It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gov. Chris Christie - Giving a Frank Response to a Teacher pushing Union Talking Points

page: 2
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 03:40 AM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


He doesn't state inflation as a non-issue. He states it as a fact, but rather that unions see it as a non-issue. They demand a certain percentage in wage increases, even if the economy or product is not worthy of such. How is that viable or even sustainable?

He also points out that if in a perfect world the wage increases would occur, he would be for it, but because we dont, they cannot. How is this bad? Are we supposed to just submit to what unions want? Give them increases when everyone else is supposed to sacrifice? Your views are jaded and slanted towards that of pro-union and that is fine, but you are ignoring the overall situation.




posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by Aristophrenia
 


I was in an union once and it was only because of the union that the pay was close to a livable wage. I work at a different place now with no union. The pay and benefits are great but you have no protection from management, especially supervisors/managers with a grudge. Also, because most of the people I work with are refugees, management likes to take advantage of language barriers to scare them into compliance.

There has to be balance. There can be an union that gets the fair wages, benefits and protections that employees need without forcing corporate entities to bend over too much.


Why not ?
Corporations are part of society - they are a function of that society should therefore act in service - NOT the other way around which is how it is now.
The country is stuffed not because of Unions, but because of corporate greed.

How do you pay for teachers - well - since 911 there has been an increase in intelligence spending equivalent to the rest of the worlds military budgets combined - just the increase.

The estimates for the war in Iraq cost the American tax payer 3 trillion dollars. THAT is what you are all paying for, that is where your money went - and now to fund that piece of junk they are asking teachers to take a pay cut - what is wrong with you people WAKE UP!!!




posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


Why shouldn't a janitor make $18 an hour? They are probably the hardest working person in the entire school system. Would you want to clean up feces, urine and vomit after kids and be paid some lousy ass wage?

Apparently you have never had to work any kind of disgraceful job that is back breaking. They make near minimum wage, treated like crap and there is no long term care for their well being.

The kind of society we should be shooting for is one where a lawyer lives next door to a janitor, IMO.

That would get the elites heads out of their own asses.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


But that is not how the division of labor falls. Most pay is based upon the skill one brings to a certain job. While a janitor is a noble job because of the nature of the dirty work that they do, the skill involved is not something of great stature.

Pay is generally lower because the supply, that being the amount of people that could be a janitor is great. With such an abundance of supply, the demand is really low, which keeps the wages of such a job at a lower level.

Lets put it this way, you say a lawyer and a janitor should be able to live next to each other, and this is one of the few countries that used to happen. But why should someone who has gone out, educated themselves in a skill that is in high demand, be given the same wage as someone who can push a mop or clean a toilet?

A persons wage potential is directly attached with their skill. A carpenter that has 20 years experience will most likely produce a better service and/or product than someone off the street wanting to learn how to be a carpenter.

The same goes here in regards to say teachers. An educator is one of the most noble jobs one could hold. You are imparting another human being with your knowledge to better that person. Again though, the supply of such is everyone. Everyone can teach. So with such an abundance, generally pay will be lower. What happened here in the United States is that the teachers' unions began demanding higher and higher wages, more benefits, etc that just are not sustainable. Guaranteed wage increases of 3-4% each year is a gravy train. One should not receive an increase in pay just because a year went by. There is no accountability to the service being presented and they are rewarded nonetheless.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


I like this mans brand of truth.
Honesty and being forward with the facts. Why dont all the politicians take lessons from this speech.


TPTB will never let a man that is this honest ever rise above were he is. That is the problem we have in the world we live in.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Subjective Truth
 


Unless we once again reassert the fact that we the people are the PTB....as was attempted in the late 18th century.

I would never want to see this man run for president. He can accomplish so much more at the state level to bring about good things. The more locally we continue to show we can govern without the meddling hands of our Imperialistic Central Government, the more power we bring back to the states.

It used to be that was what kept things in balance. The power struggle between states and the central government. For the past 70 years the central government has been grabbing more and more authority and power without a whimper from the states. Federal Highway Act (Forcing seatbelt laws, drinking age laws, etc. while holding out on money if states do not comply), Department of Education (taking power from the states to dictate education and making some blanket policies towards over 300 million people), and on and on.

When I see a governor actually stand up for his state and ask that everyone begin making sacrifices it shows true leadership to get through a rough period. I hope he remains strong and fights the good fight.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 




Older teachers can adapt and can be valuable role models to a younger generation.


True! .. But they still shouldn't make twice to three times as much as a new teacher. Actually, I'd say they deserve to be paid nearly the same. They both do the same job.



I'm also tired of seeing unions demonized over and over and over by the right-wing folks, many who have probably never been part of a union and could understand less how they work.


Been part of a Union, They added so many new guidelines to the work place, new chains of command and of course took something like $60 a month from my paycheck.

Wife is a part of a nursing union, she loves it, but from my perspective their benefits are outlandish. Especially "comp time" a concept I'd never even heard of..

As I also said I have three close relatives in a Teachers Union, including my own mother.. it's a constant "us vs them" mentality.



As for the public vs private debate?


This depends on 1. Where you live. 2. What kind of private school and 3. How you learn. Some "private" schools are a joke.. my favorite is the "my kid's so special he just needs to paint with his fingers till he's 10" schools. Generally Academy's offer the best education, followed by Christian and Jewish schools (I went to a Catholic school). It also matters if you come from a rich city, a poor city, a rural area, or inner city. Generally Suburban schools are much, much better than Inner City schools. Rural schools have different priorities than say upper income suburban schools. With Public schools the "quality" is almost ALWAYS directly related to funds available.. not generally so with private schools, most private schools especially religious based ones operate in the red with lower paid teachers yet offer superb education. I know with Catholic schools if they do not perform right the Archdiocese will completely alter the admin and staff, as well as update the curriculum. I learned in 12th grade public what I learned in 8th grade at my Catholic school. And as I pointed out, I went to a poor over populated public high school. It was a big ol' daycare slash prison. Nothing more, even had the inward facing barbed wire lol.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


If the public were allowed to choose salaries, what do you think the outcome of that would be?

Teachers would probably be scraping by on a minimum salary and they'd be glorified babysitters for a bunch of spoiled brats.

That's why unions exist and they're not all that corrupt. I don't know how NJ politics work though.


Here are the facts about New Jersey's Education system.
New Jersey in 2009 ranked third (3rd) in the amount of money spent per child on education, yet they ranked thirty sixth (36th) on SAT scores. Over paid babysitter? Seems to me like in a state like New Jersey where the citizens are paying that much money are right in expecting better results.

I can't speak for ALL parents but MY children are NOT spoiled brats. I spend a lot of time at my children's schools and the VAST majority of kids are well behaved. If the classroom is out of control and the children aren't learning that is the teacher's fault.

blog.bestandworststates.com...
blog.bestandworststates.com...

blog.bestandworststates.com...



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   
we need a guy like this for president!



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 03:41 AM
link   
The argument against unions is generally that they're bad for business...why? Well, because instead of funneling cash into their capitalist owners pockets the wealth is redistributed to the workers...uh oh...there's that term: redistribution of wealth! Of course, from a capitalists standpoint, we shouldn't allow the collective to decide on their benefits, only the owner. Only one may decide for all, that is the true nature of a capitalist enterprise.

Who was that a few posts back arguing that service sector employees don't deserve a union because they provide a public service? What kind of thought pattern is that?! 'You shouldn't benefit from the service you provide me!' Thank you feudal lord, may I have another?

Some of these that argue against dictatorship communism are the same ones insisting upon dictatorship capitalim. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, don't you understand that? Incentives, beyond the greater good ideal, are a wonderful thing. I understand that. The ability of the worker to benefit from the labor is also a good thing. We're one of the only modernized nations in the world that doesn't have laws that require vacation time. That includes the 'overworked' Japanese.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Aristophrenia
 


Let me tell you about the situation in NJ. Many people, not just teachers, in the private sector have been taking pay CUTS for the past 2 years. Teachers in private schools make between 10%-20% less than public school teachers. Private sector employees all contribute to their retirement funds out of their pay checks.

The governor is asking the teachers union to freeze pay for a couple of years and have the teachers pay a very small percentage into their pensions. NJ is broke so this sounds reasonable to me. If the state was a business they would already be bankupt and out of business.

People like me in the private sector have been giving back for a couple of years now so they won't get much sympathy from the public here in NJ when they whine about having to freeze their pay.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Erasurehead
 


I was going to bring that up, good point.

Listen folks, the government workers, right now are making twice what the private sector is.

The private sector PAYS the salaries of the public sector.

Now, with the government caused downturn in the economy, THEY CAUSED IT, you want the private sector to continue to bail out the pensions and the mandatory pay increases for the government workers? You got to be fricking kidding me.

The private sector has in about 75% of the cases lost their ENTIRE retirement, the others lost most of it. Do you think people can actually survive on a PROMISED social security system? That is already broke, the payments have been frozen now and I am assuming that now they are in the red, that will be changed to cuts in the near future.

BUT OH NO, the government workers and the other unions will get their pay for their exorbitant salaries and exorbitant pensions and their exorbitant vacations and other perks HUH!?

Peeps make me so fricking pissed off sometimes. Get this, we the private workers and companies are SICK and TIRED of paying for the sycophants in government and their connected unions. This is not even mentioning the other leeches on us!



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


I agree. It's like they live in their own little world with no financial crisis. They want to continue to get their yearly increases when there is no money. Last year I had to give back 4% of my salary because of the situation, everyone was asked to give back some for the good of the company. It was either that or people losing their jobs. Must be nice not having to live in reality.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Aristophrenia
 


I don't know where you're going here but I'm looking for a solution that even the people who whine about teachers and unions will understand.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
Listen folks, the government workers, right now are making twice what the private sector is.


I have seen nothing that supports that claim.


The private sector has in about 75% of the cases lost their ENTIRE retirement, the others lost most of it.


That's what happens when you throw all your retirement money into the great Wall Street casino. If you don't like it, you should've put your money into SS. Don't punish me for being smart with my money when you were stupid.


Do you think people can actually survive on a PROMISED social security system? That is already broke, the payments have been frozen now and I am assuming that now they are in the red, that will be changed to cuts in the near future.


Yes, I do think they can survive. Payment INCREASES have been frozen, not payments themselves.


BUT OH NO, the government workers and the other unions will get their pay for their exorbitant salaries and exorbitant pensions and their exorbitant vacations and other perks HUH!?


That's what happens when you don't have unions, you get screwed. This is why private sector, non-union employees get paid less, they let themselves get paid less.


Peeps make me so fricking pissed off sometimes. Get this, we the private workers and companies are SICK and TIRED of paying for the sycophants in government and their connected unions. This is not even mentioning the other leeches on us!


I'm sick and tired of hearing you whine about our good ideas rewarding us while your bad ideas and decisions punish you. Go back to your maxed out credit cards, I'll stick to my savings account.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


You must have me confused with someone that does not control their own retirement fund.
Sorely mistaken you are.

So, the government right now has about 178 Billion in unfunded pension problems and they are going to collapse.

And that is the problem for the rest of us, WHY?

Not whining for myself there narcissist, I am angry for my fellow man and progeny.

You may feel it is your right to place the rest of the US and our children in perpetual slavery for your current wants and needs, but the rest of us that are NOT so petulant, do not feel the need to enslave our fellow man.

Sorry, I am a sovereign and I ask nothing of my government or fellow man. I am not one of the collective.

I am a man that stands on his own two feet. I only ask that you and the government do the same.

If your damn socialist theft of our progeny and mankind is so damn wonderful, why not make it voluntary. Oh, because it is NOT wonderful.

The well is dry and we will no longer fill it.

edit to add for your skepticism-

Federal workers earning double their private counterparts

WOW, ain't that a kick in the pants!




edit on 13-9-2010 by saltheart foamfollower because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


You do know that there folks who can't stand on their own two feet, even if they wanted to?

That's the problem with the right-wing part of this dual-winged monster. You pay taxes, right? Do you expect something out of them? I pay taxes on SS, thus I want SS when I want it. I'm the guy paying taxes. Knowing the government probably won't be able to give it to me, they'll eventually fall anyway. There are ways around these obstacles but you have to be creative.

Over time, you will no longer need to blame government for your ills. You just need to know how and where to look for something better.

Also, bash Carter all you want. I think you're lost in the late 70s because that same Carter helped a former U.S citizen that was a NK prisoner get home safely.


edit on 13-9-2010 by The Sword because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by links234
I have seen nothing that supports that claim.


Well...maybe double was an exaggeration on his part but here is some data for you to chew on.....

Federal Pay is ahead of private pay (granted my original intent was about a state governor, but the scope can be expanded because it is my thread).

Overall, federal workers earned an average salary of $67,691 in 2008 for occupations that exist both in government and the private sector, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. The average pay for the same mix of jobs in the private sector was $60,046 in 2008, the most recent data available.


While this does not seem like a whole lot more, and it really isn't, the article actually did some leg work for us and included this: (Emphasis is mine)


These salary figures do not include the value of health, pension and other benefits, which averaged $40,785 per federal employee in 2008 vs. $9,882 per private worker, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.


Source: Federal Pay ahead of Private Industry

Now I will admit there are studies that show that the Federal workforce is generally higher educated (mainly because people with education tend to follow the money), but it is the benefits in which we see the ire. Average 40k in benefits? For what? Being an employee of the Government? Ridiculous!

When things start to look sour on the horizon, private companies will begin to look how to cut costs while retaining their workforce. Benefits tend to go first, but not always. If they do resort to such, they do so to remain in business, not to gut the little man or some absurd notion that flies around nowadays.

On the contrary, we have Government. Who sees the tide of economic slow down and then GUARENTEES pay raises and benefit increases! How do you justify such asinine practices? How do you say that is a good steward of the tax payers dollars? You cannot and if you try, you sound like a fool.


That's what happens when you throw all your retirement money into the great Wall Street casino. If you don't like it, you should've put your money into SS.


Wait, what? Show me where I can opt out the Government Ponzi scheme known as SS.....I am forced to pay into a system that I will never benefit from.


That's what happens when you don't have unions, you get screwed. This is why private sector, non-union employees get paid less, they let themselves get paid less.


You are looking a such a small slice of the picture. For every good case you can show how unions are good, I can show otherwise...and vice-versa. Your pro-union stance is clouding your judgement.


I'm sick and tired of hearing you whine about our good ideas rewarding us while your bad ideas and decisions punish you. Go back to your maxed out credit cards, I'll stick to my savings account.


This I agree....but the Government is doing everything BUT promote that idea....



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 


Yeah, I wonder what citizens were doing over in China "accidentally" crossing the NK border?

I do not blame the government for any of my ills, I blame them for the county's ills.

There is a difference.

As for Carter, if you are old enough to remember the time, you can say something about his presidency. If not, then you cannot. Since I do, I do.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


With regards to the benefits that federal employees recieve vs the private sector;

Healthcare: Federal employees (congress included) have the option to obtain health insurance from a PRIVATELY owned insurance company with the government covering some of the cost. This is absolutely no different than a major corporation doing the same for their employees. Not all business' do this and not all federal employees have insurance.

This is why we needed health care reform, what I wouldn't give to at least have gotten a public option...

401k: Government employees don't exactly get a 401k but they get something similiar, pay into a pool with other employees and the government adds something like $0.75 per $1 of investment. The biggest difference between the two would be that the private sector will take that money to wall street in an effort to invest it and grow it, while the government will only do that with some of the money. This is why so many in the private sector lost so much of their 401k's when the recession hit and so few in the public sector did.

Not all private employers have this either.

Paid time off: Government employees get 30 days/year of paid vacation time plus 15 days/year of sick time. That means they take time off and get paid their base pay during that time or if they're sick. In some countries (mainly Europe and Asia) this is mandatory that your employer does this. We require no such thing in the United States, something I'm hoping gets addressed in the coming years by this administration.

Unless you work for a very large employer, this doesn't happen. The average I've seen is 15 days/year of paid vacation time and equivalent or less of that in sick days from the private sector, once again, non-union.

Now, whether all this adds up to $40k/year...it's possible. Pre-recession, in the IT field, the private sector made a LOT more money than government employees, now...not so much. However, every federal employee (congress included) pays the same in taxes that someone in the private sector does making the same amount. The same.

To Saltheart: You may not feel a responsibility to society but I do.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join