Remember a while back when Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was gunned down for speaking in public and there was a calm, rational discussion about right-wing hate speech possibly being connected to actual violence? And remember how Rush and Glenn and Bill and their buds all told us how ridiculous this was? Perhaps you even remember them explaining how preposterous it was to allow the actions of a few unstable radicals to represent an entire group?
Anyhoo, the list below kind of disagrees. It even kind of suggests maybe some of us wacko lefties may have been on to something when we surmised that the violent talk (even if only metaphorical) that the right had publicly inundated us with since President Obama first proved a viable presidential candidate, might actually coincide with real violence.
Once again, I said "coincide" not directly cause, but again, the growing list of violence on our own soil shows more than a casual correlation with right wing beliefs.
To be clear, this is not the kind of thing that keeps me up at night. It hit me over the head as I read Charles Pierce's recent article about fragmentation - both the kind that ends up as shrapnel and the kind that sends people running to their own little corner of the internet to find those fragments of society who agree with them when no one else will... and when no one else should. Pierce also suggests that we are ALL political, but rather than facing up to the challenges, responsibilities, and privileges that entails, we'd rather just stick our heads in our own ostrich holes and claim we're not political. "Awww Spongebob... I hate politics. Can't we just talk about something else?" But whether you only enjoy the most local level of politics i.e. the gossip at the local barber shop, or you truly enjoy reading crap like this, if you are human, rest assured, you are a political animal. You have no choice.
So, having cleared that up, back to the point, which is that since well before 9/11, there has in fact been a string of domestic terrorism in this country - Pierce notes that a school was bombed in Michigan in 1927 because, according the bomber, "his taxes were too high" - that by the perpetrator's own admission, is strictly right wing in impetus.
I know you think I'm just pulling this out of my rear, as I occasionally enjoy doing in less serious conversations, but look at the list... a list from another article by David Neiwert, a Spokane Washington based journalist and blogger who is clearly a left-wing nut job... because he collected this stuff into one place... which means, regardless of the police reports that verify all as fact, that he can't be trusted because he compiled the collection and dared to suggest it it might lead to a rather clear conclusion... but before we get into that, the list:
-- July 2008: A gunman named Jim David Adkisson, agitated at how "liberals" are "destroying America," walks into a Unitarian Church and opens fire, killing two churchgoers and wounding four others.
-- October 2008: Two neo-Nazis are arrested in Tennessee in a plot to murder dozens of African-Americans, culminating in the assassination of President Obama.
-- December 2008: A pair of "Patriot" movement radicals -- the father-son team of Bruce and Joshua Turnidge, who wanted "to attack the political infrastructure" -- threaten a bank in Woodburn, Oregon, with a bomb in the hopes of extorting money that would end their financial difficulties, for which they blamed the government. Instead, the bomb goes off and kills two police officers. The men eventually are convicted and sentenced to death for the crime.
-- December 2008: In Belfast, Maine, police discover the makings of a nuclear "dirty bomb" in the basement of a white supremacist shot dead by his wife. The man, who was independently wealthy, reportedly was agitated about the election of President Obama and was crafting a plan to set off the bomb during Obama's inauguration.
-- January 2009: A white supremacist named Keith Luke embarks on a killing rampage in Brockton, Mass., raping and wounding a black woman and killing her sister, then killing a homeless man before being captured by police as he is en route to a Jewish community center.
-- February 2009: A Marine named Kody Brittingham is arrested and charged with plotting to assassinate President Obama. Brittingham also collected white-supremacist material.
-- February 2009: A 60-year-old former Republican Party campaign volunteer opens fire on a gathering of Chilean exchange students in an apartment complex in Miramar Beach, Fla., after telling a neighbor he wanted to start a "revolution" against Latino immigrants.
-- April 2009: A white supremacist named Richard Poplawski opens fire on three Pittsburgh police officers who come to his house on a domestic-violence call and kills all three, because he believed President Obama intended to take away the guns of white citizens like himself. Poplawski is currently awaiting trial.
-- April 2009: Another gunman in Okaloosa County, Florida, similarly fearful of Obama's purported gun-grabbing plans, kills two deputies when they come to arrest him in a domestic-violence matter, then is killed himself in a shootout with police.
-- May 2009: A "sovereign citizen" named Scott Roeder walks into a church in Wichita, Kansas, and assassinates abortion provider Dr. George Tiller.
-- June 2009: A Holocaust denier and right-wing tax protester named James Von Brunn opens fire at the Holocaust Museum, killing a security guard.
-- February 2010: An angry tax protester named Joseph Ray Stack flies an airplane into the building housing IRS offices in Austin, Texas. (Media are reluctant to label this one "domestic terrorism" too.)
-- March 2010: Seven militiamen from the Hutaree Militia in Michigan and Ohio are arrested and charged with plotting to assassinate local police officers with the intent of sparking a new civil war... to protest the current liberal government.
-- March 2010: An anti-government extremist named John Patrick Bedell walks into the Pentagon and opens fire, wounding two officers before he is himself shot dead.
-- May 2010: A "sovereign citizen" from Georgia is arrested in Tennessee and charged with plotting the violent takeover of a local county courthouse. (note the frequency with which these Sovereign Citizens appear on this list! (they sure as hell ain't a liberal group)
-- May 2010: A still-unidentified white man walks into a Jacksonville, Fla., mosque and sets it afire, simultaneously setting off a pipe bomb.
-- May 2010: Two "sovereign citizens" named Jerry and Joe Kane gun down two police officers who pull them over for a traffic violation, and then wound two more officers in a shootout in which both of them are eventually killed. (because Obama was coming to take their guns.. their words, not mine)
-- July 2010: An agitated right-winger and convict named Byron Williams loads up on weapons and drives to the Bay Area intent on attacking the offices of the Tides Foundation and the ACLU, but is intercepted by state patrolmen and engages them in a shootout and armed standoff in which two officers and Williams are wounded.
-- September 2010: A Concord, N.C., man is arrested and charged with plotting to blow up a North Carolina abortion clinic. The man, 26-year--old Justin Carl Moose, referred to himself as the "Christian counterpart to (Osama) bin Laden” in a taped undercover meeting with a federal informant.
-- January 2011: A 22-year-old gunman named Jared Lee Loughner with a long grudge against Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and a paranoid hatred of the government walks into a public Giffords event and shoots her in the head, then keeps firing, killing six people and wounding 14 more. Gifford miraculously survives.
-- January 2011: A backpack bomb with the potential of killing or injuring dozens of people is found along the route of a Martin Luther King Day “unity march” in downtown Spokane.***prevented from detonating and injuring hundreds by overpaid, inefficient PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
-- January 31, 2011: An Army veteran from California with a previous arrest record for making threats against President Bush is arrested for making terrorist outside a mosque in Michigan inside a car whose trunk was filled with Class C explosives. (be it anti-Bush or anti-Obama, anti-government is a RIGHT wing tenet)
-- March 2011: Five people in the Fairbanks area are arrested on charges of plotting to kidnap or kill state troopers and a Fairbanks judge. All five are self-proclaimed "sovereign citizens," including local militia leader Schaeffer Cox.
-- March 2011: A man from Madera, CA, named Donny Eugene Mower is arrested for the firebombing of a Planned Parenthood clinic and the vandalization of a local Islamic religious center. The crimes were committed in the name of Mower's one-man hate group, the American Nationalist Brotherhood. His 'manifesto' asked: 'Isn't it time that someone hit back?'
The list is straight from Niewert's blog "Crooks and Liars." It even has a groovy, interactive map with little "pins" located where each of these incidents took place. You can click on the pins and they'll take you to more details (and sometimes fun commentary) about the incidents. Here's a link to the map:
So, what does it mean when someone says "Left wing conspiracy theory?" Does it suggest that the left is dreaming up a conspiracy where none exists? Or does it mean that the left is conspiring against the government, the right, someone else? It's one of those labels that's kind of hard to pin down... hard to know what the person saying it really means.
While I'm asking questions, do you remember hearing about any of these stories? Or did they simply get fragmented away as isolated incidents with no possible connecting thread? Let's face it, when it's possibly a Muslim activity, our press is getting very good and keeping it in the news for weeks on end. When a story has to do with an arbitrary concept like a debt ceiling and how Congressional Republicans will spare us from disaster, our press will float it as though the Earth's viability rests on it, but what did our press do with these stories? Seems like they kind of just died quickly and were forgotten as isolated incidents. How is that even possible, unless, of course, the press bends over backwards to appeal to the right... and the Whitehouse bends over backwards to appeal to the right, and this whole myth about a "liberal media" is truly that: myth. WTF? And don't even get me started on Obama's willingness to kiss the Right's ass lately...that's another whole post!
One thing is pretty clear though, the side of the division where the above list began is right. I am open to evidence to the contrary, but there doesn't seem to be a list of leftist inspired violence since 2008 that even comes close to this. And I'm not saying anyone is formally in charge of "the right" and is orchestrating each of these hits. No, I'm not saying that at all. It's clearly a lot more like Al Quaeda... with independent cells, purposely cut off from each other, and from those higher up the chain, to prevent the lower agents from knowing too much about the upper ones. Just like Al Quaeda, occasional videos are released with generic orders and motivational propaganda like a pep rally for the minions. Only instead of occasionally showing up in Al Jazeera's mailbox, we get to see the videos on Fox... or hear them on AM radio, but the motivational speech and the de facto connectivity of these cells is as unmistakable as the network Al Quaeda has built and uses to terrorize infidels.
Pierce goes on to point out in his article that we are a nation of folks who would rather ignore the monster we've created, retreat to our fragmented safe places, and hear the praise of those who think like us, than ask the questions to which we're afraid of the answers, or, worse yet, to face up to what we've built out of these fragments.
I guess I kind of agree with Pierce's analysis but only on an individual level. On a national level, I believe that a middle still exists... that moderates still hold the middle of the bell curve that is our national thinking. In fact, I still believe Obama could represent that middle of the bell better than any of our modern presidents if only we'd all enter the discussion as responsible, rational adults as opposed to used car salesmen and low-balling buyers who represent the looong tail of the bell... the 1% that rightfully should get ignored, but instead have taken over the media forcing the rational moderates among us off to our little fragments.
Those of us who used to reside comfortably on the sides or even smack at the top of that bell curve need to come out from our fragments and demand that the conversation stay somewhere near the middle... where the adults used to converse and compromise. It's great to acknowledge, and occasionally even borrow from some of those wackos on the looong tails of the bell once in a while, but it's time to stop letting them dominate the conversations, the headlines, and stop pretending that everything they say is a valid idea.
If Obama has failed at anything, it's keeping those long tails in check. Granted, he's not solely to blame. The Fox and AM radio crowd have set up the tilted table for this failure since way before anyone even heard of Obama. Truth be told, I kind of admired Obama for his reluctance to stoop the their level, but I am becoming of the opinion that he's allowed way too much leeway for the radical right's agenda to be portrayed as legitimate. As such, he's given away his bargaining power UNLESS he comes at them with equally ridiculous and radical low-ball-like counter-proposals. If he does this, he BECOMES the wacko AM radio and the people on that list up above falsely claim that he is. But if he doesn't, he's assuming that the facts and logic will prevail, and look where that got Jimmy Carter. (How ridiculous was Carter for assuming Americans dealing with an oil embargo might see the logic in alternative energy sources??)
The hate speech and oversimplified ILlogic spewed by AM radio somehow convinced us that our press was biased toward the left... so much so that any connection of the long list of right-inspired domestic terrorism above can't possibly exist... so much so that our press actually started believing it until they bent over backwards to avoid the falsely applied label... so much so that they refused to even hint at a connection among the items on that list... or Oklahoma City... or the 1927 Michigan school bombing. So much so that even as T. Boone Pickens begins to recognize the profitability of alternative energy, that he is magically transformed into a treehugger for pointing out that he does it for the money! So much so that NO ONE mentioned how many times it was simply the routine of Congress to lift the debt ceiling in the past... well, no one but Jon Stewart, until very recently... months into the "debate."
Still don't believe we've swung way too far to the right? Then how else do we explain how every viable Republican candidate who dares venture into the race gets clipped for having a rational, moderate belief until they're all rendered so bland and generic that they drop out or they adapt to the ultra-right, and leave us actually considering people like Michele Bachmann or Sara Palin or Emanuel Cleaver as viable candidates? Seriously... HTF do these people even get mentioned in the same arena as John Kerry or Bob Dole or Clinton or Reagan???
It's time we all forget the fragments and force the conversation back to the middle. Our compass has been thrown WAY TF off, but not by a "liberal media."
This argument HAS to move back to the middle. All of our nation's arguments HAVE to move back to the middle. Congress gets paid to compromise, not stand off. That's what politicians do, and make no mistake, we're ALL politicians. How about this: instead of allowing "re-elect NO ONE" to be the theme of the next elections (after all, it didn't exactly work out last time) let's go with a theme of electing only those candidates who admit that they are in fact politicians. Cuz the surest way to know they're lying is when they speak and claim they're not. Perhaps then we can pull off the blinders, recognize the obvious connections among the listed violence above, and stand together, in the middle, against it. Fear mongers need the kind of fear these events inspire in order to force the conversation away from the middle. Let's leave the fear mongering to Al Quaeda. Then let's get back to work proving that this majestic empire is NOT ready to fall just yet. If that's gonna happen, it's gonna happen somewhere in the middle.
You can call folks in the middle fence riders. You can spout cliches about how traffic doesn't move in the middle, and you can pretend what we've done in the past 10 years or so has been great for all involved, but if you're honest, you know it hasn't been working. Let's meet somewhere a little closer to where the middle used to be and start fixing it.
Luth
Out
Wednesday, August 03, 2011
Friday, June 24, 2011
A parent´s sacrifice
The wife (Mrs. Poup) and I thought it would be a cool experience for our oldest spawn to do the non-school, and therefore, non-language club trip to France and Spain. (school boards can´t take the risk to even nominally endorse a trip that actually provides some kind of education or meaningful experience these days)
We also thought it would be cool for one of us (me) to go along.
So far we were right. It´s been VERY cool.
So cool, in fact, that I feel kind of guilty for being here.
But I won´t let that stop me from dispelling the BS I´ve heard about France - from, I suspect, people who seem to forget we kind of owe them our independence.
See, here´s the thing: I´m no stranger to world travel. I am quick to enjoy myself, but not to be impressed. I´ve been to London, Port au Prince, Rome, Munich, Baghdad, Kuwait City, Doha, Keflavik, Tegucigulpa, ... I´ve even been to Detroit, LA, Salt Lake City and Ann Arbor (and a bunch of other places - I was just dropping the names of the weird ones) ...and so in the course of my travels I´ve had opportunity to hear all kinds of stories about how weird, dirty, inhospitable, anti-American, overly commercial, and other versions of how shitty France, especially Paris, is as a destination.
And guess what I´ve discovered: not so much.
Granted, a lot of the must-see sites, as is the case in most of Europe, are a tad more religious than I would need them to be, but, also like most of Europe, even those sites represent the amazing ability of humans to overcome and leave something better than they found it.
The fact that these historical sites still exist is proof that WE CAN all just get along... even if many of these sites remind us that we didn´t at some point.
Anyhoo...
Thus far, every day of this trip has been better than the last. We started in Paris (after an overnighter on two planes). Martremont, Sacre Couer, Notre Dame, The Louvre, Eiffel Tower, Seine River Cruise, Sorbonne/Latin Quarter... Two days there was not enough to get more than a taste of it, but the taste was absolutely delicious.
Then it was a train ride to Biarritz. For those of you who have never experienced a train ride in Europe... well, I may as well not even bother trying to describe the beauty of efficient public transportation...clean, comfortable, friendly, cheap... I know... I know, Gov. Kasich is right on: why would Ohioans want anything like that?
Biarritz was a refreshing change from the mad bustle of Paris. Quaint, quiet, calm, but every bit as beautiful and awe-inspiring. And like every other stop thus far, it was better than the last AND it reminded me not to listen to any "conventional wisdom." Everything about France was spectacular!
San Sebastian and Bilbao were next. (and speaking of new experiences, each better than the last, I think I´ve found a new favorite place in the world)
With me are bright, creative, resourceful teachers who love their jobs, work their butts off (even during their summer "off" on a non-school trip), and who seem to genuinely like their students; parents who are actually involved in their kid´s lives BEFORE rehab, uplanned pregnancies, etc.; grandparents who seem way too aware of a life outside of small-town, midwestern America to actually be Americans, at least as the news portrays us; a tour guide who seems to enjoy his work, know his stuff, and who has a sense of humor; and a group of 12 mature, respectful, semi-responsible teenagers who will likely one day look back on this trip as a pretty powerful experience.
There have been several moments thus far on this trip wherein I´ve been confronted with just how lucky I am... to be able to send a daughter on this trip... to have met people and seen sites... to have breathed the air, tasted the food, felt the warmth of the sun, shielded my eyes while watching it sink into the ocean or rise over a mountain range... to have been alive right here, right now...to be excited to get home to another great daughter and wonderful wife and mother...
and it all started there in that dirty, worthless, overly commercial, expensive, anti-American Paris.
Don´t ever go there. It´s horrible.
Oh! the sacrifices we parents make.
Luth,
Out.
We also thought it would be cool for one of us (me) to go along.
So far we were right. It´s been VERY cool.
So cool, in fact, that I feel kind of guilty for being here.
But I won´t let that stop me from dispelling the BS I´ve heard about France - from, I suspect, people who seem to forget we kind of owe them our independence.
See, here´s the thing: I´m no stranger to world travel. I am quick to enjoy myself, but not to be impressed. I´ve been to London, Port au Prince, Rome, Munich, Baghdad, Kuwait City, Doha, Keflavik, Tegucigulpa, ... I´ve even been to Detroit, LA, Salt Lake City and Ann Arbor (and a bunch of other places - I was just dropping the names of the weird ones) ...and so in the course of my travels I´ve had opportunity to hear all kinds of stories about how weird, dirty, inhospitable, anti-American, overly commercial, and other versions of how shitty France, especially Paris, is as a destination.
And guess what I´ve discovered: not so much.
Granted, a lot of the must-see sites, as is the case in most of Europe, are a tad more religious than I would need them to be, but, also like most of Europe, even those sites represent the amazing ability of humans to overcome and leave something better than they found it.
The fact that these historical sites still exist is proof that WE CAN all just get along... even if many of these sites remind us that we didn´t at some point.
Anyhoo...
Thus far, every day of this trip has been better than the last. We started in Paris (after an overnighter on two planes). Martremont, Sacre Couer, Notre Dame, The Louvre, Eiffel Tower, Seine River Cruise, Sorbonne/Latin Quarter... Two days there was not enough to get more than a taste of it, but the taste was absolutely delicious.
Then it was a train ride to Biarritz. For those of you who have never experienced a train ride in Europe... well, I may as well not even bother trying to describe the beauty of efficient public transportation...clean, comfortable, friendly, cheap... I know... I know, Gov. Kasich is right on: why would Ohioans want anything like that?
Biarritz was a refreshing change from the mad bustle of Paris. Quaint, quiet, calm, but every bit as beautiful and awe-inspiring. And like every other stop thus far, it was better than the last AND it reminded me not to listen to any "conventional wisdom." Everything about France was spectacular!
San Sebastian and Bilbao were next. (and speaking of new experiences, each better than the last, I think I´ve found a new favorite place in the world)
With me are bright, creative, resourceful teachers who love their jobs, work their butts off (even during their summer "off" on a non-school trip), and who seem to genuinely like their students; parents who are actually involved in their kid´s lives BEFORE rehab, uplanned pregnancies, etc.; grandparents who seem way too aware of a life outside of small-town, midwestern America to actually be Americans, at least as the news portrays us; a tour guide who seems to enjoy his work, know his stuff, and who has a sense of humor; and a group of 12 mature, respectful, semi-responsible teenagers who will likely one day look back on this trip as a pretty powerful experience.
There have been several moments thus far on this trip wherein I´ve been confronted with just how lucky I am... to be able to send a daughter on this trip... to have met people and seen sites... to have breathed the air, tasted the food, felt the warmth of the sun, shielded my eyes while watching it sink into the ocean or rise over a mountain range... to have been alive right here, right now...to be excited to get home to another great daughter and wonderful wife and mother...
and it all started there in that dirty, worthless, overly commercial, expensive, anti-American Paris.
Don´t ever go there. It´s horrible.
Oh! the sacrifices we parents make.
Luth,
Out.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
NOW Congress questions war-like intentions?!
You've got to be shitting me! Mitch McConnell has suddenly decided that it's Congress's job to stop a President from going to war? WTF was he in 2003 when we invaded a country where the dictator was NOT waging war against his own people, was NOT criticized by the U.N. AND the Arab League, did NOT have WMD (as it seems to have turned out), and clearly did NOT have anything to do with the 9-11 attacks? Where was he to stop an invasion in which we were NOT joined by every neighboring military force?
Is his (and the rest of Congress's, and the entire Fox News audience's) memory really that short? I guess we can forgive him for forgetting our nearly solo, non-U.N. sanctioned invasion of Iraq. After all, the strategy was so well planned that it was over and done almost immediately.
What's that? Oh, this just in: we're still mired in that useless OIF mess!
So really, before we go casting those stones, let's glance outside our shattered glass houses for a minute and just admit that the only reason to criticize the current president for going along with the rest of the world and preventing the wholesale slaughter of innocent Libyans at the hands of their completely f'd up dictator is because nothing President Obama does will ever be good enough for his opponents. EVEN if what he does is kind of the right way of what his predecessor got so wrong just 9 years ago!
Please.
Luth
Out
Is his (and the rest of Congress's, and the entire Fox News audience's) memory really that short? I guess we can forgive him for forgetting our nearly solo, non-U.N. sanctioned invasion of Iraq. After all, the strategy was so well planned that it was over and done almost immediately.
What's that? Oh, this just in: we're still mired in that useless OIF mess!
So really, before we go casting those stones, let's glance outside our shattered glass houses for a minute and just admit that the only reason to criticize the current president for going along with the rest of the world and preventing the wholesale slaughter of innocent Libyans at the hands of their completely f'd up dictator is because nothing President Obama does will ever be good enough for his opponents. EVEN if what he does is kind of the right way of what his predecessor got so wrong just 9 years ago!
Please.
Luth
Out
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Apples, oranges, and more myths about teaching
You hear a lot of talk these days about how teachers only "work" for 9 months a year. Technically, even that's a stretch according to the logic of the comment. They really only "work" for about 180 days. (well, most contracts cover something like 192 days, give or take but still...) In many circles, that's really only 6 months! So the teacher in my previous example, (the one with 27 years experience and a PhD) could make $89,000 for just 6 months worth of "work." Holy shit. How are so many people laying off a job like that? Could it be there's more to it? Is it possible our definition of "work" when applied like this is a little twisted?
The problem with this logic is that it only makes sense when you define the word "work" as "performance delivery." Let's look at how this definition might apply to other professions to gain a better understanding of what that means.
Wal-Mart is a retail giant. Their actual "work" consists solely of selling stuff to customers. So by the definition that says teachers only "work" for 6 months a year, Wal-Mart employees only "work" when customers pass through the checkout line. Stocking shelves isn't work. Unloading trucks isn't work. Cleaning floors or bringing carts in from the parking lot isn't work. Hiring, paying, scheduling employees isn't work. Hell, by this definition, Wal-Mart management and administrative folks never work a day in their lives! The only folks who actually work for Wal-Mart are the cashiers. And they only work when accepting money from customers during the actual exchange of that money for a Wal-Mart good or service. Bagging purchases isn't work. Answering questions isn't work. Counting out a drawer at the end of a shift isn't work.
How about actors or entertainers? The average musician is lucky to make one hit song in his lifetime. That song is usually around three minutes long. So by our definition of work, the average musician only works about three minutes in a lifetime. The missed takes in the studio while recording this song aren't work. Subsequent play of the song on a radio, in a commercial, etc. aren't work. The time spent learning to play an instrument, writing a thousand shitty songs that eventually become the hit, rehearsing, auditioning, putting bands together, touring, breaking bands up...not work.
Actors appear in a play or on a movie screen for about 90 minutes. So they only work for the 90 minutes that it takes an audience to see the movie or play. Producers, directors, set-builders, stunt men... none of those people ever actually work by our current definition of working. Just the actors who actually deliver a performance - and then, only during the actual performance. The fact that it can take up to a year to film a movie doesn't factor into our definition of work. The only actual work we're counting now is the time during which the performance is actually delivered.
How about manufacturing employees? Their job is to put things together. So stocking their supply bins isn't work. Cleaning their areas and keeping them free of hazards isn't work. Gathering, inspecting, maintaining tools? Not work. Attending production meetings isn't work. They only work when actually putting a part on whatever they're building. Picking up the part isn't work. Inspecting it isn't work. Tossing a bad part aside isn't work. Work, by our definition, only happens when the employee is in the act of putting that part on whatever he's building. Clearly, by this definition of work, people like production schedulers, HR specialists, or, say, quality assurance engineers don't ever actually work. Truck drivers who deliver the parts don't work (at least not in this scenario), the people who process payroll for manufacturing plants don't actually work. The folks who built the building don't work. Not by our new definition that says work is only performance delivery.
How about boxers? They only work something like 7.5 to 25 minutes - or three to ten 2.5-minute rounds, maybe ten times a year. We've all heard people say, "I'd get in the ring with Mike Tyson for $10 million!" And according to our new definition of work, we should all be able to do that. Training isn't work. Developing one's talents isn't work. Starting in Golden Gloves at the age of 10 and living in the gym for ten years isn't work. A decade as an amateur getting the shit beat out of you isn't work. Going from normal training regimens to intense 12 hours/day, 7 days/week workouts for 8 weeks before the fight isn't work. Work, by our definition, only consists of the time spent in the ring during the actual fight.
I like that comparison because like a boxer, when the bell rings, teachers are ON. There are no timeouts between the bells. Teacher's "rounds" usually last around 45 minutes. They get a little longer than boxers between rounds. (During which, technically, they are not working.) These breaks between rounds are usually something like 3 to 5 minutes, during which they get to do fun things like break up fights, answer homework questions, call parents, meet with their boss, set up for the next class, monitor a hallway or playground, and occasionally even go to the bathroom.
Those "6-hour" days that teachers "work" are pretty intense. There's no leisurely stroll from the coffee machine to the bathroom or the water cooler. There's no asking if a colleague saw that episode of Idol last night - those are all saved for the 20-minute lunch period, which, by the way, does not count as work either! There's no room to nurse a hangover, or check your portfolio, call the bank, drop off a library book... or pretty much anything else, as is generally the case in most non-teaching jobs. You can't fake it. You can't call it in. Kids will eat you alive... but only for the 180 days you're actually "working" so it's no big deal. Hell, it's a part-time job.
Of course, grading papers isn't work. Meeting with parents for conferences isn't work. Helping students with homework outside of class time isn't work. Neither are getting a degree before being qualified to apply for a license, continuing with one's education (at one's own expense) over the entire course of the career in order to be able to keep a license, or writing lesson plans, serving on committees, planning and overseeing graduation ceremonies, field trips, pep-rallies, interventions, drug programs, teen pregnancy programs, or just listening to a student whose parents are never home or never sober or never not yelling at them. These things aren't work and teachers don't get paid to do them. They only get paid for their 9-months of "work."
And then there's the whole concept of working for an "entire year." The apples and the oranges. Let's take a closer look at that as well. The typical American work week is 40 hours over 52 weeks, adding up to 2080 hours a year. No one in America regularly works every single one of those weeks. It is common practice for manufacturing to shut down between Christmas and New Years. Now we're down to 2040 hours. Many manufacterers repeat this for inventory (not work, by the way) again in the summer. 2000 hours. Most full-time employees take at least a week off (and if they're full-time, most are paid for it) each year. 1960 hours. But let's be generous and say the average American "works" 2000 hours a year. That's 250 days. Hmmm. Nine months is 270 days. The average American employee works LESS than 250 days. Sounds like MOST Americans only "work" 9 months a year!! (Of course, by our definition, they're not really "working" all that time... they're just getting paid.) So when you "adjust" teacher pay to reflect what it would be IF teachers worked for an entire year, do you also adjust the pay of people with "real jobs" AS IF they worked for an "entire year?"
And we haven't even begun to cover the actual hours worked during the school year for most teachers. I'll bet it's closer to that 2080 figure than most people with similar education and experience work in their "whole year" jobs.
C'mon man...Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh can oversimplify tougher arguments this! Apples and oranges, my friend, apples and oranges.
Luth
Out
The problem with this logic is that it only makes sense when you define the word "work" as "performance delivery." Let's look at how this definition might apply to other professions to gain a better understanding of what that means.
Wal-Mart is a retail giant. Their actual "work" consists solely of selling stuff to customers. So by the definition that says teachers only "work" for 6 months a year, Wal-Mart employees only "work" when customers pass through the checkout line. Stocking shelves isn't work. Unloading trucks isn't work. Cleaning floors or bringing carts in from the parking lot isn't work. Hiring, paying, scheduling employees isn't work. Hell, by this definition, Wal-Mart management and administrative folks never work a day in their lives! The only folks who actually work for Wal-Mart are the cashiers. And they only work when accepting money from customers during the actual exchange of that money for a Wal-Mart good or service. Bagging purchases isn't work. Answering questions isn't work. Counting out a drawer at the end of a shift isn't work.
How about actors or entertainers? The average musician is lucky to make one hit song in his lifetime. That song is usually around three minutes long. So by our definition of work, the average musician only works about three minutes in a lifetime. The missed takes in the studio while recording this song aren't work. Subsequent play of the song on a radio, in a commercial, etc. aren't work. The time spent learning to play an instrument, writing a thousand shitty songs that eventually become the hit, rehearsing, auditioning, putting bands together, touring, breaking bands up...not work.
Actors appear in a play or on a movie screen for about 90 minutes. So they only work for the 90 minutes that it takes an audience to see the movie or play. Producers, directors, set-builders, stunt men... none of those people ever actually work by our current definition of working. Just the actors who actually deliver a performance - and then, only during the actual performance. The fact that it can take up to a year to film a movie doesn't factor into our definition of work. The only actual work we're counting now is the time during which the performance is actually delivered.
How about manufacturing employees? Their job is to put things together. So stocking their supply bins isn't work. Cleaning their areas and keeping them free of hazards isn't work. Gathering, inspecting, maintaining tools? Not work. Attending production meetings isn't work. They only work when actually putting a part on whatever they're building. Picking up the part isn't work. Inspecting it isn't work. Tossing a bad part aside isn't work. Work, by our definition, only happens when the employee is in the act of putting that part on whatever he's building. Clearly, by this definition of work, people like production schedulers, HR specialists, or, say, quality assurance engineers don't ever actually work. Truck drivers who deliver the parts don't work (at least not in this scenario), the people who process payroll for manufacturing plants don't actually work. The folks who built the building don't work. Not by our new definition that says work is only performance delivery.
How about boxers? They only work something like 7.5 to 25 minutes - or three to ten 2.5-minute rounds, maybe ten times a year. We've all heard people say, "I'd get in the ring with Mike Tyson for $10 million!" And according to our new definition of work, we should all be able to do that. Training isn't work. Developing one's talents isn't work. Starting in Golden Gloves at the age of 10 and living in the gym for ten years isn't work. A decade as an amateur getting the shit beat out of you isn't work. Going from normal training regimens to intense 12 hours/day, 7 days/week workouts for 8 weeks before the fight isn't work. Work, by our definition, only consists of the time spent in the ring during the actual fight.
I like that comparison because like a boxer, when the bell rings, teachers are ON. There are no timeouts between the bells. Teacher's "rounds" usually last around 45 minutes. They get a little longer than boxers between rounds. (During which, technically, they are not working.) These breaks between rounds are usually something like 3 to 5 minutes, during which they get to do fun things like break up fights, answer homework questions, call parents, meet with their boss, set up for the next class, monitor a hallway or playground, and occasionally even go to the bathroom.
Those "6-hour" days that teachers "work" are pretty intense. There's no leisurely stroll from the coffee machine to the bathroom or the water cooler. There's no asking if a colleague saw that episode of Idol last night - those are all saved for the 20-minute lunch period, which, by the way, does not count as work either! There's no room to nurse a hangover, or check your portfolio, call the bank, drop off a library book... or pretty much anything else, as is generally the case in most non-teaching jobs. You can't fake it. You can't call it in. Kids will eat you alive... but only for the 180 days you're actually "working" so it's no big deal. Hell, it's a part-time job.
Of course, grading papers isn't work. Meeting with parents for conferences isn't work. Helping students with homework outside of class time isn't work. Neither are getting a degree before being qualified to apply for a license, continuing with one's education (at one's own expense) over the entire course of the career in order to be able to keep a license, or writing lesson plans, serving on committees, planning and overseeing graduation ceremonies, field trips, pep-rallies, interventions, drug programs, teen pregnancy programs, or just listening to a student whose parents are never home or never sober or never not yelling at them. These things aren't work and teachers don't get paid to do them. They only get paid for their 9-months of "work."
And then there's the whole concept of working for an "entire year." The apples and the oranges. Let's take a closer look at that as well. The typical American work week is 40 hours over 52 weeks, adding up to 2080 hours a year. No one in America regularly works every single one of those weeks. It is common practice for manufacturing to shut down between Christmas and New Years. Now we're down to 2040 hours. Many manufacterers repeat this for inventory (not work, by the way) again in the summer. 2000 hours. Most full-time employees take at least a week off (and if they're full-time, most are paid for it) each year. 1960 hours. But let's be generous and say the average American "works" 2000 hours a year. That's 250 days. Hmmm. Nine months is 270 days. The average American employee works LESS than 250 days. Sounds like MOST Americans only "work" 9 months a year!! (Of course, by our definition, they're not really "working" all that time... they're just getting paid.) So when you "adjust" teacher pay to reflect what it would be IF teachers worked for an entire year, do you also adjust the pay of people with "real jobs" AS IF they worked for an "entire year?"
And we haven't even begun to cover the actual hours worked during the school year for most teachers. I'll bet it's closer to that 2080 figure than most people with similar education and experience work in their "whole year" jobs.
C'mon man...Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh can oversimplify tougher arguments this! Apples and oranges, my friend, apples and oranges.
Luth
Out
Thursday, March 03, 2011
Teacher pay and "tenure" myths
Strangely, I've been in two conversations in the past month wherein a conversant has invoked the outrageous pay for teachers in a particular area school district.
I'm going to make up names to protect the innocent here, but I can't help but be amused at the way some people arrive at what they believe to be facts, especially when it involves something so easy to track down like the public salary of a public employee in a public institution.
So anyway, in the first conversation my counterpart noted as fact that teachers in this school district can achieve "six-figure retirement packages." She added that she's seen the contract that guarantees this.
Given that the general formula for calculating teacher retirement in the state of Ohio is something along the lines of 80% of your highest three years, this means teachers in this particular district must average $125,000 a year for three years in order to make $100,000 a year (six figures) in retirement. So, in the course of those high three years, they'll actually make more than $125,00 in order to achieve that as their average.
A quick check of the particular school's website gives us the following myth-busting information:
The top pay on this year's scale (presumably the highest) is $89,354.00.
I know, I know... seems like a lot for a teacher, right? Does it seem like a lot for someone with 27 years of experience in their field and a PhD? 'Cuz that's the only way you'll hit this rare territory. I'm willing to bet there are few outside of teaching with those qualifications who make that little... and even fewer who are entrusted with the responsibilities of a teacher.
But the bigger point is, 80% of 89,000 will never be six figures.
This doesn't mean no teacher in that district could ever retire with a six figure pension. All he or she would have to do is pick up a mere $36,000 in supplemental contracts, like coaching, class advisor, band director, department head, etc. Given that the average supplemental contract runs somewhere in the $1,500 neighborhood (according to the district's April 2010 board minutes) this teacher would merely have to coach 24 different sports each year... for three straight years, after teaching for 27 years and earning a PhD. That sounds do-able.
I'm calling this one busted.
While the other conversation referenced this same district, it was in relation to "tenure." Another popular myth when it comes to teaching these days. If by "tenure" what you refer to is a "continuing contract," then yes, tenure still exists in the teaching profession - as it does in just about every profession. But here's where the misconception begins. New teachers are typically offered one-year contracts. Like all contracts, upon termination, there is no expectation of renewal. Do your job, and you will likely get renewed, but there's no obligation either way. You don't have to stay. They don't have to keep you. Various districts then have procedures to move returning folks into two- or three-year contracts, typically for the first five to ten years of their career. Once you reach that stage, you are then eligible to be offered, or to ask for a "continuing contract."
This, apparently, is what folks think of when they say "tenure." What most folks outside the profession don't realize is that this is where MOST employees OUTSIDE of teaching start. You may have to survive a probationary period of between 30 days and a year, but once that's over, you become a "permanent" employee... just like teachers on a continuing contract. This doesn't mean you can't be fired. It just means your employer must show cause to fire you. As long as you perform according to your job standards, it's pretty tough to show cause for termination. Again, this is no different for most employees than it is for "tenured" teachers on a continuing contract. The only difference is that few employees outside of teaching need to prove themselves for three-five years AFTER getting a degree AND a license to achieve this "tenure."
So yeah, teachers in this district could retire with six-figure pensions, but it's pretty unlikely. And yeah, teachers can still achieve "tenure," but I don't think what you think is what I think we were really thinking. What?
Luth
Out
I'm going to make up names to protect the innocent here, but I can't help but be amused at the way some people arrive at what they believe to be facts, especially when it involves something so easy to track down like the public salary of a public employee in a public institution.
So anyway, in the first conversation my counterpart noted as fact that teachers in this school district can achieve "six-figure retirement packages." She added that she's seen the contract that guarantees this.
Given that the general formula for calculating teacher retirement in the state of Ohio is something along the lines of 80% of your highest three years, this means teachers in this particular district must average $125,000 a year for three years in order to make $100,000 a year (six figures) in retirement. So, in the course of those high three years, they'll actually make more than $125,00 in order to achieve that as their average.
A quick check of the particular school's website gives us the following myth-busting information:
The top pay on this year's scale (presumably the highest) is $89,354.00.
I know, I know... seems like a lot for a teacher, right? Does it seem like a lot for someone with 27 years of experience in their field and a PhD? 'Cuz that's the only way you'll hit this rare territory. I'm willing to bet there are few outside of teaching with those qualifications who make that little... and even fewer who are entrusted with the responsibilities of a teacher.
But the bigger point is, 80% of 89,000 will never be six figures.
This doesn't mean no teacher in that district could ever retire with a six figure pension. All he or she would have to do is pick up a mere $36,000 in supplemental contracts, like coaching, class advisor, band director, department head, etc. Given that the average supplemental contract runs somewhere in the $1,500 neighborhood (according to the district's April 2010 board minutes) this teacher would merely have to coach 24 different sports each year... for three straight years, after teaching for 27 years and earning a PhD. That sounds do-able.
I'm calling this one busted.
While the other conversation referenced this same district, it was in relation to "tenure." Another popular myth when it comes to teaching these days. If by "tenure" what you refer to is a "continuing contract," then yes, tenure still exists in the teaching profession - as it does in just about every profession. But here's where the misconception begins. New teachers are typically offered one-year contracts. Like all contracts, upon termination, there is no expectation of renewal. Do your job, and you will likely get renewed, but there's no obligation either way. You don't have to stay. They don't have to keep you. Various districts then have procedures to move returning folks into two- or three-year contracts, typically for the first five to ten years of their career. Once you reach that stage, you are then eligible to be offered, or to ask for a "continuing contract."
This, apparently, is what folks think of when they say "tenure." What most folks outside the profession don't realize is that this is where MOST employees OUTSIDE of teaching start. You may have to survive a probationary period of between 30 days and a year, but once that's over, you become a "permanent" employee... just like teachers on a continuing contract. This doesn't mean you can't be fired. It just means your employer must show cause to fire you. As long as you perform according to your job standards, it's pretty tough to show cause for termination. Again, this is no different for most employees than it is for "tenured" teachers on a continuing contract. The only difference is that few employees outside of teaching need to prove themselves for three-five years AFTER getting a degree AND a license to achieve this "tenure."
So yeah, teachers in this district could retire with six-figure pensions, but it's pretty unlikely. And yeah, teachers can still achieve "tenure," but I don't think what you think is what I think we were really thinking. What?
Luth
Out
Save Money by eliminating collective bargaining?
I'm about the most anti-union liberal you'll find, but Governors Walker, Kasich, and Christie must be on crack if they think anyone other than complete idiots believes collective bargaining by public employees is the cause of today's state budget struggles.
I can't blame them for trying. To quote one of my favorite movies:
"They got this depression on. I gots to do for me and mine."
And as another character in that movie says,
"Hard times will flush the chumps. Everybody's looking fer answers."
Here's an answer: It's a recession (and it has nothing to do with collective bargaining rights)
I don't want to get into the arguments about whether or not raising taxes increases or decreases revenue, (although Walker's office's own figures make pretty clear that he's offered Wisconsin corporations, whose taxes are already ridiculously reduced, more in tax cuts - over two years - than their one year gap needs) but I will get into some of the myths you have to buy in order to think Walker... or Kasich (who's been a lot quieter with his union-busting plans since the protests in Wisconsin grew so loud)... or Christie are on track with this wacky idea.
Myth 1: Public employees make more than private employees
I know, I know, two charts in a million-page BLS report showed this was true, but those two charts don't prove much other than the old saying, "figures lie, and liars figure." If you look beyond those two charts made famous in USAToday, at some of the rest of those million pages in the BLS report, you'll note that simple adjustments for little things like education, or the size of the employer, tell us what common sense tells us: public employees still make between 5 and 15% LESS than private employees.
Here are some examples from a Rutgers study that dug a little beyond the two BLS charts:
Average National Salaries by Education
Public ..... Private
$44,000 ..... 44,000 ... high school diploma
$56,641 ..... 89,041 ... bachelors degree
$79,330 ..... 157,141 ... professional degree (lawyers, doctors)
(note how teacher and professor salaries tend to hold the high end of this down! NICE! What do they do to create jobs?)
Yep, those public employees are ROBBING us with their out of control salaries.
OK, you say, but what about retirement benefits? Well, if we're talking about states like Wisconsin, the benefits currently being paid to retirees of the state of Wisconsin are being funded out of the salaries of current Wisconsin employees, as is the case in most retirement systems, including Social Security.
In fact, another study by University of Wisconsin Econ professors showed after adjusting for education and employer size, public sector employees make 11% less than their private sector counterparts.
The Economic Policy Institute says it's more like 4.8% (8.2 until you factor in benefits)... but it's still LESS. Public employees make LESS than their private sector counterparts. No one's saying they're underpaid or overpaid, just that they make less. LESS. L-E-S-S.
What these big business, dare I say Koch-addled? governors are telling us simply isn't true.
Myth 2: Unions won't discuss cuts in desperate times
Bullshit. Like the auto industry showed us, management gave away the store rather than bothering to negotiate with unions during the good times. This same shortsightedness leaves them searching for someone to blame during the tough times. How much discussion has Governor Walker had with the unions that represents Wisconsin public employees? Collective bargaining simply means that management and labor DISCUSS these cuts, not that cuts can't be made. In fact, government intervention that prohibits such discussion sounds like just the opposite of what Republicans came to Washington to do. It sounds like bigger government forcing itself into matters where it doesn't belong.
Myth 3: Eliminating collective bargaining is the ONLY way for Wisconsin to balance their budget
Well, let's check in with free-market, high rolling, big business Texas, who did away with their public employees' collective bargaining rights years ago. Oh wait, maybe we shouldn't, since their deficit is bigger than Wisconsin's!! Hmmm, must have been something else wrong there. OK, how about we look at Federal Air Traffic Controller salaries. Seems like I remember some little incident wherein they gave up their rights to bargain. Oh, that's right, FEDERAL employees are even MORE overpaid than state and local employees. Sounds like doing away with the bargaining rights might just have the opposite effect Governor Walker is looking for in their case. So we'll skip them too.
OK, let's look at some of the numbers in Wisconsin. They're facing a one year shortfall of about $140 million. Governor Walker would have us believe that doing away with collective bargaining rights so he can cut the salaries of public employees is the only way to fix the problem. In essence, he wants to TAX - that's right, I said TAX 175,000 Wisconsin residents (public employees). How else would you describe taking money from their paychecks to run the government? But I thought he wasn't going to raise taxes?!
Before you look up what percentage that is of Wisconsin's total population, let's point out that the governor's own figures claim they'll cut $165 million just by restructuring debt. The governor won't discuss the fact that a 1.5% tax increase on just the wealthiest 2% of Wisconsin residents and corporations - a far smaller chunk of the population - would more than cover their woes even during this recession... even if these hikes were temporary, because he won't discuss raising taxes. Not even 1.5% on the wealthiest 2%. (but wait...he'll raise them by a far higher percent on 175,000 public employees??) Never mind the fact that corporate tax revenue to the state has been cut in half since 1981. Never mind the fact that the Wisconsin Department of Revenue reports 2/3 of Wisconsin corporations pay NO taxes. NONE. NADA. ZIP. In what kind of world is it right for corporations to have more rights than actual citizens? Is this what he won't discuss with public employee unions? Is it because these corporations don't use the public roads, utilities, police and fire protection, or other services the state provides? (seriously?) NO. (you weren't actually thinking about that were you?) It's because these corporations funded the governor's campaign.
All right, all right. I got off the rails a little there. The point is, it sure seems like there's a lot more wiggle room in this budget than the governor is letting on.
Myth 4: Public employee salaries are insulated from and therefore do not reflect what the market would support
Have you been following this story at all? OK, even if we use the most conservative figures, public employees make about 95% of what their private sector counterparts make, less when compared equally by education, less still when comparing by size of employer, but let's go with 95%. So this means that they make about 95% less than what the free market supports in the outside world. In other words, the marketplace has determined these salaries are about where they should be. So... why then are these free-market governors trying to intervene with what the free and open market has established. Isn't this exactly the opposite of what they came to Washington to do? Oh wait, that's right. They only manipulate the free and open market for the banking industry and the hedge fund managers who made $1.5 million PER HOUR last year! We certainly can't discuss raising their taxes even temporarily to close the recession induced gaps. After all, we can squeeze a little more out of teacher and garbage collector pay before we have to burden those guys!
So... tell me one more time how doing away with collective bargaining rights of public employees solves the recession-induced budget woes of the state of Wisconsin?
Or is this just a political move capitalizing on desperate times in order to bust the union and claim a quick, hollow victory to brag about in the next election cycle? Hmmm... maybe it's that kind of shortsighted thinking that helped Wisconsin get into this mess in the first place. Or maybe it just has something to do with the worst recession in 75 years.
Shhhhh, my common sense is tingling.
Luth
Out
I can't blame them for trying. To quote one of my favorite movies:
"They got this depression on. I gots to do for me and mine."
And as another character in that movie says,
"Hard times will flush the chumps. Everybody's looking fer answers."
Here's an answer: It's a recession (and it has nothing to do with collective bargaining rights)
I don't want to get into the arguments about whether or not raising taxes increases or decreases revenue, (although Walker's office's own figures make pretty clear that he's offered Wisconsin corporations, whose taxes are already ridiculously reduced, more in tax cuts - over two years - than their one year gap needs) but I will get into some of the myths you have to buy in order to think Walker... or Kasich (who's been a lot quieter with his union-busting plans since the protests in Wisconsin grew so loud)... or Christie are on track with this wacky idea.
Myth 1: Public employees make more than private employees
I know, I know, two charts in a million-page BLS report showed this was true, but those two charts don't prove much other than the old saying, "figures lie, and liars figure." If you look beyond those two charts made famous in USAToday, at some of the rest of those million pages in the BLS report, you'll note that simple adjustments for little things like education, or the size of the employer, tell us what common sense tells us: public employees still make between 5 and 15% LESS than private employees.
Here are some examples from a Rutgers study that dug a little beyond the two BLS charts:
Average National Salaries by Education
Public ..... Private
$44,000 ..... 44,000 ... high school diploma
$56,641 ..... 89,041 ... bachelors degree
$79,330 ..... 157,141 ... professional degree (lawyers, doctors)
(note how teacher and professor salaries tend to hold the high end of this down! NICE! What do they do to create jobs?)
Yep, those public employees are ROBBING us with their out of control salaries.
OK, you say, but what about retirement benefits? Well, if we're talking about states like Wisconsin, the benefits currently being paid to retirees of the state of Wisconsin are being funded out of the salaries of current Wisconsin employees, as is the case in most retirement systems, including Social Security.
In fact, another study by University of Wisconsin Econ professors showed after adjusting for education and employer size, public sector employees make 11% less than their private sector counterparts.
The Economic Policy Institute says it's more like 4.8% (8.2 until you factor in benefits)... but it's still LESS. Public employees make LESS than their private sector counterparts. No one's saying they're underpaid or overpaid, just that they make less. LESS. L-E-S-S.
What these big business, dare I say Koch-addled? governors are telling us simply isn't true.
Myth 2: Unions won't discuss cuts in desperate times
Bullshit. Like the auto industry showed us, management gave away the store rather than bothering to negotiate with unions during the good times. This same shortsightedness leaves them searching for someone to blame during the tough times. How much discussion has Governor Walker had with the unions that represents Wisconsin public employees? Collective bargaining simply means that management and labor DISCUSS these cuts, not that cuts can't be made. In fact, government intervention that prohibits such discussion sounds like just the opposite of what Republicans came to Washington to do. It sounds like bigger government forcing itself into matters where it doesn't belong.
Myth 3: Eliminating collective bargaining is the ONLY way for Wisconsin to balance their budget
Well, let's check in with free-market, high rolling, big business Texas, who did away with their public employees' collective bargaining rights years ago. Oh wait, maybe we shouldn't, since their deficit is bigger than Wisconsin's!! Hmmm, must have been something else wrong there. OK, how about we look at Federal Air Traffic Controller salaries. Seems like I remember some little incident wherein they gave up their rights to bargain. Oh, that's right, FEDERAL employees are even MORE overpaid than state and local employees. Sounds like doing away with the bargaining rights might just have the opposite effect Governor Walker is looking for in their case. So we'll skip them too.
OK, let's look at some of the numbers in Wisconsin. They're facing a one year shortfall of about $140 million. Governor Walker would have us believe that doing away with collective bargaining rights so he can cut the salaries of public employees is the only way to fix the problem. In essence, he wants to TAX - that's right, I said TAX 175,000 Wisconsin residents (public employees). How else would you describe taking money from their paychecks to run the government? But I thought he wasn't going to raise taxes?!
Before you look up what percentage that is of Wisconsin's total population, let's point out that the governor's own figures claim they'll cut $165 million just by restructuring debt. The governor won't discuss the fact that a 1.5% tax increase on just the wealthiest 2% of Wisconsin residents and corporations - a far smaller chunk of the population - would more than cover their woes even during this recession... even if these hikes were temporary, because he won't discuss raising taxes. Not even 1.5% on the wealthiest 2%. (but wait...he'll raise them by a far higher percent on 175,000 public employees??) Never mind the fact that corporate tax revenue to the state has been cut in half since 1981. Never mind the fact that the Wisconsin Department of Revenue reports 2/3 of Wisconsin corporations pay NO taxes. NONE. NADA. ZIP. In what kind of world is it right for corporations to have more rights than actual citizens? Is this what he won't discuss with public employee unions? Is it because these corporations don't use the public roads, utilities, police and fire protection, or other services the state provides? (seriously?) NO. (you weren't actually thinking about that were you?) It's because these corporations funded the governor's campaign.
All right, all right. I got off the rails a little there. The point is, it sure seems like there's a lot more wiggle room in this budget than the governor is letting on.
Myth 4: Public employee salaries are insulated from and therefore do not reflect what the market would support
Have you been following this story at all? OK, even if we use the most conservative figures, public employees make about 95% of what their private sector counterparts make, less when compared equally by education, less still when comparing by size of employer, but let's go with 95%. So this means that they make about 95% less than what the free market supports in the outside world. In other words, the marketplace has determined these salaries are about where they should be. So... why then are these free-market governors trying to intervene with what the free and open market has established. Isn't this exactly the opposite of what they came to Washington to do? Oh wait, that's right. They only manipulate the free and open market for the banking industry and the hedge fund managers who made $1.5 million PER HOUR last year! We certainly can't discuss raising their taxes even temporarily to close the recession induced gaps. After all, we can squeeze a little more out of teacher and garbage collector pay before we have to burden those guys!
So... tell me one more time how doing away with collective bargaining rights of public employees solves the recession-induced budget woes of the state of Wisconsin?
Or is this just a political move capitalizing on desperate times in order to bust the union and claim a quick, hollow victory to brag about in the next election cycle? Hmmm... maybe it's that kind of shortsighted thinking that helped Wisconsin get into this mess in the first place. Or maybe it just has something to do with the worst recession in 75 years.
Shhhhh, my common sense is tingling.
Luth
Out
Wednesday, February 02, 2011
Their best stuff for free?
H&R block is giving away their best stuff free, eh? What a generous organization. Apparently what they saved in advertising review, they're passing on to us. Ya see, their best stuff, according to the commercials, is helping you fill out a 1040EZ - you know, the form designed so the average American, with NO tax prep experience, can fill it out WITHOUT having to go to a professional tax preparer?
So apparently, the rest of H&R Block's stuff is less than their best. Which means, anything you might actually NEED professional help with, and that you'll pay your hard earned money for, should probably go to some other tax preparer. Someone whose best stuff is actually the stuff you might need help with.
Strange, strange commercial. And here I am, giving them this review of why it's bad for FREE!
I guess my real question is this: Did H&R Block's ad people count on Americans being the idiots we are and decide to run what they knew was actually a commercial that speaks badly about their real work anyway? Did they count on a society who can't stay focused on anything more than 140 characters, or who won't think for themselves? Or did they just not realize that this commercial says what they do best is what a high school kid can do pretty darn good without any help?
I'm sticking with my brother-in-law for my taxes this year, but if I ever get back to the point where I can do a 1040EZ again, who knows, maybe instead of filling out that single page all by myself, I'll actually brave the elements and traffic and the embarrassment and take it to H&R Block and get me some of their best stuff, for FREE!
Luth
Out
So apparently, the rest of H&R Block's stuff is less than their best. Which means, anything you might actually NEED professional help with, and that you'll pay your hard earned money for, should probably go to some other tax preparer. Someone whose best stuff is actually the stuff you might need help with.
Strange, strange commercial. And here I am, giving them this review of why it's bad for FREE!
I guess my real question is this: Did H&R Block's ad people count on Americans being the idiots we are and decide to run what they knew was actually a commercial that speaks badly about their real work anyway? Did they count on a society who can't stay focused on anything more than 140 characters, or who won't think for themselves? Or did they just not realize that this commercial says what they do best is what a high school kid can do pretty darn good without any help?
I'm sticking with my brother-in-law for my taxes this year, but if I ever get back to the point where I can do a 1040EZ again, who knows, maybe instead of filling out that single page all by myself, I'll actually brave the elements and traffic and the embarrassment and take it to H&R Block and get me some of their best stuff, for FREE!
Luth
Out
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
State of the Union - Mo' money!
Yep, mo' money it is, but is that really a surprise? We're a bigger nation than we've ever been. We're facing bigger problems than we ever have. Our infrastructure is older and as neglected as it's ever been. Our population requires more care and feeding than it ever has, AND our revenue is less than it's been in a while. Now, I know raising taxes is no guarantee of increased revenue, but raising taxes and cutting spending just might be... ya think?
Let's ask Ohio's new governor who, teamed up with the rest of Clinton's EAs, managed to balance a budget and turn over a deficit to, oh what the heck was that guy's name who succeeded Clinton... dangit. Well, you know who I'm talking about, and you know what came of that extra money. So we've got the experience to make this work...as long as we don't have to read anyone's lips.
Let's at least make sure the guys in the previous post pay the same percentage of their income in taxes as the teachers in the last post. How's that for a start?
Luth,
Out
Let's ask Ohio's new governor who, teamed up with the rest of Clinton's EAs, managed to balance a budget and turn over a deficit to, oh what the heck was that guy's name who succeeded Clinton... dangit. Well, you know who I'm talking about, and you know what came of that extra money. So we've got the experience to make this work...as long as we don't have to read anyone's lips.
Let's at least make sure the guys in the previous post pay the same percentage of their income in taxes as the teachers in the last post. How's that for a start?
Luth,
Out
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)