A topic of much discussion (though often completely irrational), teacher's pay is a great source of dissention. Especially since people love to foolishly compare it to pro athletes, or other professions with fewer people in the jobmarket. Just starting a discussion about how funny it is when people get so indignant about people being "underpaid" in a free market. As HL Mencken said, "Those can can do, those who cannot, teach." So applicable to so many, though I'm sure there are one or two exceptions somewhere. Any thoughts?
Yes. Let's take into consideration that they get paid a full year's salary for 9 months of work. People always leave that little tidbit out when comparing teacher salaries to other professions, which makes it an unfair & irrelevent comparison. And I'm not sure that it completely fits the defintion of being in the free market because a)they have unions & b)most of them are paid by the government, so there's not any true competition. I think that good teachers are underpaid. The profession as a whole should probably have their salary raised some, but let's face it - alot of teachers don't deserve a raise because they suck & truley are teachers because they aren't capable of anything else, & not particularly capable of teaching I might add. The whole problem here is their unions, which are the enemy of a free market economy. Good teachers can't get raises without crappy ones getting raises too.
You can say the opposite about many teachers. In those 9 months, many teachers spend more time working than some professions do in a year. When you work from 7-7 on weekdays and "volunteer" to be an organization's sponsor, those hours add up quickly. Teachers' roles in life are greatly underappreciated. And NoLimit's quote from Mencken proves that. I like this quote much more Let's look at Mencken's quote and dissect it. If those who teach cannot "do," then they certainly cannot teach anyone to "do" anything, correct? For you cannot teach something you yourself cannot do, which in this case, is to "do." Therefore, if we cannot be taught how to "do," we cannot "do" ourselves. In that case, we are all teachers as well (since we cannot "do"). But who are we teaching? And if we ourselves cannot teach, then what are we? OK, I have a headache now... :rofl::rofl::rofl::hihi::hihi:
No. I mean, yes. Teachers make a lot less than athletes. And it's a shame that the greedy principals aren't breaking them off proper. How are they supposed to drive Hummers making $27k/yr? OR, option B: I was just being a smartass.:hihi:
Not correct. Plenty of teachers are teachers because they either can't hack it with adults or do not like being held accountable for their ineptitude in a traditional, non-union job. OR, they can't parlay their specialty (e.g. 3rd grade math or science) into a paying career. So sure, they can "do" 3rd grade material, but nobody will "pay" for such a skill set.
You must not know how the education works. So you are saying you wouldn't pay to learn how to multiply if you didn't know how to? So, if you don't know how to multiply, you can completely forget about Algebra. Let's not even go towards Calculus.... So you now do not have a high school or college education. Don't say that you would have learned it yourself. If there were no such thing as elementary educations, only the truly gifted and wealthy would be educated. You can look at history and tell that. Ancient history didn't have any kind of public elementary education. But we must forget that because we didn't have history teachers to tell us about any of that. Elementary Education is necessary, whether you believe it or not. Just because you wouldn't want to teach kids, doesn't mean it's a useless job. Go back and tell your teachers that they are stupid for being teachers and see where that gets you.
