Cut off funding???

allinaugust · #1 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 11:38 AM

While I know this sounds quite drastic, did you ever wonder what would happen to some of the people on public aid if they had some or all of that aid cut off??? Would it help our economy???

I have an issue when I see people getting public aid, yet they are on their 3G cell phone (internet access, bells and whistles) and smelling like smoke.

What is the answer to our huge defecit??? when does it end???

annadrose · #2 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 11:47 AM

I believe education is the answer. I'm not just talking about school education although that would help with jobs etc. I'm talking about educating people on things like where their "free" benefits come from; history lessons; budgeting; parenting; nutrition; housecleaning; birth control, etc. Many people on public assistance are sadly lacking in the most basic skills as well as far below the norm on reading writing and math.
I guess it could be like the starfish story i.e. rescue one family at a time. It's a learned way of life. It becomes acceptable in one generation and the rest follow suit.

People have to know that working your own way through life has benefits financial as well as others benefits such as self esteem and that working will provide a better life for their families.
People have to learn the feeling of pride in one's own accomplishments and that even the "poorest" life on your own can be more successful and fulfilling than a life on assistance.

Instead of just giving away money, food stamps, etc people should be forced to get an education that will enable them to work and be self sufficient and they should also be performing community service for their benefits.

Also I believe that everyone who gets even one penny from the government (us that is) should be given a hair follicle drug test to determine their drug usage in the last 12 months. If they are found to be positive they should have to enter a rehab program or be denied any benefits.

tammyleeb · #3 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 12:05 PM

I am not sure what the answer is to public aid. I do know that way too many people abuse the system. I also think that much of the problem is an issue with personal responsibility. When you see generations on welfare, then you know it has become a way of life for them. It is meant to be a temporary solution, for people who fall on hard times.

wowitsdark · #4 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 12:09 PM

Anna, while I agree education is part of it, accountability is just as critical.

So often we talk about individuals who chronically use the system in terms of what they are 'taking' from the taxpayers.

The flip side of that is considering what they are *not* contributing. Everybody needs to pitch in to make our country stronger.

annadrose · #5 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 12:33 PM

I agree Wow accountability is the most important thing. I believe that people need to be taught accountability. Most of us were taught to be responsible for our actions and we were given consequences. The rest have to learn this they won't "get it" by reading it or being told it.

Crittles1 · #6 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tammyleeb

I am not sure what the answer is to public aid. I do know that way too many people abuse the system. I also think that much of the problem is an issue with personal responsibility. When you see generations on welfare, then you know it has become a way of life for them. It is meant to be a temporary solution, for people who fall on hard times.

Sad, Pathetic, Abusive......Those that abuse the system, and I do think they know they're taking what they can get, are living what they know. It's a sad cycle that continues. Drastic changes need to be put in place.

tammyleeb · #7 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 02:20 PM

I was watching one of the court shows on TV yesterday and caught one of the cases of a man who was suing his landlord. To make a very long story short...he wanted his security deposit back, the landlord refused. Come to find out, he, his wife and FOUR children had lived in her apartment for five years. The entire time they lived there, WE were paying their rent (they were suppose to pay $79 a month...which they never paid). They had learned how to work the system, the landlord could NOT evict them because they kept lodging complaints with the housing authority about the conditions of their apartment, and as long as it was an open investigation, the landlord had no options. This tenants wife had worked in the past for the housing authority and knew the rules, so they used what they knew....to live rent free for FIVE years. When the landlord was finally able to get them out, they stuffed rags in all the drains and left the water running....flooding their apartment, along with two others. I was sick to my stomach listening to this case. They actually thought they did nothing wrong, and deserved their deposit money back. The judge was sending the transcripts of the case to be further investigated. I wanted to add that they showed pictures of this three bedroom apartment, and it was very nice (hardwood floors, newer appliances).

deddlastt · #8 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by allinaugust

While I know this sounds quite drastic, did you ever wonder what would happen to some of the people on public aid if they had some or all of that aid cut off??? Would it help our economy???

I have an issue when I see people getting public aid, yet they are on their 3G cell phone (internet access, bells and whistles) and smelling like smoke.

What is the answer to our huge defecit??? when does it end???

I had a thread here recently about someone getting a new $600 cell phone for $150 and yet gets snap (food welfare) and all kinds of assistance between he and his gf (4 kids). Last year, with his tax return he bought a motorcycle (remember they have 4 kids bewteen them) and an unreliable car. I can hardly wait to see what this year's tax return will fund for him.

He thinks it's ok to have the new phone. He has other things I consider unecessary as well when the 2 of them can't support their kids.

I had a novel idea too about just stopping all aid for a year and see where things were at the end of that time. In the depression, people learned to survive and they figured out ways to make some money and families stuck together to get through it. That sense of survival is gone.

A year. That's what I think and then see how it is.

dl

kathyshopperia · #9 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deddlastt

I had a thread here recently about someone getting a new $600 cell phone for $150 and yet gets snap (food welfare) and all kinds of assistance between he and his gf (4 kids). Last year, with his tax return he bought a motorcycle (remember they have 4 kids bewteen them) and an unreliable car. I can hardly wait to see what this year's tax return will fund for him.

He thinks it's ok to have the new phone. He has other things I consider unecessary as well when the 2 of them can't support their kids.

I had a novel idea too about just stopping all aid for a year and see where things were at the end of that time. In the depression, people learned to survive and they figured out ways to make some money and families stuck together to get through it. That sense of survival is gone.

A year. That's what I think and then see how it is.

dl

I believe one of the Scandanavian countries did that and low and behold people seemed to manage.
My almost 87 yr old mom went whole winters in her childhood eating only "corn mush and rotten apples". Sometimes they got a treat and had sorghum to put on their mush. If they were really lucky they got an orange and some hard candy for Christmas. Thinking of what the "older" generation has gone through and comparing it to what people think they are entitled to these days makes me sick.
I still would like to change the food assistance program and see what happens. I would make 3 or 4 monthly boxes to choose from and that's what you get. The box would be nutritionally sound and well-planned. I think if you are needy enough and hungry enough you would appreciate it. My mom would have thought she hit the jackpot if she would have had enough food to eat all winter long. If you didn't like what was in it I'd bet you would make some life changes. We need to get tougher on the abusers of the system.

deddlastt · #10 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightowlrn

Welfare is to blame for runaway government spending

Personally, I don't believe having children suffer for their parents choices is a very good idea if one is future thinking. As for drug testing, the cost to administer such a program would be well more than any savings we might realize from the few on assistance who also can afford recreational drugs. And again, if those few have children, then what? We also know that folks who do drugs choose drugs over food, and without food they would end up in the hospital on our dime or stealing from us. It is a lose-lose.

We aren't in financial trouble because of a minority of people. We are in this mess because of people like my parents, who got back from SS and Medicare in a few months what they invested and have been living off you and me (quite well thank you) for another 25 years and neither is planning to go anywhere anytime soon. It is because of all the elderly in nursing homes on medicaid, and the folks in ICUs for months and months who have no quality of life but are being kept alive by Medicaid dollars. Supporting all the physically and mentally disabled among us takes its financial toll as well. I am sure getting ourselves into an endless war that was heavily advised against has something to do with it. As well as creating a military infrastruction that should be called an offense, not a defense. Plus, supporting those in the military, many who never saw the other side of their desk, a retirement and medical care (for their families as well) after 20 years is just nuts!

But, it isn't nice to poke fun at someone's granny, and we can't say anything about anyone in the military, so people find it simpler to blame some of the most vulnerable among us.

That is my opinion anyway .... Egypt is not erupting because of the current dictator. Egypt is erupting because of food and economics. If a bit of my income goes to others in an attempt to prevent a critical mass of poor and illiterate from rising up against me, I am okay with that policy.

And, to further it, folks "way up on high" totally love it when the low-middle class find the cause of the problems are those below them.

Who said children should suffer? My cell phone guy's kids aren't suffering. He gets snap and he got himself a cell phone ! It's a win-win situation for him. People are already stealing to support their drug habits - nothing new. Some of them can afford recreational drugs because their other needs are being met by the taxpayer.

I agree Medicaid (and don't forget disability) needs to be revamped because not all of those on it qualify. People hide money and houses.

You are quite mistaken about the military. While after 20 years there is a retirement, it honestly isn't much. I speak from living the life. And to set you straight on the medical, yes, absolutely health care was promised - a promise broken. We PAY for our "military" healthcare after retirement.

The abuse is rampant. It is possible to be born, live, and die with the government here footing the bill. In the past two weeks, I've experienced 3 situations where people flat out expected the "state" to pay because they are accustomed to NOT paying.

dl

deddlastt · #11 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kathyshopperia

I believe one of the Scandanavian countries did that and low and behold people seemed to manage.
My almost 87 yr old mom went whole winters in her childhood eating only "corn mush and rotten apples". Sometimes they got a treat and had sorghum to put on their mush. If they were really lucky they got an orange and some hard candy for Christmas. Thinking of what the "older" generation has gone through and comparing it to what people think they are entitled to these days makes me sick.
I still would like to change the food assistance program and see what happens. I would make 3 or 4 monthly boxes to choose from and that's what you get. The box would be nutritionally sound and well-planned. I think if you are needy enough and hungry enough you would appreciate it. My mom would have thought she hit the jackpot if she would have had enough food to eat all winter long. If you didn't like what was in it I'd bet you would make some life changes. We need to get tougher on the abusers of the system.

The food thing, you are right on. People expect to eat out and be able to buy what they want. If they really had to take what there was, or what was given, they'd scream. You are right. I've listened to my grandparents and my great grandmother simply talk about how life was. They accepted it and they lived it and they survived. A new dress was a luxury in that era. Now people spend too much at Walmart buying crap. It's like a hobby or past-time to go there.

I think sometimes it is a full time job for those on the dole. By the time they get all of their freebies and figure out how to maximize the churches, utility assistance, medical, dental, etc they sure don't have time to work.

dl

allinaugust · #12 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightowlrn

Welfare is to blame for runaway government spending

Personally, I don't believe having children suffer for their parents choices is a very good idea if one is future thinking. As for drug testing, the cost to administer such a program would be well more than any savings we might realize from the few on assistance who also can afford recreational drugs. And again, if those few have children, then what? We also know that folks who do drugs choose drugs over food, and without food they would end up in the hospital on our dime or stealing from us. It is a lose-lose.

We aren't in financial trouble because of a minority of people. We are in this mess because of people like my parents, who got back from SS and Medicare in a few months what they invested and have been living off you and me (quite well thank you) for another 25 years and neither is planning to go anywhere anytime soon. It is because of all the elderly in nursing homes on medicaid, and the folks in ICUs for months and months who have no quality of life but are being kept alive by Medicaid dollars. Supporting all the physically and mentally disabled among us takes its financial toll as well. I am sure getting ourselves into an endless war that was heavily advised against has something to do with it. As well as creating a military infrastruction that should be called an offense, not a defense. Plus, supporting those in the military, many who never saw the other side of their desk, a retirement and medical care (for their families as well) after 20 years is just nuts!

But, it isn't nice to poke fun at someone's granny, and we can't say anything about anyone in the military, so people find it simpler to blame some of the most vulnerable among us.

That is my opinion anyway .... Egypt is not erupting because of the current dictator. Egypt is erupting because of food and economics. If a bit of my income goes to others in an attempt to prevent a critical mass of poor and illiterate from rising up against me, I am okay with that policy.

And, to further it, folks "way up on high" totally love it when the low-middle class find the cause of the problems are those below them.

While I appreciate the valid points you make here about the medicaid and medicare, I must object to your ignorance about the military, as well as ask why you single out the military? There are many gov't employees who enjoy a very cushy retirement package. The USPS comes to mind...... Also, you would be hard pressed to find anyone in the military who has never seen the other side of their desk. While not every rating is "war going" (for lack of a better term) not too many sit behind their desk for 20 years. There are the countless moves, the deployments, the seperations, on and on and on. Also, as Deadlast stated, retired military pay for their health care. It is not "free" as some would like to believe.

wowitsdark · #13 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 10:05 PM

A agree, AIA.

Our military is expensive, no doubt about it.

But from my understanding, an exceedingly high number of retired government employees - from senators to school teachers - are guaranteed pensions out the wazoo - including health care - from the minute they retire until the minute they die.

A quick google search gave me these stats: Government-funded compensation provides 35 percent higher wages and nearly 69 percent greater benefits when compared with private sector compensation. The average cost per hour (pay and bennies both taken into account) paid out to support a government employee is 39.60. Private sector? $27.42.

Social security was, IMHO, something we never should have started. Nor were pensions (thank you, unions).

We have been saving for retirement since we were in our 20's. We're in our 40's now. It amazes me that my sister-in-law, a local school teacher who hadn't saved back a dime towards her retirement, didn't start teaching until she was 38 and could retire at 58 with 85% of her ending pay and full health benefits.

I appreciate the work teachers do, but for a nine month job with two weeks off at Christmas... that compensation level is just way cushy.

deddlastt · #14 (**permalink**) 02-02-2011, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightowlrn

I didn't say military retired healthcare was free --

To AIA -- I suppose I pointed to military retirements because I would think there are twice as many military as postal workers.

My husband graduated from a well known military academy first in his class. We married after he graduated and got our first pick of assignments. After a year or two, he began to feel like a paid potential killer and the set up was designed to allow him to have enough money and benefits to have a wife (sex) and family to keep him a happy camper. Gov't tax free housing, tax free discounted food, tax free discounted goods, coralled in gov't housing with our kids going to schools with mostly gov't kids. We figured the game out a few years into it and ran for the hills. We have never looked back. It worked out financially for us. The safer road was definitely to stay and run with the cash after 20, but we couldn't stomach it. Five years into the private sector, we moved 4 times, our oldest went to 3 kindergartens! We moved a number of times and since we weren't in Gov't housing we had to sell and buy a number of times. In the first five years, we spent one time 8 months apart and another 9 months apart. So all this hoo haa about having to move and such is BS in my experience. We moved more as civilians than as a part of the service. Which, in both situations, was done to advance careers.

Again, people are avoiding the huge elephant in the room. Either because they are a part of the elephant or because they are going to be elected by parts of the elephant. So, it is easier to hollar at those whose impact on the budget is small in comparison.

Here, to remind you now that you care to sidestep is part of what you wrote:

"Plus, supporting those in the military, many who never saw the other side of their desk, a retirement and medical care (for their families as well) after 20 years is just nuts!"

While you didn't say it was free, you certainly presented that point in your sentence ending with just nuts. Your husband did what many do. Get an education and get out. Good for him and if your family had stayed, you'd have a different view.

Nobody runs with the cash, it all comes with a price. There are no more promised survivor benefits either, fyi since you were so smart to get out and keep your kids away from other gov't kids. If we wanted a survivor benefit plan upon his retirement, we had 3 lousy plans to pick from- and pay for ourselves. None of them were worth what we could do on our own with a life insurance policy. The game, as you call it, changed while my husband served.

And serve he did. We didn't get our first pick as you were so fortunate to have on a bop. Base of preference, in case you've fogotten since you think the military is bs. I say big deal on your supposed sacrifice of moving in the private sector. You had a choice then by career, market, job whatever w hile so many other men and women did choose to protect you and our country. Desk job, a 702, not always a choice and not always for an entire career as you'd like to think.

dl

marilynk · #15 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightowlrn

I don't believe military service is/was BS. It serves a purpose. We just weren't willing to sell ourselves for the promised benefits..

Some will find it offensive that you are implying that their friend/family member "sold out" for some benefit.

Perhaps if you worded it different---how about
"our family wasn't willing to sacrifice to be career military"?

You are taking away from, with your choice of words, what some choose to do---so you can express your opinion. It comes across as disrespectful and rude (and probably to some as ungrateful...)
Obviously, you are free to express yourself however you see fit. But, be careful what toes you step on, those toes are usually attached to people. And if you step on toes today, it could be attached to the foot that kicks ya in the arse tomorrow.

deddlastt · #16 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightowlrn

Every military has its own name for preferred assignment. I chose not to use the name his branch called it for a reason. He was in 8 years, and was rumored to be a candidate for deep selection, so we weren't in it for just the education.

I don't believe military service is/was BS. It serves a purpose. We just weren't willing to sell ourselves for the promised benefits.

What I do believe is those who serve as law enforcement, fire fighters, CIA, FBI, etc, often and do put their live and their family's future in as much risk for others as any person in who serves in the armed forces. Are there special life insurance policies for them? Do they all get benefits after 20?

Again -- the part of the Federal budget that people are discussing a small, itty bitty part of the budget. While all the while, trying to avoid being stepped upon by the elephant, which in many ways, is themselves.

Again, here you are at the rink, trying skillfully to skate around what you have already said, and not succeeding.

Rumor? That's always a valid, solid reason to act, now isn't it?

You are ungrateful to our military and you belittle each and every person who has served and who serves with your mindset and comments. Obviously it's good he got out, he couldn't take it, you were too good for it, and your kids, by your own self admission, were with govt kids ~gasp~

Military life is not for everyone. You should be on your knees ever so humbly that some can handle it and do - for all of us.

dl

tammyleeb · #17 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wowitsdark

A agree, AIA.

Our military is expensive, no doubt about it.

But from my understanding, an exceedingly high number of retired government employees - from senators to school teachers - are guaranteed pensions out the wazoo - including health care - from the minute they retire until the minute they die.

A quick google search gave me these stats: Government-funded compensation provides 35 percent higher wages and nearly 69 percent greater benefits when compared with private sector compensation. The average cost per hour (pay and bennies both taken into account) paid out to support a government employee is 39.60. Private sector? $27.42.

Social security was, IMHO, something we never should have started. Nor were pensions (thank you, unions).

We have been saving for retirement since we were in our 20's. We're in our 40's now. It amazes me that my sister-in-law, a local school teacher who hadn't saved back a dime towards her retirement, didn't start teaching until she was 38 and could retire at 58 with 85% of her ending pay and full health benefits.

I appreciate the work teachers do, but for a nine month job with two weeks off at Christmas... that compensation level is just way cushy.

Wow...I don't know where your sister-in-law teaches, but I am thinking perhaps I should move! I am sure that although you think she isn't *saving* for her retirement, a certain percentage of her salary is automatically put into her retirement account. In our State, it is a rather large amount. As a sub at a local high school....let me tell you, teachers earn every single cent they make! If you get a chance, perhaps volunteer for a day at your local school and you may find your opinion may change.

annadrose · #18 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 09:21 AM

As far as "government" employees earning more it depends on whom you're talking about. From middle management on up I must agree with you. However the workers on the bottom don't get paid more. For example highway maintenance workers in private industry make much more than state workers at least in Oregon. I have worked in county, state, and federal government. The wages I earned were much less than comparable private sector jobs.
The benefits are generous, if you qualify. (Government, like everyone else, has in recent years started employing people in part time or what is classified as temporary or intermittent to avoid paying benefits). The higher benefits are an incentive to people to seek employment in government jobs. And the bureaucratic BS that low level government workers put up with is much more than anyone in the private sector endures.
As far as teachers go I believe they are not paid enough. We are ideally looking for the best, brightest, more caring individuals possible to help mold the minds of our children and ultimately our future leaders and policy makers. Should we really be skimping there?

littlewolf · #19 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deddlastt

Again, here you are at the rink, trying skillfully to skate around what you have already said, and not succeeding.

Rumor? That's always a valid, solid reason to act, now isn't it?

You are ungrateful to our military and you belittle each and every person who has served and who serves with your mindset and comments. Obviously it's good he got out, he couldn't take it, you were too good for it, and your kids, by your own self admission, were with govt kids ~gasp~

Military life is not for everyone. You should be on your knees ever so humbly that some can handle it and do - for all of us.

dl

Thank you for saying everything that I was thinking BUT in a much more polite manner! If memory serves me right though, nightowlrn has had issues with the military for quite a while now. Go back through the archives and read some of the other "wonderful" comments that she has had to make about the military.

Edited to add that the following is directed at nightowlrn and NOT you, deddlastt.......

While I thank your husband for HIS service, I thank him even more for getting out since obviously you & your family were TOO good to be around others in the military.

Deep Selection(NOT a state secret by any means.......lol) : Under the current law, each below-zone selection (also commonly referred to as "deep selection") results in the deep selected officers being added to the bottom of the selection list — effectively advancing them on the ADPL. This amendment would allow selection boards to recommend exceptionally high-performing officers for advancement in precedence within their respective selection list...............also, a Navy or Coast Guard term........

allinaugust · #20 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littlewolf

Thank you for saying everything that I was thinking BUT in a much more polite manner! If memory serves me right though, nightowlrn has had issues with the military for quite a while now. Go back through the archives and read some of the other "wonderful" comments that she has had to make about the military.

Edited to add that the following is directed at nightowlrn and NOT you, deddlastt.......

While I thank your husband for HIS service, I thank him even more for getting out since obviously you & your family were TOO good to be around others in the military.

...

AMEN!!!!

Not sure why someone in NightOwls' shoes would have such a terrible view of our military

BTW, so grateful my DH sold us out.....yup, every single month when that retirement check rolls in.....and when we go to the doctor and have insurance to help cover the cost of the bill.....and the discounted groceries (that are not always cheaper than out in town AND have a 5% surcharge attached).....sheesh.

littlewolf · #21 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by allinaugust

AMEN!!!!

Not sure why someone in NightOwls' shoes would have such a terrible view of our military

BTW, so grateful my DH sold us out.....yup, every single month when that retirement check rolls in.....and when we go to the doctor and have insurance to help cover the cost of the bill.....and the discounted groceries (that are not always cheaper than out in town AND have a 5% surcharge attached).....sheesh.

Just wondering if nightowlrn has taken a moment to think about the BENEFITS her family has received due to the education/training her husband received while he was in the military? Also, if I am not mistaken, did I not read at one point that SHE worked for the government as well?

wowitsdark · #22 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littlewolf

Just wondering if nightowlrn has taken a moment to think about the BENEFITS her family has received due to the education/training her husband received while he was in the military? Also, if I am not mistaken, did I not read at one point that SHE worked for the government as well?

I believe she has said she is a government attorney.

Pot? Kettle? Maybe?

allinaugust · #23 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littlewolf

Just wondering if nightowlrn has taken a moment to think about the BENEFITS her family has received due to the education/training her husband received while he was in the military? Also, if I am not mistaken, did I not read at one point that SHE worked for the government as well?

SERIOUSLY???? Talk about a gravy train!! GS employees get benefits FAR exceeding what our Active Duty get!!!

Hmmm, waiting to hear about this before I comment further....

littlewolf · #24 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by allinaugust

SERIOUSLY???? Talk about a gravy train!! GS employees get benefits FAR exceeding what our Active Duty get!!!

Hmmm, waiting to hear about this before I comment further....

Sent you a private message........

marilynk · #25 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by allinaugust

SERIOUSLY???? Talk about a gravy train!! GS employees get benefits FAR exceeding what our Active Duty get!!!

Hmmm, waiting to hear about this before I comment further....

This I can attest to: My dad worked for and retired from a military re-supply depot. My sis still works there.

They both received excellent bennies, liberal time off, excellent pay--and Dad was able to retire early (w/ incentives) when there was fear that the depot would be shut down due to BRAC.

Don't get me wrong--Dad worked his butt off, and my sis still works her butt off(she started out rebuilding Bradley tanks

), but yes, they have/had it a little more "cushy" than active duty military.

tammyleeb · #26 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 01:47 PM

I can't say that I have a problem with the Military. At least these people have *earned* what they have, and are willing to protect our Country. My concern is with those who live off the system, don't work, or provide us with safety. My issue is with those who can work, but make the decision not too. They feel that they are entitled to free housing, free food and medical care. They are not willing to take personal responsibility for their own lives or those of their children. Try comparing those individuals to our Military.....you know, the ones who don't even want to provide for themselves, let alone be willing to give their life for our Country!

wowitsdark · #27 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tammyleeb

Wow...I don't know where your sister-in-law teaches, but I am thinking perhaps I should move! I am sure that although you think she isn't *saving* for her retirement, a certain percentage of her salary is automatically put into her retirement account. In our State, it is a rather large amount. As a sub at a local high school....let me tell you, teachers earn every single cent they make! If you get a chance, perhaps volunteer for a day at your local school and you may find your opinion may change.

Actually, tammy, I am a former teacher myself. I know what it's like, and it's not that bad. It's a lot of work, but lots of jobs are lots of work. They also get a total of four months paid vacation time a year. That means they only work 66% of the year (not even taking into consideration weekends - that's just counting three months for the summer, two weeks at Christmas, and various other days off like MLK, Labor Day, Spring Break, Good Friday and the following Monday, etc.)

I believe you are incorrect in saying that a part of her salary is put back each month. If that were true, she would have a choice in the matter, and she doesn't. And if it were being 'invested' on her behalf, market fluctuations would dictate how much she could withdraw at retirement. She will get her pay amount upon retiring regardless of the markets because we the taxpayers subsidize the retirement pay for our teachers - as well as their health benefits.

tammyleeb · #28 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 04:15 PM

I guess we can agree to disagree about how hard teachers work. I realize that they do get summers off (consisting of about nine weeks), but I also realize that they do a great deal of work at home most nights (correcting papers, lesson plans, etc), and its time when they are offically *off the clock*. The more time I spend at our local High School, the more I realize just how underpaid our teachers are.

wowitsdark · #29 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tammyleeb

I guess we can agree to disagree about how hard teachers work. I realize that they do get summers off (consisting of about nine weeks), but I also realize that they do a great deal of work at home most nights (correcting papers, lesson plans, etc), and its time when they are offically *off the clock*. The more time I spend at our local High School, the more I realize just how underpaid our teachers are.

Think of it this way....

Here, if a teacher gets her masters and a few extra classes, I believe she could end up at a salary of around $80K. She can retire in her 50's and receive a salary in the $60's for another 40 - 50 years. She will also have what is quite literally the best health plan in our community.

Considering that they only work 66% of the year, that $80K salary is equivalent to a $120K annual salary for the amount of time worked.

To give you a bit of perspective, the average household income in my community is $38K. That's for the household - not the average salary, but the average household income.

Starting pay for a teacher just out of college is around $30K with full bennies. That translates to $45K if it was a year-round job.

And again - that is already $7K more than the average household income in the community and does not count bennies.

Some teachers work hard, some don't. Many jobs are hard - construction, running small businesses, sweat shops... I guess, having been in the trenches as a teacher myself for several years and then working in another realm, I don't see my previous 'teacher job' as any harder than my current one. Different, but not harder.

I didn't enjoy all the paper grading and lesson plan making that are critical parts of being a teacher, so I don't plan to go back to that vocation. I let my certificate expire and never looked back. It's not a bad job, and I was actually good at the *teaching* part... but to be honest, it just didn't challenge my brain in the way my brain needs challenged. What I do now wouldn't challenge a lot of people. It takes all kinds to make the world go 'round, I guess! :-)

marilynk · #30 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wowitsdark

Think of it this way....

Here, if a teacher gets her masters and a few extra classes, I believe she could end up at a salary of around $80K. She can retire in her 50's and receive a salary in the $60's for another 40 - 50 years. She will also have what is quite literally the best health plan in our community.

Considering that they only work 66% of the year, that $80K salary is equivalent to a $120K annual salary for the amount of time worked.

To give you a bit of perspective, the average household income in my community is $38K. That's for the household - not the average salary, but the average household income.

Starting pay for a teacher just out of college is around $30K with full bennies. That translates to $45K if it was a year-round job.

And again - that is already $7K more than the average household income in the community and does not count bennies.

for every 55 y/o teacher who retires--how many actually live to another 40-50 years??

Also, it is so dependent on location and other variables, on how much a teacher is paid/benefits.

What floors me is the Superintendent of Schools here makes over $150K (total of 2 HS, 2 MS, 8 to 10 elem) plus full benefits. That seems excessive to me!

wowitsdark · #31 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marilynk

for every 55 y/o teacher who retires--how many actually live to another 40-50 years??

Also, it is so dependent on location and other variables, on how much a teacher is paid/benefits.

What floors me is the Superintendent of Schools here makes over $150K (total of 2 HS, 2 MS, 8 to 10 elem) plus full benefits. That seems excessive to me!

50 years, not so many... but 40 years, probably a fair number. Thirty years... probably a large number!

It's not uncommon for them to have more years receiving retirement pay than the number of years they were actually in the workforce.

And I do realize it varies tremendously from place to place. But locally, ours are definitely well compensated - more than most career choices will pay here.

I need to do some checking to be sure, but I believe our current largest school - related taxpayer expense is pay to retired teachers.

wowitsdark · #32 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 04:59 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/07/yo...y/07money.html

Quote:

There’s a class war coming to the world of government pensions.

The haves are retirees who were once state or municipal workers. Their seemingly guaranteed and ever-escalating monthly pension benefits are breaking budgets nationwide.

The have-nots are taxpayers who don’t have generous pensions. Their 401(k)s or individual retirement accounts have taken a real beating in recent years and are not guaranteed. And soon, many of those people will be paying higher taxes or getting fewer state services as their states put more money aside to cover those pension checks.

At stake is at least $1 trillion. That’s trillion, with a “t,” as in titanic and terrifying.

tammyleeb · #33 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 05:18 PM

I can tell you that our starting teachers salary where I live is not even close to 30K, and I do not know of any teacher at our school who makes 80k. As a matter of fact, one of the teachers still working at our local High School, actually taught my husband (who graduated 32 years ago), she isn't even making 60k, and she has been teaching going on 35 years. You must have some healthy teachers where you live, not to be nit picky, but I don't think that even saying they will live 30 to 40 years past retirement is really fair. That would make them 85-95! Granted it is possible, but not likely. The other thing I am a bit curious about is the amount of teachers that actually retire at 55. In my ten years working at a local school, I only know of three teachers that have retired, and all were in their early 60s. I am sure all areas are different, and it has been interesting to learn what teachers salaries are in other areas. It makes me realize that our teachers are even more underpaid that I realized! Very interesting....

wowitsdark · #34 (**permalink**) 02-03-2011, 05:33 PM

It is very interesting, Tammy.

The average lifespan of a woman in the US is just a couple months shy of 80 years old, so given that that's the average... some will live to 90, and some to 70, kwim?

My relative that teaches locally is in a huge race to get every possible college credit hour she can right now. Currently, pay is based on years taught and level of education. There is pretty serious talk that they will be going to a different system for determining pay that hinges on performance, but they will grandfather in people at their current level.

I just looked online and found these figures for the average teacher's salary in our district (which does not include health benefits - and I believe the district picks up insurance premiums that run about $1,300/month per teacher):

2009-10, $52,034 (state avg. $46,227)

Interestingly, we are a non-unionized district.

deddlastt · #35 (**permalink**) 02-04-2011, 07:40 AM

The wheels go even faster when one skates backwards.

dl

littlewolf · #36 (**permalink**) 02-04-2011, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deddlastt

The wheels go even faster when one skates backwards.

dl

Thought the very same thing, deddlastt!! And while nightowlrn may be an attorney that supposedly helps the veterans, her own words in the past on here have been anything but helpful:

"I believe these issues occur prior to a person becoming a "veteran." Long deployements, substance abuse, etc occur long before they enter the VHA system. Additionally, many Veterans do not seek health care prior to dying by suicide. VHA cannot make a Veteran seek mental health services.

The issue is really a partnership and information sharing between DoD and VHA, which is just now starting to happen.

Additionally, the Veteran population is more likely to experience mental health crisis than the general population.

VHA has a full court blitz to address Veteran mental illness. Sadly, suicide is one of those horrible things that is difficult to prevent. We can't involuntarily hospitalize people who we fear are suicidal. Medications can only do so much. And, the military population is less likely to share their feelings and concerns due to the indoctrination of military life."

Health Care discussion.....cont'd. ...time warp back to 2010

Still shaking my head at all of the double talk & skating around what was said earlier in this thread. Plus, I am sure that the wonderful men & women that you are helping would love to know that you think that they are SELL OUTS to our government.

deddlastt · #37 (**permalink**) 02-04-2011, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littlewolf

Thought the very same thing, deddlastt!! And while nightowlrn may be an attorney that supposedly helps the veterans, her own words in the past on here have been anything but helpful:

"I believe these issues occur prior to a person becoming a "veteran." Long deployements, substance abuse, etc occur long before they enter the VHA system. Additionally, many Veterans do not seek health care prior to dying by suicide. VHA cannot make a Veteran seek mental health services.

The issue is really a partnership and information sharing between DoD and VHA, which is just now starting to happen.

Additionally, the Veteran population is more likely to experience mental health crisis than the general population.

VHA has a full court blitz to address Veteran mental illness. Sadly, suicide is one of those horrible things that is difficult to prevent. We can't involuntarily hospitalize people who we fear are suicidal. Medications can only do so much. And, the military population is less likely to share their feelings and concerns due to the indoctrination of military life."

Health Care discussion.....cont'd. ...time warp back to 2010

Still shaking my head at all of the double talk & skating around what was said earlier in this thread. Plus, I am sure that the wonderful men & women that you are helping would love to know that you think that they are SELL OUTS to our government.

Generally speaking, I've wondered before about the actual state of affairs - whether military, nursing homes, education, healthcare - which I think without getting into specific points that we could all agree each needs great improvement.....

Just HOW do we have all these people supposedly being watchdogs and testifying and researching and recommending and "doing" the right thing (and getting paid) and yet we are in such a mess? Too much isn't right and yet we have so many scurrying around thinking and telling us how much they do and how hard they work in making things the best they can be. There is a certain disconnect going on.

dl

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode