toldailytopic: Chicago Teacher's union strike. Who's side are you on?

[rocketman]

Personally, I think all unions should be abolished. The unions have been one of the greatest contributers to the collaps of the American work ethic.

I don't believe this to be true in all cases, I too disagree with all public sector unionization for the mere fact that they are not bargaining with their bosses...The People. They bargain with politicians who have no stake but, re-election so, they give away the farm. I worked non-union for most of my life and now I belong to a private sector union (it is not a choice BTW) and I have to say it has it's good and bad but, I saw just as many lazy, bad work ethic folks before I got this job as I have on the one I have now. Having a bad work ethic I believe goes much deeper than being Union or not. I would agree that all public sector unions should be abolished for the aforementioned reasons but, unions have also brought to the worker a level of safety standards, fair wages and benefits that support a healthy middle class which is why America is not a third world country. You can stereotype if you please but, regular middle class folks trying to make and keep a decent standard of living is not a bad thing from my point of view, you can find worthless employees in all walks not just the union roles.

 

[zoo22]

I think there's a real purpose and need for teacher's unions, but that generally, teacher's unions have become bloated, disfunctional and need a serious overhaul.

 

[PureX]

There are a couple of glaring problems with this foolish notion that if you work "for the public", you shouldn't be allowed to unionize or bargain collectively.

1. Is that there seems to be some sort of presumption that "the public" will automatically treat public employees fairly. Yet I see no evidence to suggest this. In fact, the evidence suggests that "the public" is really just a collection of ignorant and self-centered individuals who are only too happy to see their neighbors get screwed just as long as it isn't themselves. And as our ignorance and selfishness increases over time, as it clearly has been, so does our unwillingness to pay the taxes that pay the wages of our public employees.

2. That somehow it's "wrong" for public employees to fight for fair pay and compensation simply because "the public" has to pony up the money to cover those costs. But why? Why would being employed by the public exclude anyone from having the right to fight for fair pay and working conditions? Are public employees slaves? Are they criminals? Why should they not have the same rights as anyone else?

3. We get what we pay for. When we refuse to pay people who work for the public a decent wage with fair compensation and working conditions, we will soon be unable to find anyone who could possibly work somewhere else to do the jobs that we need done. We love to whine and complain about how poorly and inefficiently the "government" does things, and yet we support their policy of greed and stupidity as they refuse to pay what's necessary to get good quality employees. We in effect support the same inefficiency that we so love to whine about. For example, we whine and complain about the ineffectiveness of our public schools even while we help the politicians deny teachers proper compensation and control. What do we expect? I think they call this, "cutting off our noses to spite our own faces".

Can one of you public employee haters please explain to me why you think they should be denied their right to unionize or collective bargain, besides the blind, stupid greed of the taxpaying "public"?

 

[Alate_One]

This issues appear to be:

1-tying teacher pay to student test scores

2-job security

3-longer school days

4-expanding charter schools

1 and 4 are incredibly stupid ideas, both are just asking for fraud and have never been shown to actually improve student achievement.

I'm a believer in tenure to protect teachers from moronic parents and administrators, however it may need to be harder to get.

 

[bybee]

That's because you don't listen to Rush Limbaugh. See, he would have explained to you that all unions are evil freedom-hating communists bent of destroying the country. He also would have explained to you that teachers are just lazy do-nothing parasites spawned by the democratic tax-and-spend juggernaut. And that they are brainwashing your children with all sorts of liberal lies like evolution and mathematics.

Had you been smart enough to listen to Rush, you would be smart enough to hate all unions, all teachers, and all liberal democrat scum. But you didn't, and so now Rush hates YOU, too.

So see what you've done!

I suspect that hate is a liberal invention. It comes right out of their absolute belief that if you aren't with them you are against them, therefore, bad, selfish, racist, etc.

 

[LKmommy]

There are a couple of glaring problems with this foolish notion that if you work "for the public", you shouldn't be allowed to unionize or bargain collectively.

1. Is that there seems to be some sort of presumption that "the public" will automatically treat public employees fairly. Yet I see no evidence to suggest this. In fact, the evidence suggests that "the public" is really just a collection of ignorant and self-centered individuals who are only too happy to see their neighbors get screwed just as long as it isn't themselves. And as our ignorance and selfishness increases over time, as it clearly has been, so does our unwillingness to pay the taxes that pay the wages of our public employees.
2. That somehow it's "wrong" for public employees to fight for fair pay and compensation simply because "the public" has to pony up the money to cover those costs. But why? Why would being employed by the public exclude anyone from having the right to fight for fair pay and working conditions? Are public employees slaves? Are they criminals? Why should they not have the same rights as anyone else?

3. We get what we pay for. When we refuse to pay people who work for the public a decent wage with fair compensation and working conditions, we will soon be unable to find anyone who could possibly work somewhere else to do the jobs that we need done. We love to whine and complain about how poorly and inefficiently the "government" does things, and yet we support their policy of greed and stupidity as they refuse to pay what's necessary to get good quality employees. We in effect support the same inefficiency that we so love to whine about. For example, we whine and complain about the ineffectiveness of our public schools even while we help the politicians deny teachers proper compensation and control. What do we expect? I think they call this, "cutting off our noses to spite our own faces".

Can one of you public employee haters please explain to me why you think they should be denied their right to unionize or collective bargain, besides the blind, stupid greed of the taxpaying "public"?

Actually, most of the "taxpayers" are on the side of the teachers. So are most of the parents. And the issue isn't about retirements, it's about control in the schools. The teachers want to be able to decide what works best with the students, rather than the politicians and their political cronies in the city administration. And most of the parents agree with them.

Thank GOD I do not live in Chicago for I am NOT on the side of the teachers HERE, THERE, or ANYWHERE. Did they not know their job when they signed up? They (the teachers) want more control over students, thank you no.

 

[LKmommy]

There are a couple of glaring problems with this foolish notion that if you work "for the public", you shouldn't be allowed to unionize or bargain collectively.

1. Is that there seems to be some sort of presumption that "the public" will automatically treat public employees fairly. Yet I see no evidence to suggest this. In fact, the evidence suggests that "the public" is really just a collection of ignorant and self-centered individuals who are only too happy to see their neighbors get screwed just as long as it isn't themselves. And as our ignorance and selfishness increases over time, as it clearly has been, so does our unwillingness to pay the taxes that pay the wages of our public employees.

2. That somehow it's "wrong" for public employees to fight for fair pay and compensation simply because "the public" has to pony up the money to cover those costs. But why? Why would being employed by the public exclude anyone from having the right to fight for fair pay and working conditions? Are public employees slaves? Are they criminals? Why should they not have the same rights as anyone else?

3. We get what we pay for. When we refuse to pay people who work for the public a decent wage with fair compensation and working conditions, we will soon be unable to find anyone who could possibly work somewhere else to do the jobs that we need done. We love to whine and complain about how poorly and inefficiently the "government" does things, and yet we support their policy of greed and stupidity as they refuse to pay what's necessary to get good quality employees. We in effect support the same inefficiency that we so love to whine about. For example, we whine and complain about the ineffectiveness of our public schools even while we help the politicians deny teachers proper compensation and control. What do we expect? I think they call this, "cutting off our noses to spite our own faces".

Can one of you public employee haters please explain to me why you think they should be denied their right to unionize or collective bargain, besides the blind, stupid greed of the taxpaying "public"?

So then a State Social Worker, who is hired as a public employee should be paid accordingly too but that only happens in fairlyland and board rooms when it is discussed how much can we bilk the taxpayers for and then take off the top before it hits the actual "targets". I think County LIbrarians, Public Works, Sewer Dept employees....let us ALL throw up our arms and protest. The Feds could just always print up more money, it does grow from trees right?

Perhaps freezing Federal and State Legislators annual raises and cutting their retirement benefits should come FIRST if everyone is looking for this "golden money producing tree".

 

[PureX]

Thank GOD I do not live in Chicago for I am NOT on the side of the teachers HERE, THERE, or ANYWHERE. Did they not know their job when they signed up? They (the teachers) want more control over students, thank you no.

Like I said, most Americans couldn't care less what happens to their neighbors so long as it's not happening to them. It's very sad, but increasingly apparent. This is why people NEED the right to unionize and collectively bargain. So they can protect themselves from people like you.

 

[LKmommy]

Like I said, most Americans couldn't care less what happens to their neighbors so long as it's not happening to them. It's very sad, but increasingly apparent. This is why people NEED the right to unionize and collectively bargain. So they can protect themselves from people like you.

So says you PureX. As with this post and others, clearly you and I see differently. I love your analogy of what "most Americans" are based upon this post. It is also humorous in a sick kind of way your reference to a NEED. Unions though initially to protect the safety of employees has become corrupt, bloated, and a strong arm that is no longer effective for ANYONE, including the taxpayers and government (taxpayer funded) who are left dealing with stuff they were not set up to be involved in.

 

[PureX]

So says you PureX. As with this post and others, clearly you and I see differently. I love your analogy of what "most Americans" are based upon this post. It is also humorous in a sick kind of way your reference to a NEED. Unions though initially to protect the safety of employees has become corrupt, bloated, and a strong arm that is no longer effective for ANYONE, ...

So saith the mighty Limbaigh?

I don't see any teachers wallowing in undeserved wealth. Do you? And in Chicago, it's not even about the money, it's about politicians controlling what's happening in the classrooms, instead of the teachers.

... including the taxpayers and government (taxpayer funded) who are left dealing with stuff they were not set up to be involved in.

Right, so because a strike causes the employers difficulty, and the employers are the public, strikes should be illegal? What about the rights of the employees? We just ignore those because, well, they cause us difficulty? This seems to be your argument.

 

[LKmommy]

So saith the mighty Limbaigh?

I do not listen to him but nice try.

I don't see any teachers wallowing in undeserved wealth. Do you?
And in Chicago, it's not even about the money, it's about politicians controlling what's happening in the classrooms, instead of the teachers.

So saith mighty you. I do not agree with you and your line of thinking, so saith ME.

Right, so because a strike causes the employers difficulty, and the employers are the public, strikes should be illegal? What about the rights of the employees? We just ignore those because, well, they cause us difficulty? This seems to be your argument.

You do not know my argument. You ignore it PUreX with you lame assumptions. You shout out your feelings*keyword, of Mr. Limbaugh's right to free speech as well as mine. Saying I spout his rhetoric (I am honored if I do so) is the best you have? Answer my posts and maybe I will humor yours.

I disagree with you. I hope that they (Chicago Public School Teachers refusing to work) are all replaced by someone who is willing to work. Perhaps there are some fresh foreign graduates that are willing to teach for the right to have a Visa here.

 

[PureX]

I do not listen to him but nice try.

Doesn't matter. The 'greed machine' has plenty of professional liars spreading the message; glorifying and justifying fear and greed and ignorance.

Just as there will always be fools enough to listen to them.

You do not know my argument.

You haven't posted an argument. You simply parroted the propaganda that you've been told to believe.

I disagree with you. I hope that they (Chicago Public School Teachers refusing to work) are all replaced by someone who is willing to work. Perhaps there are some fresh foreign graduates that are willing to teach for the right to have a Visa here.

What a 'true American'.

 

[LKmommy]

Doesn't matter. The 'greed machine' has plenty of professional liars spreading the message; glorifying and justifying fear and greed and ignorance.

So says you and I disagree.

Just as there will always be fools enough to listen to them.

The only fool I see is you and I will remind myself what Mark Twain poetically said, "Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.”

You haven't posted an argument. You simply parroted the propaganda that you've been told to believe.

I answered Knight's "Topic of the Day":

Originally Posted by LKmommy
Thank GOD I do not live in Chicago for I am NOT on the side of the teachers HERE, THERE, or ANYWHERE. Did they not know their job when they signed up? They (the teachers) want more control over students, thank you no. and....I parrot my own thoughts and beliefs from MY perspective and experiences.

As stated, I am not from Chicago, IL but I know enough about its corrupt politicians, their antics, track records, current loss of credit ratings, current state of the State's economy. I personally enjoyed yesterday's Chicago Tribune article that provided a full 46 page of "their demands"....including amongst other things how the Dept of CPS should also be spending their dollars (which do not exsist in their current budget). Hmmm, Illinois CPS Workers....what is their guaranteed % of raise for the next 4 years? What is the guaranteed % of anyone's raise next year?

I also found other articles enjoyable, epecially the one that stated of the 400,000 eligible children for certain programs only 16,000 turned out on the first day. As a former Educational Neglect Specialist for State CPS, I know you can not force the horse to the water no matter how much money and grass you put into the effort or program.....well unless you want that Big Daddy Steamroller Gestapo to come on in....you fund with taxes their power to take away individual rights. I expect to see your name on donation to Chicago Public Schools PUre?

I also do not agree with most liberal ideas that MY local public school is pumping out. You are not privy to the stupidity in our local district.

What a 'true American'.

My passport and Birth Certificate says I am one. I believe in the Constitution and not the shenanigans that is currently being spun. I am NOT for big government. I am NOT for "big daddy", NOT for Socialism or any form of Communism in these here United States.

What exactly is a "true American" PureX? The writers of the Constitution? An Indian? A first generation born? A child born from an illegal mother? I look forward to your definition and standard of the term.

 

[rocketman]

There are a couple of glaring problems with this foolish notion that if you work "for the public", you shouldn't be allowed to unionize or bargain collectively.

1. Is that there seems to be some sort of presumption that "the public" will automatically treat public employees fairly. Yet I see no evidence to suggest this. In fact, the evidence suggests that "the public" is really just a collection of ignorant and self-centered individuals who are only too happy to see their neighbors get screwed just as long as it isn't themselves. And as our ignorance and selfishness increases over time, as it clearly has been, so does our unwillingness to pay the taxes that pay the wages of our public employees.

2. That somehow it's "wrong" for public employees to fight for fair pay and compensation simply because "the public" has to pony up the money to cover those costs. But why? Why would being employed by the public exclude anyone from having the right to fight for fair pay and working conditions? Are public employees slaves? Are they criminals? Why should they not have the same rights as anyone else?

3. We get what we pay for. When we refuse to pay people who work for the public a decent wage with fair compensation and working conditions, we will soon be unable to find anyone who could possibly work somewhere else to do the jobs that we need done. We love to whine and complain about how poorly and inefficiently the "government" does things, and yet we support their policy of greed and stupidity as they refuse to pay what's necessary to get good quality employees. We in effect support the same inefficiency that we so love to whine about. For example, we whine and complain about the ineffectiveness of our public schools even while we help the politicians deny teachers proper compensation and control. What do we expect? I think they call this, "cutting off our noses to spite our own faces".

Can one of you public employee haters please explain to me why you think they should be denied their right to unionize or collective bargain, besides the blind, stupid greed of the taxpaying "public"?

The only thing foolish is not allowing "The People" ( Your bosses) to vote on labor agreements, being they are the ones picking up the bill after all. Since this is not the case no public employees should not be able to unionize. It holds the people hostage to to an agreement they have no say in. Poor logic to call those " taxpayers" stupid, greedy, blind for an agreement they have no say in, your scorn is misplaced. If you think wages, benefits, and the lack of jobs is bad now...give your messiah Obama another term and he will be able to sink this nation to that of Greece or Spain, then you will hear complaining.

 

[drbrumley]

Chicago Government Schools Are Bad for Your Kids

Posted by James Ostrowski on September 12, 2012 08:13 AM

The Chicago teachers' strike is a great opportunity to encourage parents there to pull their kids out of those daytime propaganda prisons. There are plenty of good private schools in Chicago whose teachers aren't money-grubbing left-wing union members whose main goal is to redistribute the wealth of the working class into their own greedy, C-student pockets.

Here's a list of schools in Chicago. Choose the option to view private schools only.

Here's the introduction to my book Government Schools Are Bad for Your Kids. If you know parents in Chicago, please recommend the book to them.

If there are any Liberty Movement activists in Chicago who believe in direct action, let me know and I will forward to you a flier you can pass out which explains why government schools are indeed bad for our children.

As the Democrats like to say, let's not let a good crisis go to waste.

 

[Angel4Truth]

I completely disagree with public sector unionism. We did not elect them, and they should have no say in bargaining anything, it should all be voted on instead, since its the taxpayers money being spent.

 

[chrysostom]

Chicago Government Schools Are Bad for Your Kids

Posted by James Ostrowski on September 12, 2012 08:13 AM

The Chicago teachers' strike is a great opportunity to encourage parents there to pull their kids out of those daytime propaganda prisons. There are plenty of good private schools in Chicago whose teachers aren't money-grubbing left-wing union members whose main goal is to redistribute the wealth of the working class into their own greedy, C-student pockets.

Here's a list of schools in Chicago. Choose the option to view private schools only.

Here's the introduction to my book Government Schools Are Bad for Your Kids. If you know parents in Chicago, please recommend the book to them.

If there are any Liberty Movement activists in Chicago who believe in direct action, let me know and I will forward to you a flier you can pass out which explains why government schools are indeed bad for our children.

As the Democrats like to say, let's not let a good crisis go to waste.

nice

 

[PureX]

I completely disagree with public sector unionism. We did not elect them, and they should have no say in bargaining anything, it should all be voted on instead, since its the taxpayers money being spent.

So, in your mind, working for the public means you must give up your rights as a free citizen?

Have you ever heard of the idea of protecting the minority and the individual from the will and abuse of the majority? It is, after all, a founding principal of our nation.

Don't bother trying to answer, as I know you don't understand any of this.

 

[Angel4Truth]

So, in your mind, working for the public means you must give up your rights as a free citizen?

Have you ever heard of the idea of protecting the minority and the individual from the will and abuse of the majority? It is, after all, a founding principal of our nation.

Don't bother trying to answer, as I know you don't understand any of this.

Working for the public means you understand what working for the public means - and your pay and benefits *should* be based on tax revenues and not all areas have the same cost of livings and tax bases. A county employee for example in a small area with limited resources, doesn't deserve the same pay as someone in a metropolitan area. It should be based around a more average medium income.

I understand that liberals know little about economics though.