Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LLCF who wrote (26412)	5/24/2012 10:29:16 PM
From: one_less	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

I told you I didn't get the joke, I was trying to guess at what you found to laugh at. Now I get it but the humor still escapes me. historical cost of living compared to that salary that was noted in comparison to a California salary The argument falls flat here. If you are simply declaring that the cost of living should drive salaries for everyone, then the same cost of living case can be made for cannery workers who are employed 4 month out of the year in California, teachers who are off at least 190 days a year, dishwashers with no vacation time, lawyers, corporate executives, gardeners, doctors etc. I would have no argument if you are simply saying you think pay and benefits should be dependant on need and employment based on ability. I might argue for a different system but not that the pay and benefits for employees shouldn't be equal under socialism. I thought you were arguing that Corporate Executives are not justified in receiving high salaries any more than teachers are, so you want to justify huge teacher salaries , like in california where 59k is the average and the top end salary of teachers surpasses many corporate manager salaries. In typical cases, teachers are in a working couple relationship and considering the top end salary for one teacher is easily more than many corporate managers make, the whole issue gets to crazy when you are talking about people with 190 days off each year. I know teachers who accomplish unbelievable amounts of work and teachers who, like I said, have been reduced to book shelving tasks. The central issue for me when I am thinking of teachers is their contribution to the achievement of students. The central issue for me when I am thinking of corporate managers is whether or not they are contributing to the bottom line of a weatlh producing industry. I don't see any reason to equate the salaries of the two on any basis (unless it is based on need, socialism). I have lived in California and seen that teacher salaries afford them a very comfortable life style. I have relatives in the system, a teacher married to a principal. They have had full careers and close to retirement with very cush salaries currently with nice retirement benefits around the corner. They plan to move to a state where their retirement pay will provide very well for them. They've paid off nice homes and have plenty stashed away. Good for them but I am not thinking at all of their evolution as teachers as I say that.