I know it's the reason.
California’s economic situation!
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
I know it's the reason.
cawacko
Well-known member
How was that?
First of all, you don't even know the details about this pension "issue", so I don't know why you keep harping on it.
Secondly, to reduce class size you have to hire more teachers. And if you're hiring more teachers, you have to offer benefits that make the job attractive to talent. Not giving a pension, making them pay more for health care, making them pay for their own supplies, and cutting or capping their pay is not how you're going to attract candidates. So the pension issue is tied into this issue too. It's why your argument about this is entirely circular:
You say there's a pension problem; You also say that class sizes are too big; in order to attract candidates to be teachers, you need to offer incentives. If you're saying "no pensions", "no health care", and low pay, how are you going to attract good candidates?
It seems to me that your intent is to just get rid of public education altogether and you're using this manufactured pension crisis as an excuse. A pretty shitty excuse. One you're not really comprehending.
cawacko
Well-known member
Prop 13 plays a role no question but prop 13 alone is not the reason for our housing crisis.
ding ding ding ding ding we have a winner......he's argued for this for years.
He's a right wing nut job who pretends he's not.
cawacko
Well-known member
Wow, a lot of projecting going on there. I linked to multiple articles discussing it. Your choice not to read them but it is explained pretty clearly for you. I also linked to the LA Times article discussing how the pension issue is affecting LA schools. I believe you are in Atlanta. I've lived in Cali for 35 years and work in real estate. I follow this issue on a daily basis (it's very hard to live here and not).
cawacko
Well-known member
I see, posting an article from the LA Times about issues with LAUSD makes one a right wing nut job? Ok
There's no good paying blue collar jobs anywhere. CA has a much higher standard of living than the rest of the country. Leaving CA for opportunities elsewhere is perfectly reasonable; but the state's economy is growing and it leads the nation in job creation since raising taxes in 2012. Also, it's unemployment rate is now 4.3%, which suggests there's a tightening in the labor market there because they're near full-employment. But what's happening in CA for the middle class is happening elsewhere, not just blue states. The problem is that wages haven't risen even as the labor market tightens. Now, why would that be the case?
I trump you. I am born and raised here. 53 years.
You bring your right wing lies here from where every you came from.
Maybe it's time you go back.
Right...no one is forcing them to teach. But you need more teachers...one of you even posted about class sizes in LA. Well, you can't reduce class sizes unless you hire more teachers. And you're not going to hire good teachers if you're not offering benefits and incentives to attract good candidates. Cutting pensions isn't going to make someone decide they want to be a teacher. If anything, it will discourage them. So why would you want to discourage credible, good candidates to teach our kids?
No you're a right wing nut job because you support racist right wing BS.
cawacko
Well-known member
California has the highest poverty rate in the country. We also have amazing wealth. We have a larger out migration than those coming in from within the U.S. Middle and lower middle class people are leaving being replaced by high earners and low wage immigrants. The American dream is to start a family and buy a home. Very difficult to do here
You're not going to attract good candidates to teach kids if this is your plan. In what world does cutting benefits make employment more attractive to candidates? In no world at all. It's a non-starter.
cawacko
Well-known member
Are you going to share with us where all our states revenue comes from?
Because your reforms are punitive and do nothing to address the systemic issue of under-funding education. Also, you're not going to attract good candidates if you do away with all the incentives. You're going to diminish the supply of good candidates. But maybe that's your plan. Starve the beast of talent so it dies and you can replace it with something worse. How cynical.
cawacko
Well-known member
You claim to live here yet have no idea how the states housing market works or who is paying the taxes our government collects?
cawacko
Well-known member
Why don't our politicians raise taxes even higher to pay teachers more?
OK, but that means then that there has to be a uniform standard by which teacher merits are judged. Which would likely require federal standards, since education is universal; people in TX don't learn a different math than people in MA. Now, I could be wrong but I really don't think you would support federal mandates and guidelines for uniform education. That's the only way your plan of merit-based pay would work or be effective.
No, what's happening here is that you're not recognizing the redundancy in your own argument. You argue that class size is too big; well, the only way to reduce class size is to hire more teachers, right? So how do you attract good candidates to be teachers? Do you attract them by making them pay more for health care? Do you attract them by not giving them a pension? Do you attract them by making them pay for their own supplies? How do you think you attract good teachers, and enough of them to reduce class size?
I don't believe you all have given this enough thought. You're trying to be punitive against teachers and public employees, but they're not the ones who over-promised returns on pension fund investments; Investment Funds were. So how about instead of trying to solve a problem caused by Investment Funds by taking punitive action against teachers, you take punitive action against the Investment Funds????
I got your point just fine. I was showing that 401K's aren't the golden goose Wall Street wants you to believe, and may in fact be worse for individuals than pensions.
And CA now has the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world, a $6B surplus, unemployment down to 4.3%, has created the most jobs nationwide since 2012, and has had GDP growth above the national average since raising taxes.
And it legalized weed.
Sirthinksalot
Verified User
I also said merit based pay increases should be implemented. I also said that teachers who are effective should be kept during layoffs instead of keeping whichever dinosaur has been there the longest.