Sheilbh's Scott Walker Lovefest and Union Bashing Megathread

[DGuller]

I'd think so, at least if we apply basic economic theory.

As teachers are seen to be better compensated, more and better quality applicants will be attracted to do the job. This will lead to an improvement in the quality of education.

Is there some reason to think that this dynamic is different when it comes to teachers rather than any other job?

I agree this will hold true if we offer new teachers a higher salary.  I just don't see the improvement that comes from offering a current teacher, one who is not looking to quit, more money.

Efficiency wages?

[The Minsky Moment]

Most people can't vote for their bosses. So there is that.

Or have their bosses voted on by everyone else.

Bingo.
The employees of IBM don't vote for management.  But management is going to make comp decisions based on company interest.  So if the company thinks that getting quality people or upping training and comp will improve revenue sufficiently, they will do it.

Now take the Department of Ed.  Now you've got 3 constituent groups.
1) the teachers - they want comp to go up regardless.
2) taxpayers with kids in the school - they will want comp to go up if there is a net public benefit in better education.
3) taxpayers without kids or with kids in private schools - they want comp to down no matter what.

Thing is group 3 is probably going to be a lot bigger than group 1, so there is a natural bias to drive down comp demands.  Collective bargaining can counteract that tendency

OTOH it is also true that to the extent the teachers are cohesive and can "bribe" officials, they may be able get around this bargaining problem and exploit their position.  But although unionization makes that easier to do, that is still a problem with or without unionization, and will be even more so given all massive loopholes that have been driven through the campaign finance rules.  I.e. you can have a "union" or equivalent that just exists to advocate, lobby and finance elections, even absent bargaining rights, and have much of the same problem.

I'll say it again: you can't fix the problem of institutionalized legalized bribery without doing something to address the bribery.  Trying to put a gag on group X and say well we've solved part of the problem because now its harder from them to say what they want for their bribe is a joke.

[Admiral Yi]

Even if some of those benefits exist, how are they NET benefits?
If you take a million dollars from the taxpayer and give it to companies that sell doodads, then sure enough you are likely to see more doodad production.  But you will be hard pressed to explain why that is a net economic benefit.
You have to prepared to defend the economic case for public subsidy.

The externalities argument made for depletion is oil independence.

To be clear, I'm not saying I personally support the various things you mentioned.  If you want an accounting, you've convinced me on carried interest, I'm OK with depletion allowances (maybe partially because Obama has been pretty dishonest in peddling a rollback), and I didn't like the Osprey.

[Ed Anger]

I'm not voting for Scotty.

[Admiral Yi]

OTOH it is also true that to the extent the teachers are cohesive and can "bribe" officials, they may be able get around this bargaining problem and exploit their position.  But although unionization makes that easier to do, that is still a problem with or without unionization, and will be even more so given all massive loopholes that have been driven through the campaign finance rules.  I.e. you can have a "union" or equivalent that just exists to advocate, lobby and finance elections, even absent bargaining rights, and have much of the same problem.

While it is metaphysically possible for nonunion teachers to collectively bribe state legislatures, the fact remains teachers in right to work states get paid substantially less than their union counterparts.

[derspiess]

But see, as everybody knows, teachers don't do it for the money, they do it for the love of teaching.  Therefore, they really don't need any money at all.  They should just be happy with teaching and all the happiness teaching provides.

No shit.  If they're gonna talk the talk and post all that self-indulgent shit on Facebook, then walk the walk.  IM A TEECHR I MAKE MOAR

[Jacob]

OTOH it is also true that to the extent the teachers are cohesive and can "bribe" officials, they may be able get around this bargaining problem and exploit their position.  But although unionization makes that easier to do, that is still a problem with or without unionization, and will be even more so given all massive loopholes that have been driven through the campaign finance rules.  I.e. you can have a "union" or equivalent that just exists to advocate, lobby and finance elections, even absent bargaining rights, and have much of the same problem.

While it is metaphysically possible for nonunion teachers to collectively bribe state legislatures, the fact remains teachers in right to work states get paid substantially less than their union counterparts.

So you think the problem is some teachers are getting paid too much?

[CountDeMoney]

But see, as everybody knows, teachers don't do it for the money, they do it for the love of teaching.  Therefore, they really don't need any money at all.  They should just be happy with teaching and all the happiness teaching provides.

No shit.  If they're gonna talk the talk and post all that self-indulgent shit on Facebook, then walk the walk.  IM A TEECHR I MAKE MOAR

Alrighty then.  You tell 'em, derfetus.

[Admiral Yi]

So you think the problem is some teachers are getting paid too much?

Absolutely.

[jimmy olsen]

All these in just the last few years. There's more but you get the general idea. And Mass probably isn't the most corrupt state compared to states like New York and Rhode Island, but that's probably a distinction without a difference.

Lies!

[jimmy olsen]

So you think the problem is some teachers are getting paid too much?

Absolutely.

And people wonder why American students don't score well compared to other nations.

[Jacob]

So you think the problem is some teachers are getting paid too much?

Absolutely.

What are the kind of teacher salaries you think are unreasonable?

[CountDeMoney]

So you think the problem is some teachers are getting paid too much?

Absolutely.

Who else gets paid too much, Yi? 
I mean, other than everybody--as we all know your preferred economic model is "slave wages = good for executives and shareholders"--but as far as actual professions go, who else gets paid "too much"?

[Admiral Yi]

What are the kind of teacher salaries you think are unreasonable?

I'll make you a deal.  I'll post my answer below, spoilered, and then after you tell me what *you* think would be a reasonable teacher salary, take a look.

[spoiler]Starting at maybe 30-35, averaging around 50, maxing around 70, administrators maybe get 90-100.[/spoiler]

[Admiral Yi]

Who else gets paid too much, Yi? 
I mean, other than everybody--as we all know your preferred economic model is "slave wages = good for executives and shareholders"--but as far as actual professions go, who else gets paid "too much"?

West Coast longshoremen.