And those lazy people will lose their jobs, because lots and lots of un-lazy people will be competing for those respected and well-paid jobs. And why isn't every well-paid profession a lazy profession? Surely if we stopped paying lawyers so much, they'd work harder? Are you seriously saying that teachers, firefighters, nurses, etc., are *better* for being underpaid? Should we choose some more professions, cut their salaries, and see if they improve?
No, I'm saying those people are often more passionate, because they chose that career path for an unselfish purpose.
Even people passionate about their work need to live. Need to buy food and pay rent. Need time to relax and need the ability to do their job without overbearing management.
You keep going from one extreme to the other. Bus drivers, garbage collectors, subway workers, professional sports players, etc. all go on strike, should we just throw out money every time someone goes on strike?
It seems to me that you keep walking away from the point that you've just made. You say that nurses and teachers chose their careers for an unselfish purpose. If so, then why would they strike? I say that nurses and teachers, like everyone else on the planet, want to be appreciated and paid a decent living. And if we have a shortage of people in those professions, or an issue with the quality of the work that those people are doing, then it's time to bump up that decent living.
I guess that would depend on what the qualifications are, and how much time and money they would cost.
80k starting for doctorates in specific discipline + teaching. Also, a 100% reduction in the super intendent's salary, just for the hell of it
Have you ever really looked at the reasons why teachers and nurses normally strike? It isn't because they are asking for more, it's generally because they are trying to fight cuts. My point was, it's not just the highly educated professionals that strike, it's every day people too. Just because a person is passionate about their career, doesn't mean they should just bend over and take it all the time without standing up for themselves.
Uh...this sounds like a reversal of your position. Doesn't demanding a decent salary count as "standing up for themselves"? But, I'm going to do my best to be done with this discussion. Again, I really feel as if I'm trying to defend the basic economic principle that people respond to financial rewards, and that feels like too bedrock a principle for me to be constructing from the ground up.
...and I'm going to continue to defend my position that some jobs have larger rewards than just fattening the wallet and getting rich. You keep saying I'm backing off my position, but I've said all along I don't think teachers are as under-paid as you make it sound. You keep going from one extreme to the other. You make it sound as if teachers are one step away from being homeless, then the next you argue with me about how passionate they are. If I was a teacher I would be quite offended by your stance. I know your heart is probably in the right place, but your argument is way off here.
Sorry @Lewdog but I question who your teachers were because just reading this conversation I understand @ChickenFreak's argument. It is fairly consistent. I also understand what you're trying to say, but your argument seems far less sound. If I were grading you on presentation i'd say CF scored higher, not because I agree, but because my basic and critical reading comprehension skills show me that CF's argument has stayed mainly unshaken. Yours is a bit less grounded, a bit less sturdy, and you contradicted yourself towards the end. As to my POV on the argument, CF is right about money as incentive being a fundamental principle of econ. In America. It's even taught in classes. Not that money inherently makes anyone better, we pay more, socially to jobs we hold of higher value to attract the best. So yes, teachers should be paid more, but also should be challenege a bit more to meet qualifications. Not very easy to do that though as many teachers are prompeted/pushed into getting a Master to continue teaching a certain grade level. A PhD is almost a must to teach Uni. Level. We need to value our teachers, firemen, and policemen, so that they make enough to live on. Sure they go in knowing they will be rewarded other than financially, but that doesn't mean none of them ever want to pay their college debt or own a house or start a family. Most teachers are just pulling through on their income. Just because they know it's low pay doesn't mean they shouldn't be taking care of. they do a specialized job, a public service at that, and should at leat be paid enough to be able to save up some money. I'm not talking get rich, but having to work more than one job just to feed your kid and you got a spouse and aren't even in a house... sounds pretty tough, but it's real. Businessmen and lawyers and politicians are all grossly overpaid. But teachers... some how are underpaid? Bah...
I didn't know I was getting graded...and my argument has never contradicted itself. I'd like you to point where I contradicted myself, and please don't question my education or whom my teachers were, it sounds arrogant of you. Besides the fact, where are you in life? What kind of experience do you have? Show me some pictures of teachers, firemen, and policemen living on the streets. They do have enough to live on, what in the wide-wide-world of sports are you guys talking about? MOST teachers are just pulling through on their income? That's your opinion backed with what? Personal experience? Once again, we go back to how much experience you have on this planet. I'll say it again, don't ever, ever, ever try to judge me or talk down to me because I don't agree with you. Their is no respect to be earned that way.
Since this is related to the topic of has society reach an all-time low and have our kids gotten dumber, I dare chime in a bit here... I think what people often forget about teachers is that their job doesn't end when the class ends. It's a big responsibility, teaching the kids and the youth, so more often than not your work follows you home. Parents calling, papers to be graded, classes to be planned and prepared, "problem students" to be dealt with, sleepless nights cos some kid has really shitty parents, etc. But unlike, say, a politician who may also work a lot outside their business hours, a teacher doesn't receive the compensation s/he'd deserve, not in my opinion, anyway (though is it a surprise 'cause that's my career of choice, heh). But that's 'cause schools are often funded by the city/municipality/state and they are always tight on money, or pretend to be. Sure, I get paid a lot better as a teacher than as your regular office worker, and so far I've worked both jobs. When I leave the latter, I can fully focus on my own life and hobbies. When I leave the former, I'm likely to spend some of the evening, the me-time, preparing the next class etc. However, at least in my home country I find a nurse's job a lot tougher -- and they get paid less than an average teacher. @Lewdog I don't think Andrae was talking you down or meant to be rude. If you've got two people saying your argumentation was problematic, you can either go back and check if there's something you could do better in the future, or ignore the feedback you receive. In a way I can see why you'd feel this way, but a part of me kind of hears something like this: [in a creaky voice]: "kids, shut up, when I was young I had to walk 5 miles to school and I was chased by wolves! And all we had for food was shoe sole gruel and crusty bread made of pine bark!" Times have changed, economy has changed, occupational demands have changed, living expenses have changed. My parents actually had it better in the '80s when they were in their late 20s, early 30s. They could afford vacations abroad, the latest technology, two cars, a big house, a summer cottage etc. without having to work 7 days a week for some corporation. I can only dream of having things like that. My kids are gonna grow up in a 3-room apartment, learn to walk and bike to school even when it's -25 C outside cos Mommy and Daddy have only one car, and if they wanna go abroad, they have to wait until they're old enough to work as au-pairs. That sure is better than working in a sweatshop in Bangladesh, so I'm grateful of the things I have, but just 'cause I have things better doesn't mean I shouldn't stand up for my rights or demand decent compensation for the work I do. I get your point, but it's not always a matter of choice. Sometimes life shuts certain doors and it's bye-bye med school. In any case, some people have to become teachers and janitors and nurses and truck drivers and cleaners. If everyone decided to become a doctor or a lawyer, we'd be in trouble....
Oh, no you didn't! Don't you go blaming society's problems on the lack of a fictional character's presence. People had just as many problems back then that they have now, only the issues have changed. The only reason you think society is "morally and intellectually bankrupt" (bs) today is because people are starting to be more aware of them with the advent of social media. The fact that they now get their news from places other than the heavily slanted traditional medias, and the fact that they can be instantly connected to places across the globe like never before, has radically changed how people think and how aware they are of the problems of today. I may not live in the US, but I'm still part of the Western world and from a highly religious country. And let me tell you, we're fudged over here. No amount of God talk in schools and in the media changes anything for the better in my place. Folks here also speak of how morally and intellectually decrepit we are as opposed to the "good ol' times", but I know enough from my parents and grandparents to know that's not true. Sure, we may not be as idealistic as they were, but I won't stand for claims that we've somehow devolved into dumb delinquents.
I'm not religious myself, but I have this feeling that many kids will be able to find God if they want to, even if they aren't fed his word with such hefty spoonfuls as, say, my parents were, or even I was back in elementary school (we had regular morning prayers every Thursday back then -- pure boring to most kids, borderline torture to kids like me who fainted easily in crowded places, and you had to stand. Unthinkable nowdays!). When I was in junior/senior high and MSN messenger came, as well as last.fm and MySpace, I was in contact with a load of American kids of my age, and even though they complained about their schools, they were some smart teenagers, really quite critical of the media, life, politics, God, etc. You ask kids today what they use the internet for: yeah, they say porn and online games, but they also admit they use it for information and networking. Maybe that's why they're often so damn smart, over here anyway, but judging by the behavior and level of knowledge of some younger people here and on other forums, it's not so different in the UK, US, NZ, Oz... There's room for improvement when it comes to spelling, though.
"Eye have a spelling chequer, It came with my Pea Sea. It plane lee marks four my revue Miss Steaks I can knot sea. Eye strike the quays and type a whirred And weight four it two say Weather eye am write oar wrong It tells me straight a weigh. Eye ran this poem threw it, Your shore real glad two no. Its vary polished in its weigh. My chequer tolled me sew. A chequer is a bless thing, It freeze yew lodes of thyme. It helps me right all stiles of righting, And aides me when eye rime. Each frays come posed up on my screen Eye trussed too bee a joule. The chequer pours o'er every word Two cheque sum spelling rule."
This is the single most brilliant poem I've ever read so far. My series of 1s and 0s applaud you over the network at this very moment.
It's not mine, hence the quotation marks. Quick google search actually shows it's written by Jerrold H. Zar in 1992! This was just something I had floating around for teaching purposes xD
Why did you leave doctors off that list? Your stereotype of the above professions is off the mark. I can speak for the nursing profession (not the individuals in it). We used to be rewarded with titles rather than wage increases all the while the hospitals which maintained a wage monopoly claimed they could do nothing about chronic shortages of nurses. Supply and demand anyone? A crisis was precipitated as the technical needs of critically ill patients meant hospitals could not just tell nurses to get by, do their best despite the understaffing. Along came a source of labor outside the hospital monopoly, agencies that could staff ICUs. There was a wage explosion that eventually leveled off at a what should have been the market wage level all along. That's a tad oversimplified since unions also played a role when the Service Employees Union came in to compete with the negotiating branches of the state professional associations. The typical nurses union before that time had a self defeating policy that strikes were unethical in the nursing profession. I watched the wage revolution from a front row seat. It's not about 'different' rewards dedicated professionals want. It's about market forces. Right now some professions are not as valued as they should be and since wages depend on taxpayers who are often low information voters, teachers are one of them. The result is not, dedicated altruistic teachers, rather one gets poorer quality teachers in the lower paid jobs with the districts that fund their schools better getting the better teachers. The same can be said for fire fighters. In my city where they make a really good salary with good benefits, we have excellent service. I've been doing work for them for over 20 years. I see the same people every year there is almost no turnover. But one of the districts I do some contract work for staff their stations with 80% volunteers. The response time is slower and the skills of the responders depends on who's volunteering that day. They are well trained (because they train them themselves) but they have few long term experienced members on their crews. Every year I see those guys ~70% of them are new faces. It's like staffing your fire department with new graduates who move on as soon as they get a paying job.
Strangely, people use that sort of thing to dismiss reality a lot. Whenever I see that, I want to point those people to the memoirs written about that era. At any rate, yes, things have changed in detail but not overall. Instead of walking through snow, it's taking the subway; instead of wolves, it's muggers. The only difference I really see is how much whining gets done.
People whined in the past, they just didn't have the internet to let everyone know. If the had had it, they would have.
