LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteIf they work more days then they should be paid more. It's as simple as that. They don't get paid as much because they have so many days off and I don't have a problem with that.Originally Posted by pramjockey
Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net
200% of Average household income
175% of Average household income
150% of Average household income
125% of Average household income
100% of Average household income
75% of Average household income
50% of Average household income
25% of Average household income
Other (explain)
President
I disagree. As salaried employees working a full time job over a full year, if the school year is lengthened, it should just be offset by fewer of those goddamn inservice days and other after-hours obligations.
Vice President
If they work more days then they should be paid more. It's as simple as that. They don't get paid as much because they have so many days off and I don't have a problem with that.
"The long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead." - John Maynard Keynes (admits his philosophy is not viable)
Secretary of State
The "research" to which you linked didn't actually cite any exceptions to Gresham's Law, as it is widely applied. Instead, they made up some erroneous definition of what Gresham's Law supposedly means, and then argued against that.
It appears to me that you have already made up your mind that markets are irrational and inefficient, and that my evidence to the contrary, no matter how well presented, will be ignored. We will just have to agree to disagree.
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add "within the limits of the law" because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Isaac H Tiffany (1819)
I think schooling all year round is probably a good idea, if only to compete with the rest of the world.
We aren't so much a farming and harvesting nation anymore, there's no longer any need to have the summers off.
That said, the need to keep the lights on, is gonna cost more...which I am sorry to say will increase taxes.
Secretary of Defense
There was a while ago an experiment with year round schooling.
As I recall it had the same number of days teaching but with the breaks spread out. That way all classrooms would be used all the time, just at break times it could be a different class.
The educational advantage was that the kids did not regress over an extended summer break.
The main drawback as I see it is family vacations, if you had two or three kids it might be impossible to get time off for all the kids at the same period for a family trip without taking a kid out of class.
I always find it strange that only reasonable people agree with me.
We could off set those costs by turning off the heat and forcing kids to wear sweaters
U.S. House Representative
I am for a solid base pay of 80% of what households get, because there is some work necessary in the summer, and a great deal of "homework" the teachers have to do daily (grading papers, parent reports, class prep, and after school conferences). Added to this there should be bonus pay for better performance and higher test scores. I am not really fond of the tenure system as it is, and it should be easier to fire bad teachers. Teaching is not a profession, it is a calling. We owe average teachers for the hours they put in. What we owe the good teachers, we could never pay. Trying to put a price on what a good teacher accomplishes is pointless, I am Ok with whatever they make as long as it works for them.
"Againsed stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain" Friedrich von Schiller[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks