dadmonson Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 (edited) Just like the topic title said, how come teachers don't make more money? What is the reason for this. With the amount of education some of them have they should be making a shitload. Anybody know? Edited November 22, 2007 by dadmonson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty McFly Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 Just like the topic title said, how come teachers don't make more money? What is the reason for this. With the amount of education some of them have they should be making a shitload. Anybody know? before I answer you, I want you to know that teachers make more money than firemen or policemen. now, I have another question: if the city gets 12 million dollars for education every year, and there are only 2 or 3 million children in public schools, why is the teacher's union STILL complaining? NOW to answer your question: the schools need to get PRIVATIZED that's the only answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadmonson Posted November 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 before I answer you, I want you to know that teachers make more money than firemen or policemen. now, I have another question: if the city gets 12 million dollars for education every year, and there are only 2 or 3 million children in public schools, why is the teacher's union STILL complaining? NOW to answer your question: the schools need to get PRIVATIZED that's the only answer. I bet you be making fools out of your professors in college. I definetly need to read more Ayn Rand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RationalBiker Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 I also agree that schools should be privatized. However, thinking that lots of education directly coorelates to deserving a high income may be problematic. Many folks graduate from colleges and universities and go into jobs that don't pay well. The chief factors are (generally) how competent and productive the individual is when he goes into the job market, something not guarenteed by a college degree. How they market themselves matters. The job they want to do matters. Some people pick occupations because of the occupation without any expectation of making lots of money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mammon Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 before I answer you, I want you to know that teachers make more money than firemen or policemen. now, I have another question: if the city gets 12 million dollars for education every year, and there are only 2 or 3 million children in public schools, why is the teacher's union STILL complaining? NOW to answer your question: the schools need to get PRIVATIZED that's the only answer. Yes, but allow me to play Socrates here and say... do you even know why privatizing education might increase the salary of teachers? I could get elected and pass a law saying that teachers should get paid $300,000 a year and it would increase their pay withouting privatizing the system. You say these things, but do you know why they are true or false? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiralTheorist Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 A somewhat random thought: in education, it isn't individuals competing against each other for funds, it's institutions. Wouldn't it be interesting if, rather than paying a tuition which granted access to all teachers in a given school equally, there were per-class fees with demand-sensitive prices? For instance, perhaps one would pay $5000 a year to attend a particular college, and then one would bid against other students for seats in particular classes. Or perhaps the professor of a class would simply set whatever fee he considered appropriate given factors like his own skill at teaching the class, the general demand for the subject, and how many seats he wanted to fill. There might be problems with this idea that aren't popping into my mind immediately, but it would open up some neat possibilities. If I were a professor under such a system, for instance, I might consider a sliding scale of fees based on GPAs - if some D student wanted to attend one of my classes, you'd better believe he'd pay extra for it! ;-) -- Spiral Theorist -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4reason Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 (edited) Yes, but allow me to play Socrates here and say... do you even know why privatizing education might increase the salary of teachers? I could get elected and pass a law saying that teachers should get paid $300,000 a year and it would increase their pay withouting privatizing the system. You say these things, but do you know why they are true or false? While there technically are ways to increase salary without privatizing the whole system (immoral ways, mind you), what privatization offers is the potential for teachers' incomes to become merit based and competitive (and by merit I mean ability, not just fancy degrees). But for this to really work we would need privatization on a massive if not complete scale. I, for example, work at a "private" Montessori school that is technically owned and operated by a board of directors (which presents a whole list of issues I won't go into here). The school where I teach is also quite expensive, and I think the parents largely suspect that the teachers are well paid-- that they're getting the best that money can buy-- but we're not. If I were teaching the same level in public schools I'd be earning more than twice as much, especially when all the cushy government benefits are factored in. So why is that? My school is "privatized, right? Yes, but all the surrounding schools are not. And Montessori is a relatively small educational community, so there aren't many of the schools around to begin with (not high quality ones, anyway). Now, if there were to be more private Montessori schools that popped up in the area, things would get a little more competitive and pay may actually have to (gasp!) start being merit based. The good news is, we have lots of schools in this country that are close together that could function as a competitive market to help make teachers get paid what their merits deserve. The bad news is, they're public schools and we just need to figure out how to overhaul the system. Edited November 22, 2007 by 4reason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intellectualammo Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 I also agree that schools should be privatized. However, thinking that lots of education directly coorelates to deserving a high income may be problematic. The market sets the value, when education is privatized. Not only do I agree that education should be privatized on principle, and eduation should not be compulsory by law, but also I want the entire public educational system (read: government education installations) to collapse via a "mass exiting" from them. They don't need reformed, but abolished. I highly recommend the lecture from the 2007 ARI Lecture Series by C. Bradley Thompson "The Separation of School and State: The Case of Abolishing America's Government Schools" which is still avaliable free if you are an ARI registered user. As far as teachers pay is concerned, I like the One Minute Case For Privatizing Education where it says: Moreover, the current near monopoly also cripples employment opportunities for educators. Not only are positions limited, but salaries are also dictated by bureaucrats and lobbyists, not the market. Public schools cannot offer merit-based salaries to attract more qualified professionals This is a factor in why teachers don't make as much as they could, or make more than they should...because their salaries aren't being set by the market value of them as educators. By privatizing education, the market is able to set a value on the educator, which can be higher or lower than what educators are getting now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aequalsa Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 Just like the topic title said, how come teachers don't make more money? What is the reason for this. With the amount of education some of them have they should be making a shitload. Anybody know? The first premise you ought to check is whether or not they are not paid well. Public school teachers in every area I have heard of make well above the 50 percentile of incomes. Even better if you factor in the fact that they work 90 days less/year then your average stiff and have benefits you literally can not buy in the private sector. The whole notion is a sham fostered by the teachers union. Thats why our schools are running as profitably as the american car companies. Years and years of demanding more money for producing less. Also, most public school teachers are only required to have a bachelors and a teaching cert. Often these are in liberal arts majors. I would not consider that to be highly educated. Note too, that when they land the teaching job they usually have classes paid for and when they get the higher degree paid for by the public, they automatically get paid more for it regardless of whether or not they are more effective at their jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softwareNerd Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 (edited) I agree with aEqualsA. The evidence suggests that the average benefits paid to teachers is not low if one considers the demand and supply. First, I'd like to see someone make the case that teacher pay is "low". My guess would be that privatization alone will not raise teachers average salaries. I would not be surprised is privatization creates a higher variation in teacher's pay, while actually lowering the average. Edited November 22, 2007 by softwareNerd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moebius Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 The average HS teacher makes something like 50K a year working a little over 9 months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aequalsa Posted November 23, 2007 Report Share Posted November 23, 2007 The average HS teacher makes something like 50K a year working a little over 9 months. Sounds about right...as compared to the general median income of 30K/year for 12 months. So that puts them in the top 20% of income earners or so...maybe a little higher. So they don't make a lot compared to say, a movie star or surgeon. Compared to the world generally they do fine. In addition to the 50K, I know of one benefit they have here in Denver where they are able to buy hud houses for 50% value and sell them after 3 years of living in them for their full value. Also their health care is better then anything I can even buy.(I've lookedA) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty McFly Posted November 23, 2007 Report Share Posted November 23, 2007 The average HS teacher makes something like 50K a year working a little over 9 months. average NYC teacher makes about 70K a year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moebius Posted November 24, 2007 Report Share Posted November 24, 2007 average NYC teacher makes about 70K a year But that's also because living in NYC is way more expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonebuddha Posted November 24, 2007 Report Share Posted November 24, 2007 Click right here: Rich Athletes, Poor Teachers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve D'Ippolito Posted November 24, 2007 Report Share Posted November 24, 2007 There is one very simple reason why professional athletes and entertainers make more than teachers and are likely to do so far into the future: The professional athlete or entertainer has millions of people willing to pay for what they provide. The teacher, a few hundred. There are a lot fewer of the former than the latter, too (and necessarily so). Back in the days before mass media, many more people entertained but they often did not make very good money at all--much less than teachers I would imagine. (The teachers also had a more regular income.) A lot more is spent paying teachers (all of them) put together than athletes and entertainers. But there are millions of teachers and only some thousands of the others. (Point that out to people who say that "society's" values are skewed.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidOdden Posted November 26, 2007 Report Share Posted November 26, 2007 With the amount of education some of them have they should be making a shitload.Pay is not determined by education, it is determined by demand and supply. The demand for teachers is not particularly high, relative to the supply. Demand is, in part, how interested people are in a product, so if a lot of people have a low-key interest, demand can be low. Although there are upwards of 100 million demanders, the strength of the demand is not very high (given the supply). Note, regarding the 90 day vacation, that many teachers would be happy to take a 12 month teaching job (with commensurate pay increase of course). I personally think the 9 month contract / 3 month unemployment cycle is moronic, but somebody (and I don't know who) doesn't want to run year-round schools. Kids stopped working the harvest decades ago, and summer vacation just doesn't make any sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moebius Posted November 26, 2007 Report Share Posted November 26, 2007 (edited) Note, regarding the 90 day vacation, that many teachers would be happy to take a 12 month teaching job (with commensurate pay increase of course). I personally think the 9 month contract / 3 month unemployment cycle is moronic, but somebody (and I don't know who) doesn't want to run year-round schools. Kids stopped working the harvest decades ago, and summer vacation just doesn't make any sense. Summer vacation was originally set up for an agrarian society, but that doesn't mean it has no value today. I think it makes sense to have an extended block of time for the kids or the parents to do things that is otherwise impossible during the school year. Summer camps, long trips, internships, jobs, etc. In any case, I am sure there would be many people who work outside of teaching that would be happy to take a 3 month vacation if they could. It works both ways. And teachers are free to take on a second job if they really wanted to during the vacation. Edited November 26, 2007 by Moebius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aequalsa Posted November 26, 2007 Report Share Posted November 26, 2007 In any case, I am sure there would be many people who work outside of teaching that would be happy to take a 3 month vacation if they could. It works both ways. And teachers are free to take on a second job if they really wanted to during the vacation. And also, the point about summer vacation was that they are paid above average yearly incomes while working 65% of the time that most others do. The notion that they are paid poorly is not valid according to any numbers that I have seen. Only ridiculous comparisons to rock stars and athletes makes their income seem low at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidOdden Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 And teachers are free to take on a second job if they really wanted to during the vacation.True, and anyone who works any job is free to take a second or third job. However, very few decent paying jobs exist where you can work at it for 3 months, drop it, come back a year later and repeat the cycle. The only valid standard for comparing teacher pay to that of others is on the basis of annual salary, period. Objecting that they get to have a 3 month vacation is a ridiculous and irrelevant argument, because it's an enforced vacation where you don't have the option of making the money and skipping the vacation (as would be the case in other lines of work). The average annual salary for teachers is about $47K, which isn't shabby (and is comparable to patrol officer pay, btw). I think the objection that some people have simply reflects the actual fact that it's at the lower end of salaries for positions requiring extended training, and most white collar jobs pay better than that on average. So if you want to get rich, you should pick a different line of work. The underlying assumption that teacher pay is low or that doctor or baseball player pay is high is based on the fallacy of intrinsicism -- the idea that it's intrinsic in the job, that baseball players should not be paid much because after all, they just play baseball, and that teacher should get paid a lot because they just should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.