Somebody' skills are worth what somebody is willing to pay for it. This goes for everything in the world. So a person's skills are worth the highest bid he can find for them. The only way a person could not be getting paid what their skills are worth, in the private market, is if they choose not to or they have failed to find that person/persons who would pay more. Either way it's the worker's own doing. So you are saying teachers could get paid more then their skills are worth by "working together"? If this is the case, is this not a bad thing for society? The people who are paying more are the tax payers and the skill that the tax payer is getting diminished returns for is 'educating our children'. Sounds like a really bad system, and this is backed up by American test scores.
That would presume a perfectly fluid marketplace of labor and capital. At the same time in a perfectly fluid marketplace of labor and capital employers are also free to find the cheapest labor. Why should anyone try to make as much money from their labor or anything for that matter? You're making an argument against capitalism that workers shouldn't try to maximize what they can get for their labor. Essentially you are advocating socialism by saying that people who work in the public sector shouldn't try to get as much as they can.
That's right, but it was the union that proposed the idea of standards by which teachers be held accountable. I never claimed the unions fired teachers.
For the amount of post graduate education required for most teachers they are paid far below market value.
By your logic anything that takes down CEO's should be a good thing for society then. Most of them are paid more than they are worth for their skills, and routinely CEO's that lose money for the company or cause it to fail still get bonuses in the tens of millions. Anything a teacher gets is nothing compared to what the CEO makes.
In a sense, yes, although in the early days of the union movement, they were fighting the corporate bosses for the most basic benefits, benefits that kids like tallanvor take for granted.
If people are willing to pay others less then your skills are not worth as much as you think they are. Because their money is coming from tax payers. If you are getting paid more then your skills are worth from a private company, then who cares right? It's just some greedy private company. You would just be screwing over the company and by association all your fellow employees. If you get paid more then your worth in the public sector then your screwing over the tax payer and your fellow citizens. That's the liberal's definition of capitalism. Since capitalism has no set definition then I can't exactly tell you, 'you are wrong'. What I advocate is a private voucher system which would make all of this crap irrelevant. This is just another issue that wouldn't exist if libertarians/conservatives had their way (like gay marriage).
] Says who? I would say that's highly improbable. Why would business owner's continually overpay for CEOs? Are CEOs part of a union and that's how they are getting overpaid?
The problem with your analysis is that you assume that the value of one's time should be determined by supply and demand. That is, if there are too many lawyers, a lawyer should only charge 4 bucks an hour since there is more supply than demand. This immediately shows how ridiculous your argument is. People are not commodities. The value of a teacher is in the ability to educate future doctors, engineers, and business people, or artists and anything else under the sun. Teachers are reduced to unionizing because they are grossly undervalued to the point you have the most talented teachers quiting because of it. I know former CEO's who went into teaching as an altruistic endeavor but were so disgusted by the system ON ALL SIDE they had to quit. The pay is nothing but it's an insult. You say other systems are much better - well guess what, in other systems teachers are not treated like a commodity - they are respected and its an esteemed position.
If their are more lawyers then their is a demand for then they should get paid less. Why don't we just make a couple thousand basketball teams for the NBA so everyone can be a basketball player and make millions? If they want to get paid what their skills are worth then they want a private voucher system. Thousands of different employers all offering different contracts as opposed to one employer (the state) offering one contract. What are the negatives of being treated like a valuable commodity? Are you saying valuable employees aren't respected? I would say that's true for the most current public school system. My mother is a public high school physics teacher who is under-appreciated by her employers.
Union busting efforts in Indiana, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida are now off the table. Thank you Wisconsin... keep it up. (Or, you can always compromise your rights away because the Repubs have the votes. )
The CATO Institute. The Koch brother's instituted institute. devoted to destroying unions as well as social security in America among other libertarian wet dreams. Hadly an unbiased source. Extremist really. However, even a broken clock can be right twice a day so Aside from libertarian novels and hypothetical abstract theories, history just shows that their deire of union free work places and corporations without government regulations and lower and lower taxes especially for the wealthy always produces societies with ever increasing levels of wealth for a few with very little trickle down for the vast majority. Recent US history shows this again. Hence we see the top 1% 's share of the wealth in the US going from roughly 8% in 1980 with the swing toward their desired economic system to to approximately 25% and growing of today.
Yes, judoka. Where have you been? Maybe you are starting to see that just like the song- "Which Side are You On" ( which I greatly appreciated, though I like the old Woodie Guthrie IIRC much better) you have to sort of take a side despite an intellectual ability to note faults on the better side.
When I see comments like this I always wonder if I am dealing with naive kids who have read libertarian novels or excessive exposure to Fox or conservative/libertarian ideas, which given the economic muscle of the wealthy behind them, are everywhere available 24/7. Or I wonder if perhaps these are folks who have limited exposure to the work force as an employee. In many work places, teachers and other workers are just as likely to be paid by how much they suck up to the boss or owner as they are on the basis of superior work.
You don't understand these folks have inculcated an ideology designed to spin issues so that they benefit those in power. In America therefore so many always approach life on the basis of what is best for the elite. Getting more for labor pisses them off, though they are seldom owners themselves. Someone raised the Stockholm Syndrome. It is sort of like the concept of the House Negro in which the slave who worked indoors was farily content with the slavery system. They don't envy the elite but respect the elite, as they are taught that the elite almost always deserves what they have. Rather they are pissed off and envy their neighbors in a similar station as them who have better health care or benefits due to whatever reason including unions.
More from Governor Walker when he thinks he is speaking to his patron the Koch Brther. ************ Those questions point to a more profound question: Has Walker violated Wisconsin’s strictest-in-the-nation ethics rules, which require elected officials to “maintain the faith and confidence of the people of the state” when it comes to their actions? Here’s the critical exchange: Koch caller: “Well, I tell you what, Scott: once you crush these bastards I’ll fly you out to Cali and really show you a good time.” Governor Walker: “All right, that would be outstanding. Thanks for all the support in helping us move the cause forward…“ Koch caller: “Absolutely. And, you know, we have a little bit of a vested interest as well. ” “Well,” replies Walker, “that’s just it.” When someone who Scott Walker thought was a major donor to national groups that aided Walker’s 2010 gubernatorial run—and that gave the Walker campaign $43,000 directly, via Koch Industries’ KochPAC—said he had a “vested interest” in a budget plan being pushed by the governor, Walker replied, “Well, that’s just it.” The conversation is so stunning in its brazenness that the Center for Media and Democracy, which had already filed freedom-of-information requests for records of contacts between the governor and his aides and representatives of Koch industries, is stepping up those demands. http://www.thenation.com/blog/158804/scott-walker-koch-caller-thanks-all-support
Says the balance sheet of companies that are failing, or losing money but the CEO's still get tens of millions in bonuses. Says the fact that when our industry truly were leaders of the world back in the 50's and 60's the CEO's only made 30 times what the avg. worker did. Now they make more than 300 times what the avg. worker did. If you believe they are worth that much then I don't know what to say to you. The CEO's are at the top and don't have to be part of the union.
That's awesome news. The Democrats, Independents, Unions, and good people of Wisconsin are really doing a great service to large parts of America here.
If you believe you know how to run a company better then every business owner then I don't know what to tell you.
