63 schools and serve approximately 40,064 students.

 

The budget also covers the cost of providing and supporting day-to-day activities in our schools: instructional materials and supplies; program and services; salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation; facility maintenance; and technology.

 

Salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation... was OBVIOUSLY NOT PART OF THE EQUATION. According to what was said, the funding left over to cover the rest was roughly $56,000.

 

With that being said. Next time their is a meeting I will let you know.

[pBills]

Say what you mean and mean what you say then.

 

 

Really douche? So I didn't put "not" in there. You understand... well then, maybe you don't understand what was insinuated.

[Joe Miner]

What does that have to do with anything? This budget does deal with teachers salaries. It deals with the operational costs outside of that

 

As stated, the part of the budget they were discussing DID NOT include labor. Teachers, Executive Staff, etc.

 

The budget also covers the cost of providing and supporting day-to-day activities in our schools: instructional materials and supplies; program and services; salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation; facility maintenance; and technology.

 

Salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation... was OBVIOUSLY NOT PART OF THE EQUATION. According to what was said, the funding left over to cover the rest was roughly $56,000.

 

It covers teachers' salaries

It Doesn't cover teachers' salaries

It covers teachers' salaries

It Doesn't cover teachers' salaries

 

WTF?

 

The only thing I think we've established at this point is that this statement:

Oh and in all seriousness, we don't spend enough on education in this country. One of the schools (elementary) I live near has a YEARLY budget of $56,000 to cover everything. And some people say that is a bit high.

 

Is completely wrong as was immediately pointed out.

 

Simple question.

 

What is covered by the $56,000/year budget?

[3rdnlng]

Really douche? So I didn't put "not" in there. You understand... well then, maybe you don't understand what was insinuated.

 

Douche? Childlike. Anyway, which "insinuation" should I understand, or not understand? That teachers salaries were included, or that they weren't included? Should I take into account your statements or your mistatements?

[OCinBuffalo]

Premises for Unions when my grandfather helped start one in the 40's:

1. Only the best workers get to join, not everybody. Union status was earned, not entitled.

2. By definition, the union workers(see #1) had every right to demand more pay than non-union workers

3. If you didn't hold up your end of the deal, it's bye bye union card

4. Managers had a choice, hire the union, pay more, but, get a quality job done faster.

5. Based on 1-4, union labor had every right to say "hey, we are the guys doing the job, we want a cut, based on our performance"

 

Premises for Unions now:

1. Everyone is forced to join the union, or is entitled to, regardless of how they work

2. Since everybody is paid the same, based only on time they have been there, not how well they work, the good worker has no incentive to do any better than the turd, and is often discouraged from standing out, lest he expose the turd for being...a turd. Experience is more about how to be a better turd, not good, worker. The younger worker does a better job for a few years, until the veterans wear them down. Of course there are exceptions, but, those are the guys you meet in the bar who say they retired early because they were sick of the turds, and consequently, the turd management that has also given up...due to the turds.

3. Nobody gets tossed, short of work abandonment, and even then, its a lawsuit, grievance process, blah, blah, blah

4. Managers have no choice, they have to take all the turds with the good workers....and they usually end up in the bar sitting next to the frustrated good worker.

5. The average union leader/organizer is looking to do a volume business, not stand up for the good workers. The concept of paying the best workers for the best work has been replaced by: if you show up relatively sober, you are entitled to more $ than you are worth, free health care, and "hey, slow down or you will work yourself out of a job, and, if I have to tell you again, we will throw you out of the union for working too hard"....because I get paid by the head, not by the quality of work.

 

"Let me be clear": my grandfather was talking about unions, and what he worked for, being abused, and essentially over with, in the 80s. There simply is no incentive for a turd to do anything to improve. In fact, if anything, now its more about the the stud being turned into a turd. Spare me the anecdotes and platitudes: I have lived and seen this right in front of me, so, I have one of mine for every single one of yours.

 

I can't help thinking that if things went back to the original set of premises, we would all have a much better view of unions. But, then again, historically, I also think that the big mistake was letting the CIO join the AFL.

 

I think we can all agree that skilled labor, and the good workers involved, have every right to collective bargain no different that how any other association works on behalf of its workers.

 

However, I also think that when we allow non-skilled labor to demand wages that the market doesn't support....we end up with factories in China, and again, no incentive for unskilled labor to improve themselves. When we let/force everybody to join the union, we end up with the teacher's union, the results we have, and the endless "just throw money at it" nonsense.

[OCinBuffalo]

Also, regarding the Teamsters:

 

I find it highly ironic that they complain about wages, threaten to strike, etc., get higher wages, and then complain about the price of the very goods they haul, like milk, going up....which of course causes the price of most other things to go up too.

 

WTF do they expect to happen?

 

Yet, every time, they haul out the tired, old, "standard of living" and "cost of inflation" arguments, when they want more money, again.