The biggest problem with unions is the last-in, first-out rule. Most union contracts are structured so that when the municipality has shortfalls and has to let teachers go (i.e. most municipalities in America over the last few years), the most recently hired teachers are the first ones to be let go, regardless of competence. This is doubly damaging to the municipality in question, because those are the cheapest teachers, so more need to be let go in order to balance the budget.
But, as I said in the other thread, as long as the teachers' unions are the only ones sticking up for teachers while the taxpayers want to drop their kids off at school, drive to work on clean, safe streets, and then bitch and moan about the nerve of municipal workers actually expecting a paycheck, well.. I'm sympathetic to the workers, and if the union's the only one standing up for them, then they're doing more good than harm.
If you download the actual research linked from the article then one of the findings was that higher years of experience in the teacher predicted better outcomes in the pupils. So in this case the data supports the union. (Though, if you don't give the new teachers any work then how are they going to get the years of experience?)
...as long as Dick Cheney is the only one sticking up for military contractors while the taxpayers want to protect their oil supply and rebuild Iraq, and then bitch and moan about the nerve of Halliburton to get a no-bid contract at above market rates, well... I'm sympathetic to the contractors, and if Dick Cheney is the only one standing up for them, then he is doing more good than harm.
[edit: not actually defending Cheney, just pointing out flawed logic.]
A friend of mine worked for Raytheon right out of school. Really good paycheck.
At the end of his first couple months, his boss was flabbergasted because he insisted on actually getting something done every week. He was on the fast track immediately.
And, by all accounts, Raytheon is significantly less crooked than Halliburton.
I take it you don't favor giving no-bid military contracts to politically favored service providers at above-market rates? In that case, why do you favor doing so in education?
If you'd like to rephrase your question, I'll respond.
EDIT: Ok, I'll respond. For both you and me, a position as a math teacher would involve taking less money, working harder, and contributing more to society than we do now. I don't feel the need to kick public servants in the teeth that you apparently do. If you're outraged by government spending, go after the big dollars that don't accomplish anything first. Then you can worry about small dollars for people who do accomplish things.
b) Teacher and other govt employee pay is hardly a small portion of state and municipal budgets, and the upcoming pension crisis is going to be a huge problem for the entire country. This is not a small problem.
c) I have criticized other big spending as well (e.g., assorted bailouts).
Also, you seem to have no compunctions against "kicking public servants in the teeth": http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1557874 You only seem to object when the "public servants" in question are your political allies.
I object to the blanket characterization of defense contractors as public servants.
I mean, you wanna complain about crooked unions -- let's take the dollar figures, multiply by about a million (literally), and there you are with the defense contractors. And most of them never even deliver a product, or deliver a crappy unwanted product years late and billions over budget. If teachers operated like defense contractors, we'd have spent a trillion dollars over the last 10 years on a system to blast knowledge into kids brains using lasers and have nothing to show for it.
It's not about political allies. Eisenhower told us the same thing, there's a republican-approved stance for you.
I mean, geez, I'm all about more efficiency in government spending. I'll go for the higher dollar figures for things that don't provide anything for the country first, and get to small dollar figures in the education system about 10th.
Also. I think, not to put too fine a point on it, but you're likely either ignorant or lying when you claim that you work harder than teachers. You're on hacker news right now. Teachers have 6 hours of teaching with 3 minute breaks, followed by curriculum development and grading. I don't care what the study says, that's more work than the overwhelming majority of office jobs.
But I guess the department of education is lying just like the BLS?
I'll go for the higher dollar figures for things that don't provide anything for the country first, and get to small dollar figures in the education system about 10th.
Really? It looks to me as if you are defending wasteful spending on education rather than simply criticizing it less than other wasteful spending: "...as long as the teachers' unions are the only ones sticking up for teachers...they're doing more good than harm."
500 is the new 700? We definitely spend over 500 billion on the military.
For the last 8 years or so, national education spending has been pretty much flatlined, or even declining in real dollars. Military spending has been skyrocketing.
And yes. I don't believe kicking teachers in the teeth is a good idea. If you have a math degree, you can get paid twice as much to work on some non-functional crap for a defense contractor as you can as a teacher. That's not the same thing. Defense is far more bloated. Meanwhile, we're sliding on every international metric of education. I'd suggest reading Kristof today if you want some neat statistics.
The data I found was from 2004-2005. For 2008 (the last year for which full data is available), the relevant numbers are $730B defence, $860B education. You could have discovered this yourself if you spent even a minute or two googling.
It would appear that education is even more bloated than the military. As you say, "we're sliding on every international metric of education," but the military is still #1 (by a wide margin). Abiding by your philosophy of targeting the big ticket items for criticism and leaving the smaller ticket items alone, will you now focus your critiques on education and disregard the military?
But, as I said in the other thread, as long as the teachers' unions are the only ones sticking up for teachers while the taxpayers want to drop their kids off at school, drive to work on clean, safe streets, and then bitch and moan about the nerve of municipal workers actually expecting a paycheck, well.. I'm sympathetic to the workers, and if the union's the only one standing up for them, then they're doing more good than harm.