Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Fox News is OUTRAGED that executives make ten times more than workers   (foxnews.com) divider line 238
    More: Ironic, Fox News, labourers, Randi Weingarten, Mackinac Center, Great Officer of State, National Education Association, stipends, Dennis Van Roekel  
•       •       •

5401 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Jul 2012 at 12:18 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



238 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-14 02:29:29 PM  

salvador.hardin: gimmegimme: salvador.hardin: randomjsa: And the fact that liberals are not having a fit about this tells me a lot about them.

The problem here is that these are public sector unions. Meaning tax payers support everything they do no matter what and while some people, particularly liberals, bemoan and complain that teachers don't get paid enough, or that schools don't get enough money... The teachers union bosses are making 500,000? If you are one of the people who thinks we need to 'spend more on education' then perhaps you should suggest cutting back on what the union boss gets.

Unless of course the only reason you want teachers to get paid more is so they can kick more towards Democrat candidates in elections.

Since taxpayers pay for teacher's salaries, we have a right to tell teachers how to spend that money. Dropping $500,000 in to the nation's schools is like a silver bullet for all that ailes us. There's two union bosses, so we can drop an entire $1,000,000 back into the system and divvy it up among the 8 or 9 schools that comprise the US education system.

Does Coca-Cola have the right to tell its employees how to spend their paychecks?

From your last reply to me I really thought you'd gotten on the trolley here.
Goddamn Poe and his goodfernutin law.


Isn't it sad that crazy stupid people and smart people deliberately saying stupid things can sound exactly the same?
 
2012-07-14 02:29:38 PM  

elchip: As much as I loathe to defend him, if I put $17000 into my 401(k) this year and it does really well, and at the end of the year there's $20,000 in my 401(k), I didn't evade taxes. My 401(k) just increased.

Granted, most people don't have access to a type of fund with that kind of growth rate.


a 15% growth rate is Mazzive.

Now, considering Romney's time at Bain ... (let's say 20 years, just to be fair)
and the maximum deposit size ($17,000 x 20 =340,000)

and let's even be more generous and calculate the interest as if he'd deposited it at the beginning of his tenure and place that at 1982, just to make the math easy and give him an even 30 years.

To get to an even ten million takes an interest rate of about 11.271318 %. That's continually compounded interest.

How has your 401k done? As I recall from my days of having one, it was pretty hit-or-miss, even in the go-go 90's. Even when It was doing well, it didn't get anything like 7 or 8 percent.
 
2012-07-14 02:30:00 PM  

Heraclitus: Yes Union leaders get 10 times more and corporate CEO's get 400 Times more. Your point is?


That Fox News is complaining about the lower number, while lauding the higher number?

I thought that was kind of obvious. I hope my clarification helps.
 
2012-07-14 02:31:16 PM  

KarmicDisaster: The Outrage! It should be a million times!


Commie. The outrage is that they're getting paid at all.
 
2012-07-14 02:31:33 PM  

Stile4aly: But I thought all the lazy teachers make six figure incomes while only working 7 months out of the year.


Pretty much...
i49.tinypic.com
 
2012-07-14 02:34:37 PM  

randomjsa: The problem here is that these are public sector unions. Meaning tax payers support everything they do no matter what and while some people, particularly liberals, bemoan and complain that teachers don't get paid enough, or that schools don't get enough money... The teachers union bosses are making 500,000? If you are one of the people who thinks we need to 'spend more on education' then perhaps you should suggest cutting back on what the union boss gets.


Wow.

See, this is what's wrong with the right :

If a man earns a million dollars, he's entitled to it - no matter where it came from (babies on spikes, Inc) or how he spends it (raping little boys in honduras)

But if a man makes 50,000 - after earning a Master's Degree - as a teacher - then if they spend 1% a year on a Union, then that's a horrible evil thing. That implies that the state should cut 1% of their pay and 'de-fund' the union.

[jackie chan confused.jpg]
 
2012-07-14 02:34:50 PM  

randomjsa: The problem here is that these are public sector unions.


No. The NEA and AFT are not public sector unions but unions which have membership consisting by a significant margin public employees. Further, the NEA and AFT, and as far as I know all state and local affiliates, have no compulsory membership. What you state is deceitful either by purpose or by misrepresentation of your knowledge on the subject, but what is worse is what follows is agonizingly stupid, even for your normal tortured logic postings.

I have always wondered whether or not you are a troll. This post, I simply do not care anymore as your post is identical to my expectations of trolling.
 
2012-07-14 02:34:53 PM  

salvador.hardin: gimmegimme: salvador.hardin: Fire the Union boss and credit every teacher their share of the salary. There's only what, 20 or so teachers in each union, so that means like a 50% increase in their salary (multiply by 10 for the boss then divide by 20 for the number of union members). The teachers might experience slashes in benefits or compensation without the union to bargain in their interest, but they will have that extra 50% salary to compensate for the loss. Really a huge win for the teachers if you do the math this way.

LOLWUT?

Lemme guess. You're not a job creator and you never will be.

Maybe there's more people in the union, who knows. That's paper pusher talk.

Teachers aren't historically pushovers who are so dedicated to the calling of their career path that they routinely put the needs of their students ahead of their own welfare. They don't need talented negotiators to look out for their interests, they are capable of bargaining for their own individual fair compensation.

The fact remains there'd have to be hundreds (if not thousands) of people in the union, all receiving some benefit from collective bargaining power (or maybe experiencing some kind of assault on the contractually guaranteed benefits they've already obtained), to justify paying competitive compensation to the talented people running the union.

The smart move is to dissolve the union, go at it on their own, and use those fat union dues they recoup to invest in numismatic gold coins.



I'm a teacher. While the Unions can be a problem, I must say that you do not speak for me. You do not speak for teachers. We aren't pushovers, no, but with a Union we have a mouthpiece and a venue to use it.

Unions do cause issues, but if you honestly think we are better without them because this farker makes 500k a year, I'm going to assume you probably wanted to end your last statement with "so vote republican".
 
2012-07-14 02:37:20 PM  
I noticed Fox nixed their comment boards.
 
2012-07-14 02:40:22 PM  

Contribution Corsair: This is insulting! Those execs work hard for that money, it isn't like execs and the like get free money or anything like that CEO who quit the second day and made millions!

Teachers leech off the system via unions while execs work themselves to death daily to ensure that every dollar they are given is just compensation for a hard day's work.


It's not like that CEO gets paid for doing nothing while he goes off to raise money for the winter olympics.
 
2012-07-14 02:41:37 PM  

Poison Appleseeds: I noticed Fox nixed their comment boards.


Probably tired of having to answer mail from the Secret Service.
 
2012-07-14 02:41:55 PM  

TimonC346: I'm a teacher.


Not to be insulting because I know how hard, especially on Fark, drawing sarcasm and parody from text can be in the age of hyper-hyperbolic rhetoric, but you may want to reread his comments. What is especially absurd is the "numismatic gold coins" line, basically the type of currency advertised all over Beck and similar which tries to pass over investments in gold currencies as investments in gold despite the value of the coins being an arbitrary amount based on how collectible the coin is.
 
2012-07-14 02:44:33 PM  

TsukasaK: The point I'm getting at here, is that it seems odd that everyone is hating on Romney for being rich. Not for lying on his disclosure documents, not for being an inconsistent waffler, not for running companies into the ground (ala Bain), not because he's completely unlikeable..

but rather just for having shiatloads of money.

Farkers be jelly.


It seems odd because you're pretending that you don't understand where the resentment is coming from. It's not just simply because he's rich. It's more about the fact that he's able to use loopholes to lessen his tax burden, and he's using his wealth to run for president in implement a plan to change the system even further in his favor. Warren Buffett is also rich, but he's advocating a change in the system that would actually increase the tax burden for people like him. So, the rich guy who says "I have a lot, but I want to change the game so I can keep more," will get treated differently from the rich guy who says, "I have a lot, but I want to change the game even if it means I end up with less."

Didn't we already go through this with Steve Forbes over a decade ago? He had this plan for a flat tax as one of the pillars of his presidential campaign, and when he was asked to show his tax returns (which would help clarify how much he would save if his plan was put in place), we heard a lot of crickets.
 
2012-07-14 02:45:57 PM  

doyner: Poison Appleseeds: I noticed Fox nixed their comment boards.

Probably tired of having to answer mail from the Secret Service.


I'm suprised they haven't pulled the Fox Nation yet for that same reason.

Although they never promote that website anymore.
 
2012-07-14 02:50:11 PM  

MyRandomName: It is just completely astounding how little fark liberals know about SEC filing rules and regulation. There are many examples of CEO in name only and a CEO can have zero managerial contributions to a company


Then they certainly don't deserve top-dollar salaries. I can find plenty of minimum wage workers capable of contributing zero to the company.
 
2012-07-14 02:51:15 PM  
randomjsa (favorite: "Holy fnck you're an idiot." - Nina_Hartley's_Ass): The problem here is that these are public sector unions.

Roight. Because you goose-steppers are so supportive of private sector unions.

Meaning tax payers support everything they do no matter what and while some people, particularly liberals, bemoan and complain that teachers don't get paid enough, or that schools don't get enough money... The teachers union bosses are making 500,000? If you are one of the people who thinks we need to 'spend more on education' then perhaps you should suggest cutting back on what the union boss gets.

Those two union bosses make about $950,000 between them, according to TFA. Sourcewatch has 1.4 million teachers in the AFT and 3.2 million in the NEA. That's 4.6 million between them. Take away that $950,000 and divide it among the 4.6 million, and each teacher gets...21 cents.

Yeah, that'll attract the best and brightest.

Unless of course the only reason you want teachers to get paid more is so they can kick more towards Democrat candidates

DRINK!

in elections.

Yeah, how uppity of them.
 
2012-07-14 02:54:25 PM  

TsukasaK: rubi_con_man: This seems to be tax evasion to me.

Not if it's all legal. The worst thing you can say about Rmoney is that he possibly lied on his disclosure forms (hopefully it'll disqualify the fark). It's not tax evasion if you're within the confines of the law.

Honestly? I can get on board with that. If I had that kind of cash, i'd be using every possible loophole and law to my advantage too. So would anyone else in that position.

/doesn't hate the rich
//hates douchebags
///unfortunately there's a lot of overlap


That pretty greedy and short sighted. If I had has kind of money I'd be living a very very comfortable life and happily pay my taxes knowing it's helping to keep the country going.
 
2012-07-14 02:54:57 PM  

whitman00: /if this is such an outrage, where are all the teacher groups protesting and lobbying the government to get out of paying their union dues?


They've been trying for years.
 
2012-07-14 02:58:31 PM  

TsukasaK: rewind2846: That is the problem. Too often the line between what is "legal" and what is "illegal" is not drawn by what an individual or a society believes is right and wrong, but by what those in power want. If I had enough money, power and influence (even to the point of becoming a dictator) I could make any act as legal or illegal as I wished. This is why corporate lobbyists exist.

What is good for society is second to what is good for them

So how was one man jumping through loopholes in the law to stack away lots of cash somehow wrong or bad for society? I'm honestly curious.


You . . . you seriously think it's just one man?

/It's the "Elect me, and I'll make it easier for lots of other rich guys to do the same!" platform he's campaigning for that many people dislike.
//I don't think you're honestly curious.
 
2012-07-14 02:58:55 PM  

Shrugging Atlas: I sometimes wonder what would happen if Fox News started subtely shifting to the left. Just an occasional screencrawl or comment at first, then a segment or two a day on already established shows with hosts the masses know and trust.

I know the workers at Fox wouldn't give a shiat, since they've already proven they'll say or do anything for money. But I wonder if the people that absorb the channel for hours a day would notice, of if they would just accept what they're told like they always do?


That would be an awesome experiment. I wish I had enough money to buy Fox and try it.

Here in Ohio I have several right-wing coworkers who were vociferously pro-SB5 (the bill that restricted collective bargain of public employees) however when the SB5 was overwhelmingly defeated in the last election, they changed their tune.

My hypothesis is that right-wingers are strongly influenced by what people around them think. When my co-workers realized that 2/3 of the voters opposed SB5, they suddenly abandoned opinions that they had aggressively defended a few days earlier.
 
2012-07-14 03:01:42 PM  

TsukasaK: The point I'm getting at here, is that it seems odd that everyone is hating on Romney for being rich. Not for lying on his disclosure documents, not for being an inconsistent waffler, not for running companies into the ground (ala Bain), not because he's completely unlikeable..

but rather just for having shiatloads of money.

Farkers be jelly.


OK. As a rule I put anyone on ignore who uses "jelly" as slang for jealous. There's just no excuse for that.
 
2012-07-14 03:07:28 PM  

MyRandomName: Just because the left is too farking retarded to understand this concept, and they chose to ignore all the independent fact checkers, doesn't mean Romney lied on his forms.


From the forms themselves:
"Mr. Romney has not had any active role with any Bain Capital entity and has not been involved in the operations of any Bain Capital entity in any way."

This is false. That said, I'll wait for any investigations if they happen - there's a reason I said "possibly".

Graffito: OK. As a rule I put anyone on ignore who uses "jelly" as slang for jealous. There's just no excuse for that.


www.nationofblue.com
 
2012-07-14 03:08:33 PM  
Here's the funny thing about this: the union works for the teachers. Not the other way around.

That is a fact that is often lost on folks. Those "union bosses" aren't the teachers' employers. They are an organization that the teachers belong to. In the same way that the RIAA work for recording artists and their production houses, or the MPAA work for the film industry. In the same way that SAG works for actors.

Union bosses don't employ teachers, any more than SAG employs actors. They are a labor organization, and their members employ the services of the union, not the other way around. So, really when you talk about unions and teachers, when you come down on teachers, why are folks down on job creators like that?
 
2012-07-14 03:09:03 PM  
The big salaries drew jeers from many educators and their advocates in the U.S., where the average nationwide salary for teachers is a scant $44,000 a year.

This is the first sentence of the third paragraph in the article. It is unsupported by any example or fact. This is rhetoric and spin without substance. This is Fox.

The author is fabricating outraged "educators and their advocates", hoping to align the reader with these fictitious characters so he will share their outrage. The author is attempting to create a controversy where none exists and to demonize the teacher's union bosses. This is an attack on teachers unions, plain and simple.
 
2012-07-14 03:12:32 PM  

Weaver95: Mantour: The article is about Union Bosses making a lot of money, not Wall Street executive.

true, however - its a valid comparison. Fox news is making the argument about 'compensation being out of control'. ok, well - if that's the crux of their article then is ALL compensation out of control, or merely UNION compensation out of control? when you put CEO/executive compensation next to union compensation, a different picture emerges.

perspective is a good thing.


People who support Wall Street thugs while deriding union thugs can't be said to have any perspective.
 
2012-07-14 03:12:37 PM  
I'm not trying to be coy or troll here. I'm trying to point out, through painfully obvious parody (with a dead giveaway mis-estimation of numbers), the glaring bit of missing information in this "article". How many teachers the union serves is a critical and important piece of information in any discussion of the salaries they receive, and its not even mentioned here.

The NEA has a membership of 3 million. The AFT has a membership of 1.5 million.

Its also critical to at least mention what responsibilities those executives have and what the Unions do for their members. This isn't about balance or fairness, its basic information that is required to be covered in some nominal fashion in this story.

I know that Poe's Law applies to the internet in general, and on fark in particular. I don't have alts, when I write a parody response I write it under the same name as my regular responses. When I write parody I try really hard to go so far over the line that no one on any side of the issue can possibly mistake my parody for being genuine. I do this so that if someone recognizes my handle for some reason, they don't question whether my genuine statements are parody. I guess when Randomjsa and Tenaltsofcheese come in and make my positions seem tame, its just impossible to find a line that is too far.
 
2012-07-14 03:12:39 PM  

red5ish: The big salaries drew jeers from many educators and their advocates in the U.S., where the average nationwide salary for teachers is a scant $44,000 a year.

This is the first sentence of the third paragraph in the article. It is unsupported by any example or fact. This is rhetoric and spin without substance. This is Fox.

The author is fabricating outraged "educators and their advocates", hoping to align the reader with these fictitious characters so he will share their outrage. The author is attempting to create a controversy where none exists and to demonize the teacher's union bosses. This is an attack on teachers unions, plain and simple.


I love their use of the word "scant" when describing teachers' salaries, as if we don't remember them constantly crying about how teachers are overpaid and get summers off.
 
2012-07-14 03:14:09 PM  

TsukasaK: MyRandomName: Just because the left is too farking retarded to understand this concept, and they chose to ignore all the independent fact checkers, doesn't mean Romney lied on his forms.

From the forms themselves:
"Mr. Romney has not had any active role with any Bain Capital entity and has not been involved in the operations of any Bain Capital entity in any way."


In other words, "After 1999, I did not have fiduciary relations with that company."
 
2012-07-14 03:14:13 PM  

salvador.hardin: I'm not trying to be coy or troll here. I'm trying to point out, through painfully obvious parody (with a dead giveaway mis-estimation of numbers), the glaring bit of missing information in this "article". How many teachers the union serves is a critical and important piece of information in any discussion of the salaries they receive, and its not even mentioned here.

The NEA has a membership of 3 million. The AFT has a membership of 1.5 million.

Its also critical to at least mention what responsibilities those executives have and what the Unions do for their members. This isn't about balance or fairness, its basic information that is required to be covered in some nominal fashion in this story.

I know that Poe's Law applies to the internet in general, and on fark in particular. I don't have alts, when I write a parody response I write it under the same name as my regular responses. When I write parody I try really hard to go so far over the line that no one on any side of the issue can possibly mistake my parody for being genuine. I do this so that if someone recognizes my handle for some reason, they don't question whether my genuine statements are parody. I guess when Randomjsa and Tenaltsofcheese come in and make my positions seem tame, its just impossible to find a line that is too far.


2/10
/ ;-)
 
2012-07-14 03:15:47 PM  

salvador.hardin: I'm not trying to be coy or troll here. I'm trying to point out, through painfully obvious parody (with a dead giveaway mis-estimation of numbers), the glaring bit of missing information in this "article". How many teachers the union serves is a critical and important piece of information in any discussion of the salaries they receive, and its not even mentioned here.

The NEA has a membership of 3 million. The AFT has a membership of 1.5 million.

Its also critical to at least mention what responsibilities those executives have and what the Unions do for their members. This isn't about balance or fairness, its basic information that is required to be covered in some nominal fashion in this story.

I know that Poe's Law applies to the internet in general, and on fark in particular. I don't have alts, when I write a parody response I write it under the same name as my regular responses. When I write parody I try really hard to go so far over the line that no one on any side of the issue can possibly mistake my parody for being genuine. I do this so that if someone recognizes my handle for some reason, they don't question whether my genuine statements are parody. I guess when Randomjsa and Tenaltsofcheese come in and make my positions seem tame, its just impossible to find a line that is too far.


This is why we should just nationalize teachers and chain them to their desks, only feeding them and giving them water. It's the only way to get a genuine education for our children.

Except in private school teachers. Those people should be given the world on a string, and sit on a rainbow.
 
2012-07-14 03:19:06 PM  

St_Francis_P: Wait; isn't complaining about executive compensation...socialism?


Boy that article IS a switch. Did they forget about the job creators?
 
2012-07-14 03:20:14 PM  

AkaDad: In other words, "After 1999, I did not have fiduciary relations with that company."


Except that's not what the paper says:

"Mr. Romney has not had any active role with any Bain Capital entity and has not been involved in the operations of any Bain Capital entity in any way."

Except this is completely farking false.

Official documents and other sources contradict Romney and Bain's account.

Among them:

* Six SEC filings announcing Bain's acquisition of other companies that are signed by Mitt Romney. Those SEC filings list Romney's "principal occupation" as "managing director of Bain, Inc," as well as "chairman" and "chief executive officer."

* A press release issued on Bain's behalf in 1999 describes Romney as the CEO of Bain and says he's on a "a part-time leave of absence to head the Salt Lake City Olympic Committee."

* Sworn testimony in which Romney states that "[T]here were a number of social trips and business trips that brought me back to Massachusetts, board meetings, Thanksgiving and so forth," after 1999 and before 2003. During this time, Romney continued to sit on the boards of Staples and LifeLike, firms that Bain had invested in.

* Romney's lawyer said in 2002 that Romney's "private and public ties to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts" continued "unabated" during his time running the Olympics.

* Romney told the Globe in 1999 that he would "stay on as a part-timer with Bain, providing input on investment and key personnel decisions." As Slate's Dave Weigel points out, this article was cited in an email the Romney campaign sent out to rebut claims that Romney remained involved with Bain after 1999.

* News reports from during Romney's 2002 run for governor refer to his affiliation with Bain during the 1999-2002 period as a "leave of absence," not a full departure. As Politicker reported Friday, Romney retained a "very active role" with Bain during a previous leave of absence, when he ran for Senate in 1994.
 
2012-07-14 03:21:01 PM  

HighOnCraic: red5ish: The big salaries drew jeers from many educators and their advocates in the U.S., where the average nationwide salary for teachers is a scant $44,000 a year.

This is the first sentence of the third paragraph in the article. It is unsupported by any example or fact. This is rhetoric and spin without substance. This is Fox.

The author is fabricating outraged "educators and their advocates", hoping to align the reader with these fictitious characters so he will share their outrage. The author is attempting to create a controversy where none exists and to demonize the teacher's union bosses. This is an attack on teachers unions, plain and simple.

I love their use of the word "scant" when describing teachers' salaries, as if we don't remember them constantly crying about how teachers are overpaid and get summers off.


On even days, $45K is way too much to pay a teacher who gets all that free time and only has to work 7 hours a day. On odd days, $45K is such de minimis pay that it's surprising teachers haven't risen up against their union overlords.
 
2012-07-14 03:21:56 PM  
If teachers really cared about children, like they claim, then they should teach for free.

Then, when they collect welfare and food stamps, we can call them moochers and parasites.
 
2012-07-14 03:22:19 PM  

edmo: St_Francis_P: Wait; isn't complaining about executive compensation...socialism?

Boy that article IS a switch. Did they forget about the job creators?


In the case of unions, the teachers are job creators. They employ unions, and fund them.

You'll note that the usual suspects seem mum on the topic of the RIAA and MPAA when it comes to this sort of thing too. Unions bad, but apparently industry organizations good. THOSE guys earn their pay apparently, but writers unions and other just sponge off the talent and hard work of their members...
 
2012-07-14 03:22:22 PM  

Gyrfalcon: HighOnCraic: red5ish: The big salaries drew jeers from many educators and their advocates in the U.S., where the average nationwide salary for teachers is a scant $44,000 a year.

This is the first sentence of the third paragraph in the article. It is unsupported by any example or fact. This is rhetoric and spin without substance. This is Fox.

The author is fabricating outraged "educators and their advocates", hoping to align the reader with these fictitious characters so he will share their outrage. The author is attempting to create a controversy where none exists and to demonize the teacher's union bosses. This is an attack on teachers unions, plain and simple.

I love their use of the word "scant" when describing teachers' salaries, as if we don't remember them constantly crying about how teachers are overpaid and get summers off.

On even days, $45K is way too much to pay a teacher who gets all that free time and only has to work 7 hours a day. On odd days, $45K is such de minimis pay that it's surprising teachers haven't risen up against their union overlords.


Wouldn't it be cool if teachers only had to work seven hours a day?
 
2012-07-14 03:24:05 PM  

TsukasaK: The point I'm getting at here, is that it seems odd that everyone is hating on Romney for being rich. Not for lying on his disclosure documents, not for being an inconsistent waffler, not for running companies into the ground (ala Bain), not because he's completely unlikeable..

but rather just for having shiatloads of money.

Farkers be jelly.


Bible says don't steal. I'm assuming that means with legalese, too, since there was that whole covenant with Hebes thing.

God's an attorney and he's gonna be pissed.
 
2012-07-14 03:28:08 PM  

BravadoGT: Right...because working for a business where an executive happens to be is highly paid and FORCING teachers to join a union and pay the salary of its highly paid execs out of their own checks--that's the same thing.


Considering that that high executive pay comes from the sweat of the workers, I don't really see the difference.
 
2012-07-14 03:30:36 PM  

TsukasaK: AkaDad: In other words, "After 1999, I did not have fiduciary relations with that company."

Except that's not what the paper says:

"Mr. Romney has not had any active role with any Bain Capital entity and has not been involved in the operations of any Bain Capital entity in any way."

Except this is completely farking false.


Thatsthejoke.jpg
 
2012-07-14 03:31:21 PM  
salvador.hardin: Fire the Union boss and credit every teacher their share of the salary. There's only what, 20 or so teachers in each union, so that means like a 50% increase in their salary (multiply by 10 for the boss then divide by 20 for the number of union members). The teachers might experience slashes in benefits or compensation without the union to bargain in their interest, but they will have that extra 50% salary to compensate for the loss. Really a huge win for the teachers if you do the math this way.

I think/hope most of us saw what you were doing here
 
2012-07-14 03:32:09 PM  

Graffito: OK. As a rule I put anyone on ignore who uses "jelly" as slang for jealous. There's just no excuse for that.


You sound totes jelly.
 
2012-07-14 03:36:45 PM  
I know it's probably horribly socialist of me, but I think I could support legislation that limited total executive pay (including bonuses, stocks, etc) to 100x the lowest hourly pay rate (treated as full time for a year) at the company. Want to make more than $1000 per hour? Pay your employees more than $10.
 
2012-07-14 03:50:09 PM  

TimonC346: salvador.hardin:
The smart move is to dissolve the union, go at it on their own, and use those fat union dues they recoup to invest in numismatic gold coins.



I'm a teacher. While the Unions can be a problem, I must say that you do not speak for me. You do not speak for teachers. We aren't pushovers, no, but with a Union we have a mouthpiece and a venue to use it.

Unions do cause issues, but if you honestly think we are better without them because this farker makes 500k a year, I'm going to assume you probably wanted to end your last statement with "so vote republican".



I hope that "Recognizing Sarcasm 101" is not one of your subjects.
 
2012-07-14 03:53:18 PM  

Exception Collection: I know it's probably horribly socialist of me, but I think I could support legislation that limited total executive pay (including bonuses, stocks, etc) to 100x the lowest hourly pay rate (treated as full time for a year) at the company. Want to make more than $1000 per hour? Pay your employees more than $10.


Personally I would like to see the corporate tax rates tied to the median income of the companies workers. The further apart the upper management salaries are to the average worker in the company the higher the tax bill. This will encourage companies to not only invest in their workers but chill the outrageous compensation of upper management.
 
2012-07-14 03:55:35 PM  

gimmegimme: Wouldn't it be cool if teachers only had to work seven hours a day?


During the school year, my mom only works seven hours a day. Seven days a week.
 
2012-07-14 03:56:05 PM  

hubiestubert: edmo: St_Francis_P: Wait; isn't complaining about executive compensation...socialism?

Boy that article IS a switch. Did they forget about the job creators?

In the case of unions, the teachers are job creators. They employ unions, and fund them.

You'll note that the usual suspects seem mum on the topic of the RIAA and MPAA when it comes to this sort of thing too. Unions bad, but apparently industry organizations good. THOSE guys earn their pay apparently, but writers unions and other just sponge off the talent and hard work of their members...


I don't believe the GOP actually thinks that far ahead.
 
2012-07-14 03:56:58 PM  
And if schools where able to be "free market" teachers would make 20% less and executives would make 50% more.
 
2012-07-14 03:58:09 PM  

elchip: rubi_con_man: Speaking of Dodging taxes: did you hear about Mill Romney's 401k ?

As CEO he made contributions to his 401k, which were managed by ... Bain. This allowed him to buy a special class of stock from ... Bain. This stock had the very special property that it paid huge dividends regularly and almost immediately based on the profits of ... Bain ...

So now his 401k has over 10 million in it. Wow. That's big.

It's especially big considering that the maximum allowed contribution into your 401k is $17,000 in 2011, meaning that it would take over 580 years for anyone else to get that balance in just contributions. This seems to be tax evasion to me.

As much as I loathe to defend him, if I put $17000 into my 401(k) this year and it does really well, and at the end of the year there's $20,000 in my 401(k), I didn't evade taxes. My 401(k) just increased.

Granted, most people don't have access to a type of fund with that kind of growth rate.



Actually, an investment vehicle created by an entity controlled by you for the specific purpose of avoiding taxation is normally considered a form of tax evasion.

You are permitted to avail yourself of every legal means to reduce your tax liability, but as soon as you undertake actions (creating a special class of low cost shares available only to you, with a dividend triggering at your choice, and only after investment in a tax-sheltered investment, for example) specifically to avoid taxation, you have done something wrong.

Though perhaps not in the States...who knows.
 
2012-07-14 04:01:00 PM  
Let's all hold our breath waiting for our government to limit executive pay.
 
2012-07-14 04:09:49 PM  

BravadoGT: because working for a business where an executive happens to be is highly paid and FORCING teachers to join a union and pay the salary


The employee could choose not to be an employee.
The teacher could choose not be a teacher.

Why do you hate the free market?
 
Displayed 50 of 238 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report