T.O. tells Dr. Phil he squandered $80 million

[KD in CA]

Perhaps I should put it another way.... the total cost/spending of "education" doesn't go down. When was the last time your school taxes or property taxes went down? Never.

 

The reason teachers would need to be cut is because the cost of keeping their retired colleagues comfy in perpetuity continuously rises. Those are the costs of "education".

If the state limited their retirement benefits, this problem would disappear.

 

Exactly.

 

Step 1: Blackmail elected officals into signing absurdly rich contracts that contain numerous provisions to make it difficult if not impossible to change future pension/benefits payouts.

Step 2: When there's no money left for anything else cry "they want to cut teachers!!!" whenever someone suggests the incorporation of fiscal sanity into state and local budgets.

Step 3: State goes another billion in debt but who cares about that?

[San Jose Bills Fan]

What's that?

 

I'm a teacher, it's unbelievable how many parents come flying at the teacher first before speaking with the child. The child is always right these days, teachers are just dumb and ignorant and stupid.

 

As an coach and sub teacher locally, I second this post. I could give stories of being emasculated by administration because the faculty member was maintaining control of the room while the kid was acting like a fool. Our society sucks at parenting in general.

 

Yeah, yeah, yeah, you teachers have it so rough. Get paid a decent salary, get your summers off, end of the day for you is 2:00, get a week off for Christmas, week off for Easter, a week off in Febuary because the kids need a winter break, get free or nearly free medical & dental insurance & get a nice cushy pension when you retire when your 50 all on the tax payer's dime. The school districts keep telling everybody that taxes keep going up because they need to find the money to fund all of this. Why don't they do what every business in the free world is doing now & you know do away with pensions & setup 401k's & make the employees pay a good % of the health benefits. My school taxes are nearly $4 grand a year now & have gone up every year in the last 6 years since I moved into my house in Lancaster. Got little sympathy for teachers.

Gordio, why are you lumping every teacher as if they have the same job?

 

Within teaching there are huge disparities in both working conditions and compensation.

 

Yes some teachers have it pretty good but there are also a lot of other teachers who have it pretty bad.

 

I am not a school teacher but I think your attack (which it clearly was because we weren't talking about teacher compensation) is off base because (your attack) is an absurdly sweeping generalization and because it's mean-spirited and beside the point… tangential at best.

Edited May 9, 2012 by San Jose Bills Fan

[tonyd19]

The problem with teacher pensions is usually administration. In our school district, there is 1 administrator for every 4 teachers. There pension is roughly 90% of there average 3 highest years compensation after 30 years of service. Many of the administrators make 150k a year plus. Just crazy numbers.....yes they are unsustainable. And I spent a lot of time advising public school pensions here in Nevada. The key is fewer administrators, more teachers.

[Malazan]

The problem with teacher pensions is usually administration. In our school district, there is 1 administrator for every 4 teachers.

 

The primary goal of bureaucracy is to sustain itself.

[Captain Caveman]

Guys, there's a whole other forum for this bull ****. Now can someone start working on that Brewster's Millions remake?

[bklnpete]

The hate-on-teachers thing is pure jack-assery.

 

If you think they have it so easy then go get yourself a master's degree, try finding a job in a decent district in today's market, put up with kids all day who are parented by people like "Gordio", work from home on evenings and/or weekends because that's what every teacher I know has to do to get grades, lesson plans completed, then go through the frustration of not being able to teach a proper curriculum to kids but rather be forced to prepare kids specifically for the statewide exams that schools are now judged by if they want to receive funding...

 

yeah man, a really fu#@ing breeze of a job. What a bunch of loafers.

[dogma+]

Congrats T.O.

 

And I won't shed one single tear for anyone who is basically handed a lottery win because they are physically blessed to play a game for a living and make more then what most people will in a lifetime, then throw it all away because they thought the gravy train would never end.

 

You had your chance at living very comfortably for the rest of your life not having to work, instead, you can join the rest of us working people now and put your college degree to work for you

 

From what i've read, it is largely due to his financial manager.

[DJasper Probincrux III]

Never said teaching was an easy job biscuit, but why should everybody fund their pensions? Have them do what everybody else does & set up a 401k for them.

I like how everyone sort of pretends that teachers aren't taxpayers too.

 

FWIW, I pay roughly 8% of my gross towards my future pension each pay. I also pay property taxes where I live to the tune of about 5k per year. I also pay FICA and state income tax and local earned income tax and federal earned income tax. To imply that I'm getting a free ride is BS. You want to end pensions fine. I'll take a check right now for that 8% I've been kicking in plus the earned interest. Since at that point there will almost certainly be a matched percentage of contribution and I will have missed out on years of that match along with the compounded interest THAT would have accrued I'd at least like a check for the match amount retroactively. That seems fair since you're ending a guaranteed benefit that two parties entered into a contract for potentially 29 years into a 30 year contract. I'll go ahead and put that into the 403b I already have set up alongside my pension and have been kicking an additional 5% into myself already. So long as we're doing away with guaranteed benefits I'd like a check for the 14% FICA that has been already paid for that I'm due as well.

 

Of course, if I retired today you'd only look at my pension and lifestyle and assume that you're footing the bill by yourself and refuse to account for any piece that I paid for or my own financial planning.

 

Furthermore, teachers in WNY do start over 30k. They're also required by law to have a college degree. I started out in the private sector more than 10 years ago at more than 30k so it's not like that's an out of line salary by any stretch. I have more education and more qualifications than my wife and she makes roughly 30k per year more than me annually, not including her incentive bonuses, in the private sector. In our current step system I'd have to work for more than 20 more years in the District to make the salary she makes today. She puts in 8 hours in the office and does work at home. I put in 8 hours at the office and then work at home.

 

Is being off in summer nice? Yup, sure is. Is being off on holidays nice? Yup, sure is. Is having a desk thrown at me by a 14 year old girl fun? Nope, not so much. EVERY job has perks and bad parts. My wife's perks are free tickets to events and food samples and comped meals at fancy restaurants and travel junkets to nice places. My perks are I get to see my kids in summer and I don't have to work on Christmas. You want to make school year round? OK, go for it. Just don't complain when we give you grief for yanking your kid out of school in July to hit the beach for 2 weeks. What you'll then do is rail about how teachers are pampered and spoiled because they want air con installed in 100 year old buildings that dont have it so we can work when it's 95 degrees...as though corporate America sweats it out inside those corporate parks in the burbs.

 

I'm not asking for your sympathy or your pity and I'm not griping about my job in the least. All I'm asking is that you give the people in the business the same respect you would demand at your own job. Just because we teach doesn't mean that we can't, or haven't already done, something else. The prevailing attitude is that our job is in some way easy or less than a private sector job. I've had both. Pushing papers around an office and sitting in meetings all day is WAYYYYYY easier than what I do now an way more people can do it successfully.

 

Non-union carpenters in Philadelphia make about $35 an hour. Extrapolated out over an 8 hour day and 191 days that I work we make almost exactly the same salary. Not that carpenters shouldn't make that but I don't think anyone would look at non-union carpenters as grossly overpaid.

[Mr. WEO]

I like how everyone sort of pretends that teachers aren't taxpayers too.

 

FWIW, I pay roughly 8% of my gross towards my future pension each pay. I also pay property taxes where I live to the tune of about 5k per year. I also pay FICA and state income tax and local earned income tax and federal earned income tax. To imply that I'm getting a free ride is BS. You want to end pensions fine. I'll take a check right now for that 8% I've been kicking in plus the earned interest. Since at that point there will almost certainly be a matched percentage of contribution and I will have missed out on years of that match along with the compounded interest THAT would have accrued I'd at least like a check for the match amount retroactively. That seems fair since you're ending a guaranteed benefit that two parties entered into a contract for potentially 29 years into a 30 year contract. I'll go ahead and put that into the 403b I already have set up alongside my pension and have been kicking an additional 5% into myself already. So long as we're doing away with guaranteed benefits I'd like a check for the 14% FICA that has been already paid for that I'm due as well.

 

 

 

You make good points, but I take issue with this paragraph.

 

We all pay taxes. Your argument doesn't make progress there. In the case of property and school taxes, almost none of us see that money in our compensation. You can't have your FICA, either. We all pay that too. As for the 8% you've been kicking in for your pension, there would be no "interest" earned and you can't have a check---any more than I could in the private sector. We are offered a 401 or 403b. We aren't offered the alternative of "a check" instead. And, unlike pensions which typically have a guaranteed rate of return, your 401 likely would have lost money like the rest of us did in the past 3 years. It doesn't earn interest.

[vincec]

Exactly.

 

Step 1: Blackmail elected officals into signing absurdly rich contracts that contain numerous provisions to make it difficult if not impossible to change future pension/benefits payouts.

Step 2: When there's no money left for anything else cry "they want to cut teachers!!!" whenever someone suggests the incorporation of fiscal sanity into state and local budgets.

Step 3: State goes another billion in debt but who cares about that?

Right. Because teachers are in it for the money.

 

People in NY have no clue how good they have it. Here in NC, (non-unionized) teachers don't get paid bupkis and have poor benefits. The results are class sizes of 30+ and even 40+ students per class in high schools and mediocre national rankings for performance. Schools in NY are ranked 3rd in the country.

 

Maybe to help the situation, the state could start by giving more than 50% of the "education lottery" to the school system and not give hundreds of millions public dollars to renovate football stadiums.

[KD in CA]

Right. Because teachers are in it for the money.

 

People in NY have no clue how good they have it. Here in NC, (non-unionized) teachers don't get paid bupkis and have poor benefits. The results are class sizes of 30+ and even 40+ students per class in high schools and mediocre national rankings for performance. Schools in NY are ranked 3rd in the country.

 

Did you miss the distinction between "teachers" and "unions"? Or are you just ignoring the continued gross abuses of those unions? Please, tell us how the 'rubber rooms' in NYC or the taxpayer paid boob-jobs in Buffalo are helping to educate our children.

 

 

Maybe to help the situation, the state could start by giving more than 50% of the "education lottery" to the school system and not give hundreds of millions public dollars to renovate football stadiums.

I've posted my feelings many times about the absurdity of taxpayer money going to build stadiums, but as for needing more money in education, that's simply bullsh--. The US spends more per pupil than anywhere in the world. The problem isn't money, the problem is abuse of money.

[DJasper Probincrux III]

You make good points, but I take issue with this paragraph.

 

We all pay taxes. Your argument doesn't make progress there. In the case of property and school taxes, almost none of us see that money in our compensation. You can't have your FICA, either. We all pay that too. As for the 8% you've been kicking in for your pension, there would be no "interest" earned and you can't have a check---any more than I could in the private sector. We are offered a 401 or 403b. We aren't offered the alternative of "a check" instead. And, unlike pensions which typically have a guaranteed rate of return, your 401 likely would have lost money like the rest of us did in the past 3 years. It doesn't earn interest.

What I'm saying is if you kill my pension today that's fine. I want the money I've kicked in back. I'm legally obligated to contribute that percentage and didn't have the option to put it elsewhere instead. If you d/c the pension my money shouldn't disappear and actually there has been a rate of return earned since the state has been investing that money and the state's pension fund has been positive over that time (the issue is that it was less positive than projection). Also, the market today has doubled in value since 2008 so if your 401k is still super down you need a new fund manager. You should at least have broken even.

 

I'm going on the premise that the pension was killed today, not if we went back in time and started over. Obviously if we went back in time and started over I wouldn't be able to expect anything because it would be a 401k. To kill a defined benefit that is legally protected and supported by a load of case law is going to take quite a lot of negotiating

 

You take a glass half full approach to school taxes as well, you could also look at it that I've giving the District a 10% salary rebate every year. The FICA comment was more of a throw away but since Social Security is also a defined benefit that some people are eager to take away from people who have involuntarily put a significant amount of money into it seems like a reasonable corollary. I fully understand it won't work that way but it's the same idea. I've been legally prevented from investing that 14% myself in return for a promise of a defined benefit in the future. If you do away with the benefit it seems reasonable that people should be able to at least break even (excluding inflation) on the deal not be -14% of their lifetime income for a broken legal contract.

 

There are plenty of things that ARE screwed up about pensions. For example, when I retire I can withdraw all of the money I put in and STILL collect the defined benefit with no reduction. i shouldn't be able to do that. It screws the current taxpayers who then have to fund the benefit without my contribution in the kitty anymore. I can go reinvest every dime in something else, keep earning a rate of return while continuing to collect the same pension checks. That's not right and I'll support a law change stopping that type of practice. I'll support changing pensions for future entrants or even eliminating them entirely for new people and going to a 401k match program but I won't support just deleting the pensions of people who have been in the system and paying in for decades and telling them "Oops sorry, thats just all gone now, here's a 401k with a $0 balance, good luck".

 

On a semi-related note - our country's increased use of 401k accounts and other direct equity investments for retirement funds is IMO very dangerous. It creates tremendous pressure for politicians to make policies to keep the market moving higher because more middle class people than ever get royally screwed if the market drops. If Warren Buffett loses 50% of his net worth he's still insanely wealthy. if a 65 year old guy on the verge of retirement loses 50% of his 401k thats a big big issue.

[vincec]

Did you miss the distinction between "teachers" and "unions"? Or are you just ignoring the continued gross abuses of those unions? Please, tell us how the 'rubber rooms' in NYC or the taxpayer paid boob-jobs in Buffalo are helping to educate our children.

When did unions become the enemy in this country? It's very sad. Unions were designed to create the bargaining conditions so that the people that actually do the work can make enough money and benefits so that they can make a career out of being a teacher, police office, fireman, electrician, etc. instead of constantly looking to switch professions or get second jobs to be able to afford raising families. I think that it's a worthwhile mission. The arrangements between the owners and unions that lead to pensions are just free market negotiations and are as fair as you negotiating a higher salary, Fred Jackson negotiating a new contract the Bills negotiating with the city for stadium improvements.

Edited May 10, 2012 by vincec

[DJasper Probincrux III]

The US spends more per pupil than anywhere in the world.

This is false. In actual dollars per pupil we're 4th. As a percentage of GDP we're 21st. We spend more than the rest of the G-8 though. Although keep in mind we spend a WHOLE lot of money educating everyone (special ed). Most of the rest of the world is pretty ok with excluding kids that don't fit the system and/or have a very rigid tracking system like Japan's where your life path is basically decided before you get to high school.

[vincec]

This is false. In actual dollars per pupil we're 4th. As a percentage of GDP we're 21st. We spend more than the rest of the G-8 though. Although keep in mind we spend a WHOLE lot of money educating everyone (special ed). Most of the rest of the world is pretty ok with excluding kids that don't fit the system and/or have a very rigid tracking system like Japan's where your life path is basically decided before you get to high school.

People who think we spend a lot of money on education should take a look at the federal budget to see where the money really goes. Although this wasn't the final budget for 2011 it wasn't too far off and I found this a useful link: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/02/01/us/budget.html

 

The graphic makes the distribution pretty clear.

[DJasper Probincrux III]

When did unions become the enemy in this country?

They became the enemy as soon as big business stopped calling out the Pinkertons. They became the only bullies on the block and quite honestly the leaderships are completely out of control. I'm in a union and I disapprove of many of the tactics that other unions use to "negotiate". Check this site out for why Philadelphia is a terrible place to get anything done www.phillybully.com

 

People who think we spend a lot of money on education should take a look at the federal budget to see where the money really goes. Although this wasn't the final budget for 2011 it wasn't too far off and I found this a useful link: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/02/01/us/budget.html

 

The graphic makes the distribution pretty clear.

This is misleading as well though. The federal government does not pay for education, the states do. The feds only pay a percentage of special ed (and not even what they're legally obligated to). It'd be like looking at a state budget looking for military spending, it wouldn't be there.

 

In fact, I think you'd find a lot of people who would really like the feds to take their ball and go home since they aren't really supposed to be legislating ed policy in the first place. Utah told the feds to stick No Child Left Behind up their asses under the penalty of losing all federal funds. Utah's test scores stink...but they stunk before as well so you can't really blame the loss of money for that.

Edited May 10, 2012 by Big Papi

[vincec]

They became the enemy as soon as big business stopped calling out the Pinkertons. They became the only bullies on the block and quite honestly the leaderships are completely out of control. I'm in a union and I disapprove of many of the tactics that other unions use to "negotiate". Check this site out for why Philadelphia is a terrible place to get anything done www.phillybully.com

Do you really think that the US would be better off without unions? Where do you think the money that businesses and industries save would go? I'll give you a hint, it's not going to go into average americans pockets. Yes, there are abuses by unions just as there are by corporate owners and executives (who for example take 6 figure bonuses while losing their clients retirements), but that doesn't mean that the concept of organized labor is bad. You don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

 

This is misleading as well though. The federal government does not pay for education, the states do. The feds only pay a percentage of special ed (and not even what they're legally obligated to). It'd be like looking at a state budget looking for military spending, it wouldn't be there.

This is true. It would be interesting to see a graphic showing the combined state and federal spending nationally, it that's possible. I suspect that it would still pale in comparison to other spending initiatives. One F-22 costs almost $500,000,000. ONE plane. That would alleviate a lot of overcrowding in NC schools and probably a few other states as well.

Edited May 10, 2012 by vincec

[DJasper Probincrux III]

Step 1: Blackmail elected officals into signing absurdly rich contracts that contain numerous provisions to make it difficult if not impossible to change future pension/benefits payouts.

Well, if the politicians are part of the same pension system do you really have to blackmail them? The second part of this statement is just contract law. Case law backs that up all day long, it's not about provisions in the law itself. It's not hard to change the benefits of new entrants, it IS pretty near impossible to reduce the benefit of those who have already signed in. That ship has sailed. best you can do is change it now and not let anyone else in. States including NYS have been doing that for years. If you think modern pensions are bad you should check out the stuff they gave out back in the 60's and early 70's. My parents were both public employees and got into the NYS system in Tier I, they're currently up to Tier 6 with each Tier having reduced something - in some case quite a lot. Check out Tier I (which they closed in 1973), 50% of your highest 3 year average salary for life if you put in 25 years.

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

. . . There are plenty of things that ARE screwed up about pensions. For example, when I retire I can withdraw all of the money I put in and STILL collect the defined benefit with no reduction. i shouldn't be able to do that.

 

Just curious - - what state's teacher retirement plan now allows this?

 

I won't support just deleting the pensions of people who have been in the system and paying in for decades and telling them "Oops sorry, thats just all gone now, here's a 401k with a $0 balance, good luck". . . .

 

I don't see how anybody could reasonably argue that such a change would be fair - - has anybody in a position of authority actually proposed such a change? I don't follow this issue closely, but all I remember hearing on the news are proposals in various states to force new teacher hires into a 401k or 403b type of defined contribution retirement plan. Maybe I haven't been paying enough attention.

 

Thanks in advance for any info.

[DJasper Probincrux III]

Do you really think that the US would be better off without unions? Where do you think the money that businesses and industries save would go? I'll give you a hint, it's not going to go into average americans pockets. Yes, there are abuses by unions just as there are by corporate owners and executives (who for example take 6 figure bonuses while losing their clients retirements), but that doesn't mean that the concept of organized labor is bad. You don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

I agree that corporate folks have just as many bad people who abuse their positions but I do disagree that the money saved wouldn't go into american's pockets. In lots of cases the money has to come out of our pockets in the first place to pay for the projects. Also, bad unions do cause local problems and drive development away. Corporations and businesses in general, corporate or not, like to invest capital to make money. Lack of a union wouldn't make people get paid more but it would probably make two projects possible where there is only 1 now which puts twice as many people back to work and creates investment and renewal twice as quickly. Would you rather have 1 carpenter working at $80 an hour or 2 at $35? Would you rather have one derelict building revitalized and put back on the tax rolls or would you rather have 2? union domination in Philly has led to real issues including a pay-to-play culture that pervades government at all levels here and can be enforced by union bullies as it is the in the case of the developer I cited earlier at Phillybully.com

 

This is true. It would be interesting to see a graphic showing the combined state and federal spending nationally, it that's possible. I suspect that it would still pale in comparison to other spending initiatives. One F-22 costs almost $500,000,000. ONE plane. That would alleviate a lot of overcrowding in NC schools and probably a few other states as well.

Just for perspective, 500 million is a lot of money, but the Philadelphia City School District budget is 2.5 BILLION alone. The Commonwealth of PA spends about 25 BILLION combined on education annually. Philly spends 10% of the total by itself, the 500 other districts spend the rest for an average district budget of about 4.7 million dollars annually.

 

Just curious - - what state's teacher retirement plan now allows this?

 

 

 

I don't see how anybody could reasonably argue that such a change would be fair - - has anybody in a position of authority actually proposed such a change? I don't follow this issue closely, but all I remember hearing on the news are proposals in various states to force new teacher hires into a 401k or 403b type of defined contribution retirement plan. Maybe I haven't been paying enough attention.

 

Thanks in advance for any info.

Pennsylvania's plan allows that (not coincidentally, the politicians are in the same pension system as the teachers)

 

I haven't heard anyone in authority actually make a statement to that effect but I hear plenty of regular people make statements like that all the time.