This is why they kneel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joeyc77

I do understand. I also understand the difference between fighting for wages/safety/etc against a corporation whose sole purpose is to earn profits and the government, whose sole purpose is to serve the people. It’s not just that they donate politically. That’s only part of the issue. It’s that in their effort to keep members “safe” they protect members who are poor at their jobs.

How can a cop in a high crime area feel “safe”? My guess is by not questioning whether or not to shoot a potential suspect. You want public sector unions to act different from their purpose, yet you don’t want to abolish them for political purposes. That’s tribalism.

---

The difference for the employees is simply it's public or private. Are you saying government has no financial restrictions placed? It can give unlimited funds for salary? They simply do whatever any employee wants because they can? There is a difference but it isn't that only one might try and screw over employees to cut costs as either may. The union is there for the employees either way even if who they negotiate with public or private is different.

I agree, protecting bad employees can be troublesome. This alone is not reason all unions need to go, it is an aspect that potentially could be addressed though I agree.

No, I want public union sectors to protect majority of employees and have standards around who gets said protections. Very poor individuals like the many cop examples mentioned are a sign of issues with those unions when it is bad individuals. If every union has standards that say protect murderers then that's an issue but I asked for specifics/data on this plenty with no response.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flips333

I want to poke people's eyes out (including my wife's) when they suggest that teachers don't work in the summer. I know practically no professors, and very few high school or middle school teachers (I don't know many grade school teachers) who are just kicking it all summer. My high school teaching friends are working 55-60 hrs/week during the school year and 20-25 hrs/week in the summer. Do the math. Perhaps I have a skewed population (I tend to know very good teachers)

---

Professors have always been different....and maybe all teachers are different from what I knew growing up. What I remember then....and thru my 20s and 30s when I knew a lot of teachers....the norm was they would have lawn mowing services and painted houses, went on lengthy camping trips, and rarely talked about spending much of their summers preparing for the coming year (which is why I agreed on working 10 months, not 9 months of the year).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

Unions are good for helping employees collectively bargain against corporate leaders who are focusing on the bottom line and lining their own pockets. This is good.

But the government is the people and there is not profit motivation. I don't think there should be unions for government employees.

I also don't think unions should be using dues for political contributions. I have no issue with them SUGGESTING contributions to their members.

---

The $ still matters to government too though. It's not like all of a sudden that aspect changes, people will try and save where possible still or cut costs etc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiteWolf

Professors have always been different....and maybe all teachers are different from what I knew growing up. What I remember then....and thru my 20s and 30s when I knew a lot of teachers....the norm was they would have lawn mowing services and painted houses, went on lengthy camping trips, and rarely talked about spending much of their summers preparing for the coming year (which is why I agreed on working 10 months, not 9 months of the year).

---

I get a sense that you are a little older... (than me anyway) 50s?, anyway, what teachers have to teach and what they have to do has changed dramatically. by the 90s what kids were learning in high school was stuff taught in college 20 years prior. I remember my pharmacist dad being shocked at the chemistry we learned as sophomores in highschool. The amount of work has gone up, the amount of knowledge that we have to impart is increasing exponentially... etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flips333

That's not because we are spending money on teachers. Just look at the amount we spend on High School Athletics. We hire football coaches to teach history for ****s sake! I went to a school where they spent less per student in highschool in the chicago-land area and they had top 10 test scores... why? Well they spent their money on teachers. Now that school system has OK test scores, but they have a big pool, and a bunch of high school championships in a bunch of sports. AND they are spending more than most schools per student in the chicago land area.

---

Yeah, I never really got the whole thing with the money spent on high school and college sports.

I read an article once where it stated that in 40 of the 50 states (or 57 if you were BO) the highest paid public employee was a coach. A few high schools in Texas have spent millions on sports facilities.

Never got the focus on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngopher35

The $ still matters to government too though. It's not like all of a sudden that aspect changes, people will try and save where possible still or cut costs etc

---

But the government is supposed to be the supporters not the exploiters of the people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flips333

The evidence is that this will be bad for their learning in the future not good. Picking up technology is not the same as learning critical thinking or writing. The ipad just isn't going to do that.

Not to mention I can show you links between screen time and substance use, suicide, mental illness.

The things are tools. They can be useful as tools in the classroom, but too much of it will not help your kid. It will stunt them. Kids can't read a map or figure out plan a route to get from one place to another anymore... why? Well they know how to use the app. Well does that mean they know more than someone who doesn't know the app?

---

Yes. Long ago, people used sun dials to tell time. Then clocks were developed and everyone learned how to tell time on a clock. Were the people who knew how to use sun dials more intelligent?

At some point, Morse code was a way to communicate. Now people text. Technology changes. The fear of this is that one day, technology will cease to exist forcing us back to the sun dial days. Well I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

Also, how are standardized tests critical thinking? A,B or C is not a lot of critical thought. Furthermore once you understand statistics you can pretty much guess an answer without even looking at the current question. Kids are not taught critical thinking in school. They are taught to sit criss cross applesauce and listen to some hack drone on about how they did it when they were a kid. They are taught to listen to and respect authority which they should get at home. Parents have also become lazy in their child’s development and education. Relying of schools to teach kids everything they need to know. But unfortunately, that’s not reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joeyc77

Kids can get human interaction through social activities like clubs and sports. They don’t need to sit in a classroom and follow “rules” all day. Our current system is designed to produce rule followers who sit at a desk all day in an office. Our system is not designed to breed creative, open minded individuals who work through issues on their own. It’s a flawed system that way.

Furthermore, what world do you think kids will grow up in? A world without technology at our fingertips where literally any questions can be answered or the world we grew up in with encyclopedias? People should be pushing their kids towards more screen time, more technology, not less. Just because “we didn’t grow up that way” is not an excuse. It’s the modern day version of walking to school, both ways, uphill.

---

My daughters are definitely suffering for not getting time away from their parents and with their friends. It's my job to make them think for themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ewing

School administrators are rewarded for not spending the same way management is rewarded for maximizing profit. The idea that corporate America would take advantage of someone that was dependent on them but not the government is laughable

I also dont like the fact they make political donations but that arena is a total **** show

---

The government are supposed to represent and support the people not exploit them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joeyc77

Yes. Long ago, people used sun dials to tell time. Then clocks were developed and everyone learned how to tell time on a clock. Were the people who knew how to use sun dials more intelligent?

At some point, Morse code was a way to communicate. Now people text. Technology changes. The fear of this is that one day, technology will cease to exist forcing us back to the sun dial days. Well I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

Also, how are standardized tests critical thinking? A,B or C is not a lot of critical thought. Furthermore once you understand statistics you can pretty much guess an answer without even looking at the current question. Kids are not taught critical thinking in school. They are taught to sit criss cross applesauce and listen to some hack drone on about how they did it when they were a kid. They are taught to listen to and respect authority which they should get at home. Parents have also become lazy in their child’s development and education. Relying of schools to teach kids everything they need to know. But unfortunately, that’s not reality.

---

It's not about going to some pre-technology state... it's about adaptability. The data is in on how screen time effects students it's not good. IT's a tool. That if overused damages our ability to function. They did a study where they took kids cell phones away for 2 weeks in a camp situation and the group that had the phones taken way had increases in theory of mind (that's being able to think how someone else is thinking).

There are probably things we probably agree on.

Standardized tests can go **** themselves. We need to stop asking kids standardized multiple choice tests and start making them write out answers. Parents need to support teachers... not fight with them. I am a firm believer that what makes a school system good is less about the school system and more about if the parents have an active roll in supporting it.

All this let technology do it and this idea that we don't teach critical thinking and your courter weight is they are taught to sit criss-cross applesauce is giving me the sense that you don't understand natural childhood development and probably don't have a kid? Am I off base? Cause little kids are not doing critical thinking... Hell most of those systems are not really coming online till about puberty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sluggo1

Yeah, I never really got the whole thing with the money spent on high school and college sports.

I read an article once where it stated that in 40 of the 50 states (or 57 if you were BO) the highest paid public employee was a coach. A few high schools in Texas have spent millions on sports facilities.

Never got the focus on this.

---

Yeah I say stop the tom foolery and spend the money on the important stuff. This isn't to say don't have sports... but if you are spending more on your football coach than your teachers you have dumb priorities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngopher35

The difference for the employees is simply it's public or private. Are you saying government has no financial restrictions placed? It can give unlimited funds for salary? They simply do whatever any employee wants because they can? There is a difference but it isn't that only one might try and screw over employees to cut costs as either may. The union is there for the employees either way even if who they negotiate with public or private is different.

I agree, protecting bad employees can be troublesome. This alone is not reason all unions need to go, it is an aspect that potentially could be addressed though I agree.

No, I want public union sectors to protect majority of employees and have standards around who gets said protections. Very poor individuals like the many cop examples mentioned are a sign of issues with those unions when it is bad individuals. If every union has standards that say protect murderers then that's an issue but I asked for specifics/data on this plenty with no response.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Last part first, the data is in the article you posted regarding safety. Furthermore, it’s common knowledge among unions to practice safety. How many cops would say they wouldn’t have most likely done the same thing in the Jacob Blake case? Do believe cops risked their careers and perhaps their freedom to kill someone because he was black? That in this current environment they didn’t understand the potential downside of shooting an unarmed black man? Or is it more likely, whether justified or not, they were reacting in order to protect themselves and others? Unions will make sure cops are acting in a way that protects them first and foremost. In the unions eyes, police lives are more valuable than a suspects.

Obviously, a government has it limits on how much it can spend, unlike corporations. This does not stop public sector unions from demanding more. There’s no CEO in the government earning 100x more than the average employee. People in public sector unions choose to be civil servants. Yet, they act like they have no purpose other than their own unions during negotiations.

How do you address unions protecting bad employees when that is one of its designed purposes- one for all?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flips333

It's not about going to some pre-technology state... it's about adaptability. The data is in on how screen time effects students it's not good. IT's a tool. That if overused damages our ability to function. They did a study where they took kids cell phones away for 2 weeks in a camp situation and the group that had the phones taken way had increases in theory of mind (that's being able to think how someone else is thinking).

There are probably things we probably agree on.

Standardized tests can go **** themselves. We need to stop asking kids standardized multiple choice tests and start making them write out answers. Parents need to support teachers... not fight with them. I am a firm believer that what makes a school system good is less about the school system and more about if the parents have an active roll in supporting it.

All this let technology do it and this idea that we don't teach critical thinking and your courter weight is they are taught to sit criss-cross applesauce is giving me the sense that you don't understand natural childhood development and probably don't have a kid? Am I off base? Cause little kids are not doing critical thinking... Hell most of those systems are not really coming online till about puberty.

---

You’re way off base. My daughter is 13 years old. Unlike most parents, I’ve taken a direct interest in my daughters education. She learns just at much at home as she does in school. I currently live 2000 miles away from my daughter. For the last year anyway. But she still texts me almost daily with questions about subjects she’s learning in school. I showed her at an early age how to look up questions via the internet but she still humors me by asking.

I also took early education in college. I was on target to be an elementary school teacher but took a different path instead. It’s helped some with my child tbh. But it’s also helped me see the flaws with early education. Our current education system is not designed to breed CEOs or job creators or even creative minds. It’s designed to breed office drones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flips333

Yeah I say stop the tom foolery and spend the money on the important stuff. This isn't to say don't have sports... but if you are spending more on your football coach than your teachers you have dumb priorities.

---

I Wonder how many people realize this.

I could kind of live with football and basketball scholarships since those sports on the high levels can pay for themselves and generate revenue.

But a track scholarship, golf, lacrosse etc.…I don't get those. Do you give a scholarship to a so-so golfer but bypass a "B" student??? I dunno.

And why not make football and basketball scholarships read where if you get drafted by the NFL or NBA you pay back the value of the scholarship. The NFL & NBA would pay it. As it is no, they are the major sports without minor league expenses. Baseball and Hockey pay for their minor leagues, why not the NBA and NFL???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joeyc77

You’re way off base. My daughter is 13 years old. Unlike most parents, I’ve taken a direct interest in my daughters education. She learns just at much at home as she does in school. I currently live 2000 miles away from my daughter. For the last year anyway. But she still texts me almost daily with questions about subjects she’s learning in school. I showed her at an early age how to look up questions via the internet but she still humors me by asking.

I also took early education in college. I was on target to be an elementary school teacher but took a different path instead. It’s helped some with my child tbh. But it’s also helped me see the flaws with early education. Our current education system is not designed to breed CEOs or job creators or even creative minds. It’s designed to breed office drones.

---

Great.. happy to be so wrong.