So whats up with our great country ... the USA

[JS80]

Originally posted by: montanafan

Originally posted by: JS80

A scientist doesn't do jack shvt. A proprietor who takes risks to pay a group of scientists under an entity called a "corporation" creates the tecnologies. If it weren't for entrepreneurs, we wouldn't have our pharmaceutical, aerospace computer...etc etc industries that make our country the strongest economically in the world. :roll:

wtf is this "deserve" shvt. you "deserve" what the market says you "deserve" and in turn accept.

Originally posted by: JS80

Studies have shown "if teachers were paid far more" it would just attract even MORE unqualified idiots. Go to college first, then debate on sociological and economic issues.

I find something illogical about these two posts coming one after the other.

I agree that entrepreneurs are responsible for the creation of new technologies, great strides in medicine, etc., and the strength of our economy. I also agree that they "deserve" what they get in return because of the risks they take; and the qualifications, ambition, innovation, and drive that it takes to get the results they and their shareholders want to make their products and businesses successful.

But what about, why they do it? Are most of them driven by a desire to benefit society? No. Most do it for the money. Personal wealth, an affluent lifestyle, to have the best for their families, a secure retirement, an inheritance for their children, etc. And I agree that they get what they do because it's what the "market" says they "deserve" and will bear. Does the promise of all that attract a lot of unqualified idiots? Of course it does, just look at all the businesses that are started and soon fail. Those unqualified idiots don't last very long because they don't get the required results. And part of the reason they don't get the results is because they don't have the best equipment, the best ideas, the best innovations, the best managers and workers, etc.

So how can you say that the same thing wouldn't work in the education market? Studies have also shown that schools in high tax-bracket districts (markets) with parents (shareholders) who are willing and able to invest in the best facilities, equipment, and salaries to attract the best teachers are much more successful in getting the results they want for success. They want their kids to get into the best colleges and they want them to be prepared for success in those colleges and therefore the workplace.

Can anyone with a college degree get a job as a teacher? The answer would be yes for most districts, but not for these. Why? Because these shareholders don't want babysitters teaching a cookie-cutter curriculum to their students. They may attract a lot of unqualified idiots in their marketplace just as the business world does, but just like the in the business world, those people either don't make the cut or are soon out when they don't get the required results (the only difference being that when they are let go they don't get the $100 million severance package that a lot of corporate CEO's get when they're forced out.).

Offering high salaries for teachers would attract the best and the brightest, the most qualified, innovative, ambitious, and driven. And you would get the results you want from them, but only if the current system is overhauled. The current tenure system would have to be thrown out and replaced with an on-going results based one. Just like the one for entrepreneurs. The teacher unions would have to be dissolved. Political corruption in the bureaucracy would have to be eliminated. And the services and products produced would have to be highly valued in the marketplace.

Relatively small wealthy ones are willing to bear the cost of the investment for what they view as a large return on it. The larger national one is not.

I never said raising salaries for teachers would not attract people who would be better teachers. I said that it would attract more unqualified people. Sorry I should have said raising teacher salaries would attract more unqualified people along with some more qualified people (high ratio favoring the idiots).

I know what I said before sounds like a paradox, but it isn't:
The difference between private industry and public service is that private industry will not hire unqualified people as the salaries increase -- thus a disincentive for unqualified people to apply. However, in public service, the system is set up to hire as many people as the budget will allow, i.e. spend all the money, so that in the NEXT budget you yell and scream there is not enough money. And then when they get that money they'll find ways to spend it -- if they can't they'll just hire more administrative people. This is why government is bloated with bullshvt pencil pusher jobs that do nothing.

I agree with your second to last paragraph. However, this is a highly unlikely scenario. In fact I'll go as far to say it'll never happen; hence we need, as taxpaying citizens, to work hard to keep teacher salaries as low as possible (along with all government jobs) and freeze education budget increases (along with all government budgets ex-defense).

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: JSFLY

In addition Scientists can be teachers and share their knowledge with others.

Scientists DESERVE to be paid more based on their value to society.

What's Katie's value to society?

Learn about a free market economy first, then post.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: JSFLY

Think of some of the biggest American corporations.... Intel, Boeing, Microsoft, Phizer...... These companies would not EXIST without the scientific innovations as the driving force behind their products. Therefore, scientists create the products which create shareholder value. The leading scientists of these respective companies create Billions in value for their company.

You're too young and idealistic. You're thinking of it backwards. The correct way to look at this situation is:

Without the incentive of making a profit, none of these companies would exist, and they'd have no money to invest in R&D. The desire to make money comes first and foremost, the method they devise to make that money comes distant second.

Trust me, if Intel, Boeing, Microsoft or Phizer were offered the opportunity to turn a greater profit selling plastic dog sh!t made in Hong Kong, they'd be doing that. But as it stands, they make more what they're doing now.

 

[vulcanman]

I used Katie Couric merely as an example .. could have been any other TV newscaster. The fact is we are losing our position in the global economy but most seem oblivious to the problems ahead.

Most of our kids would'nt be able to locate South Korea on a map ... let alone be aware that it is the most wired country in the world. Whereas a South Korean kid could not only tell you everything about the US ... but clean our clock when it comes to academics. A recent study had those kids from the far-east take our SAT test ... they ridiculed it. We cannot afford to be complacent.

The recent news flurry in the media about Katie Couric on CBS ... is indeed driven by audience hunger for celebrity gossip ... and therein lies the problem. Our thirst for information ... and the kind of information we seek ... is a reflection of our education. I remember the days (several years ago) when 60-minutes (and Ted Koppell) used to draw significant viewership. Now we have shows like Wife Swap and Desperate Housewives competing for top honors.

I am lucky to have a kid (9yr old) who enjoys National Geographic, Discovery, History channel etc. .... but most of his buddies from the neighborhood have no clue beyond the basic. And we live in a fairly yuppie kinda place with top-rated schools.

We recently bought him a gamecube and insisted on E-rated games only. Sadly, his buddies have already graduated to T and a few M-rated games ... thanks to very willing (or resigned) parents. Pretty traumatic for him .. fortunately, he does not hate us ... yet

How many are aware that the rate of top foreign students entering our Universities is steadily declining .... Do you know the long-term impact to the US economy ? To make matters worse ... the number of naturalized Asians moving back to their native country is also increasing. Some are probably thinking ... about time ! But the smart ones can probably figure out why thats a very bad sign for this country's future.

 

[vulcanman]

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Originally posted by: vulcanman
- We have the cops on COPS chastising us about violence and crime yet we have the same Fox channel, during the commercial breaks, showing very graphic ads for SAINTS ROW on XBox ... enticing viewers to purchase this violent game. Hypocrisy?

I can say with certainty that violent video games don't make people who would otherwise be completely passive - into murderous criminals.

Following through with that logic ... cereal commercials on TV would not make kids demand the same ... teenage shows on TV would not make teenage girls act like bimbos in real-life ... and MTV would not make suburban white teenage kids dress up as hoodlums ... Neither would passive chatting with an underage girl online make a grown man to get on his truck and drive 2 hours to have sex with her.

Try watching one of those CatchAPredator shows on MSNBC ... the sickos come from all walks of life ... and "completely passive" professions ... but yet are driven to commit a crime !

One of those two school kids that got caught before they were to mow their fellow students ... enjoyed violent video games.

BTW .. here an introduction to the new Xbox game "SAINTS ROW" ...
"Welcome to the dirty world of Saints Row, where shotguns, rival gangs, and liquor bottles are commonplace. Whether you've just begun your hoodlum career or need help rising the upper ranks of gang life, our guide's got you covered."

 

[jadinolf]

Originally posted by: Zolty
so you want us to invade vietnam and install our system then?

No, teach them to solder for free.

 

[mrrman]

thats just how society is and will always be...the richer countries have everything and just assume its their for the taking while the poorer countries struggle every day just to make ends meet or make it through the day.

 

[UncleWai]

Your premises do not support your claim. Your Katie Couric examples have nothing to do with US moving at the wrong direction. Ever heard of the diamond vs water paradox? You are just rephrasing that with Katie Couric and NASA scientists.

Also, your elitist ideology is very anti-democratic. What makes you think you can impose what you think it's the correct direction to the majority? The TV shows what the viewers want to watch, it's a free market system. If you think reality shows are crap, good for you, go watch your discovery channel. However, please don't complain just because you think it's the only "correct" tv channel.
Unless you are proclaiming a democratic system does not work, in that case, good for you again because you are slowly reaching the Chinese state of mind.

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: JohnCU
what about sports stars making millions and millions while teachers get paid sh!t and even the EEs who keep the electricity flowing are not rolling in money.

the world wouldn't stop without football, but it would without teachers and engineers and doctors (although they make a lot)

Please don't include teachers in that group. Doctors and Engineers maybe. Most K-12 teachers are complete sh!t. They deserve what they make, 30k a year. Nothing more, cause they don't do crap. University teachers aren't often a whole lot better. There are some good ones, but some REALLY bad ones too. Just depends.

A professional athlete should without a doubt make more than a K-12 teacher, as its a MUCH MUCH more difficult career.

Did you ever stop to think that the brilliant individuals and those with real talent don't go into teaching precisely because of the low pay? Think. HMMMM, make $50,000-70,000 doing white collar job or make 25,000 teaching. HMMMM

Edit: Of course raising salaries will pull more "qualified" teachers into the system. You will always have unqualified teachers as you do in every profession but what then is the answer to our current education system that doesn't appear to be working?

Teachers don't do crap? :roll: My God ...

 

[Genx87]

15 million for reading off a teleprompter.

And the people who defend her will tell us the CEO's who lead companies that employ millions of people and create trillions in wealth making a few million is criminal.

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: vulcanman
Where are we headed folks ??

- Highest paid (level 15) scientist doing cutting edge research and earn 158K per year ... yet we have Katie Couric who hosts a 30-min newcast and earns 15 million a year!

- We have the cops on COPS chastising us about violence and crime yet we have the same Fox channel, during the commercial breaks, showing very graphic ads for SAINTS ROW on XBox ... enticing viewers to purchase this violent game. Hypocrisy?

- There are families in Vietnam taking loans to send their kids to learn soldering ... yet there are families in the US buying $150 sneakers for their kids ... and maxing their credit cards ... @ 15.5% APR no less ! Brain In the Drain ?

- There are kids in India who walk miles to get to a school that has no air-conditioning and yet make it to medicine and engineering ... yet we have kids in the US that view school as a social playground for dates ... and the occasional shootouts !

Are we doomed !!! ???

This sounds like something a senior citizen writes into the editorial section of a news paper.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: vulcanman
Where are we headed folks ??

- Highest paid (level 15) scientist doing cutting edge research and earn 158K per year ... yet we have Katie Couric who hosts a 30-min newcast and earns 15 million a year!

Are we doomed !!! ???

These are poor examples IMHO.

Lets take the first one above: You compare the top paid journalist with a government employed scientist. Why not compare with a top scientist like Any Grove of Intel? He makes far more than the top paid journalist.

Also, the simple fact is that the government is never a "top payer". I don't think Senators (or even the President) makes much more than them. There are plenty of scientists making big bucks in the business world.

Fern

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: JohnCU

Originally posted by: ElFenix
katie couric directly enters the lives of far more people than teachers or doctors or engineers. that is why she gets paid more.


although, if i were CBS, i would have hired that french chick.

no, its just that people don't appreciate how doctors and teachers and engineers directly affect their life. katie couric isn't going to perform heart surgery on you or keep your lights on or design your car.

and a doctor can only perform on one person at a time. for that one time a doctor gets paid way more. a skilled surgeon can probably make $10,000 per person. katie couric is probably making closer to a dollar a person.