More than 30,000 in NJ protest state budget cuts, Mostly Union & Government Employees

reply to post by Xtrozero


That is why I want to see private schools being allowed to operate with the voucher programs. Wisconsin attempted this, but somehow this is what ended up happening.

Yes, you were allowed to remove your child from public school and get like a $2000 voucher or money to sent your child to a private school. BUT, the public school would still get the same amount of money as if the child was still there.

Private entities have to produce or fail. The teachers would get paid better and the management end would have to remain small to keep the entity running efficiently. I know of no one that would rather put their child in a public school compared to a private one.

When government is the employer, who gets the bucks? The big guys, just like in a union.

I do not know. In the beginning unions worked, now they are set up just like government.

reply to post by endisnighe


Everywhere they tried the voucher program it has been a success for the student involved. The voucher programs in D.C. alone account for the success of several students who had failing grades while in public schools and soared after transferring to a private school with the voucher programs.

Guess who ended the D.C. voucher programs because it took money away from the public system?

Originally posted by Xtrozero
That is what happens when you finally pull the populace off the state's nipple. The idea that one needs to be productive and competitive to earn a living is an alien thought in many states....

And how is state contributing to the welfare of the people?

Who needs state...

Originally posted by breakingdradles

It was mostly comprised of public employee union members and several community and nonprofit groups that would lose some or all their funding if Christie's plans are adopted.

LOL, screw them. Fat cats with government and union jobs don't want to get paid like normal people!

I say cut their benefits more!

Except the non-profits, keep those open, but screw the rest.

I would not lean so hard into the us vs. them rhetoric, but I will agree
that we need smaller government and it should not be getting paid
more than most of the other ppl working similar jobs.

I think when the general population is losing jobs, then they should as well.

In other words tie the real economy to the government jobs so the
government workers will do more to insure the security of the
job market for everyone.

Here in my state we have a branch of city government hired just to
go around and tell ppl to mow their yard and paint their house.

We have government funded historical societies that hold all day
long hearings because someone expanded their driveway,
with their permission, but did not stain the concrete to make it look old.

We have new streetlights going up during the recession in a nearby town
that are over priced fancy lights costing much more while ppl are
losing their jobs, cars, and homes.

We have the government writing ballot initiatives that end up being
land grabs that end up benefiting private ppl to the tune of
$700 million in tax money which is used to seize land from
businesses near the river to expand the bar and sports district.

Government is running amok in MANY ways.

It needs to be put in check big time even at the state level.

Good Luck to you all !

reply to post by endisnighe


Your post shows how teacher's unions are stopping simple solutions to problems that would not only benefit society, but reward good teachers as well.

A simple solution to poor qualities in public schools is to reward good teachers and fire bad ones. Many talented people choose not to go into teaching because the pay is lousy. Many of our country's best teachers went into Medicine or Banking. Most of us, including teacher's unions agree good teachers should be among the most highly paid people in America.

Yet the teacher's unions want it both ways. They want the carrot, but not the stick. They want all their members to make high salaries, but do not want any sort of accountability whatsoever.

reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint


There was a town in Massachusetts or Rhode Island that did just that, they wanted to fire the bad teachers. The union would not allow such a move as per a clause in the contract. So the District Admin fired all of the teachers in that union, shut down the school because the unions were standing in the way of progress. The admin went to further say that the teacher would have to reapply for their same positions.

It didn't work out well, the unions ended up getting all the teachers back to work even the bad ones. So unless you have a governor like Christie who is willing to stick it to the unions for their corrupt practices, little help is available for those admins actually looking to fight these unions by themselves.

reply to post by prionace glauca


More school boards have to be gutsy like that, and when they are the people need to stand behind their school boards and stand behind the good teachers.

Just get rid of the public schools all together. Increasingly public schools have become nothing more than day care centers for children and teenagers above the age of preschoolers. Public education is nothing more than political indoctrination for those who wish to be educated, and babysitting for the rest. It is outrageous to think elected officials are the best source of choosing educational curriculum, and public schools become nothing more than political battlefields. Let education be handled by the private sector, including those parents who choose to home school their children, and then the idea of vouchers becomes even more useful as public assistance can be used to help those families who want to place their children in a private school of their choice, and those kids who don't want an education will save the state untold dollars by not having to babysit them at the expense of those who go to school to learn.