Pay to Play sports

Moderator: The Merrimack Volunteer Moderators

Postby James Austin » Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:42 am

RBarnes wrote:I would agree teachers are under valued in this country. They should make much more then say a computer programmer because after all without teachers teaching first we'd have no computer programmers.


By that logic, shouldn't teachers be the highest paid profession in America?
Just because you don't take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you.
James Austin
 
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 6:56 am
Location: Merrimack, NH

Postby RBarnes » Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:57 am

James Austin wrote:
RBarnes wrote:I would agree teachers are under valued in this country. They should make much more then say a computer programmer because after all without teachers teaching first we'd have no computer programmers.


By that logic, shouldn't teachers be the highest paid profession in America?


I'd argue that Doctors should hold that honor.

But being paid what your worth and what the market bares are two different things as I pointed out.
$DO || ! $DO ; try
try: command not found
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Jeannine Stergios » Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:28 pm

RD

Jeannine, do you think that any teacher with half a brain would take a job that offered a Pinto salary without a Cadillac health plan? Furthermore, would you want a teacher with less than half a brain teaching Merrimack's kids?


A Pinto salary? Give me a break! Sounds like they are holding us hostage. They can do the same as everyone else - take what the employer is willing to pay for benefits.

To hear you go on we have teachers making minimum wage. No offense - but a Bachelor of Arts degree in Education isn't as hard to obtain as an Engineering Degree. That's why engineers have higher starting salaries.
REPUBLICAN - BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE CAN BE ON WELFARE
Jeannine Stergios
 
Posts: 9306
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 6:36 pm
Location: Jessica Drive Merrimack

Postby Michael Pelletier » Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:44 pm

RBarnes wrote:But being paid what your worth and what the market bares are two different things as I pointed out.

And part of the problem is that there is no real "market" in employment of teaching professionals, only the nationwide government-run education monopsony (an oligopsony limited to one buyer).

And monopsony in the labor market tends to depress wages, as found by Richard Stratton, in his article, Monopoly, Monopsony, and Union Strength and Local Market Wage Differentials. Some Empirical Evidence on Their Impacts, American Journal of Economics and Sociology 44 (3), 305–318.

It's entirely possible that in a free market for educational services, the overall compensation of teaching professionals would rise, perhaps significantly.
User avatar
Michael Pelletier
 
Posts: 4219
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:43 pm
Location: 3 Woodbine Lane

Postby Wayne » Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:29 pm

RBarnes wrote:Unfortunately because of teacher unions which allow bad teachers to keep high paying jobs this isn't always the case. If you want proof of this look no further then the hundreds of thousands of dollars Nashua had to fork over to the super they fired and yet still had to pay for nearly a year after firing and give tons more to.

Bad example. Dr. Earl's situation has nothing to do with any teacher's unions. She simply signed a contract that the city administrators apparently didn't look over very carefully.
Wayne
 
Posts: 2866
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 8:47 am
Location: Merrimack

Postby Mike Ruggiero » Fri Mar 02, 2007 10:17 pm

I'm on my third in the system. For those of you that don't realize it, student/athletes in Merrimack DO pay to play. Do you have any idea what it cost the parents of a athlete on one of the school teams? Some sports cost FOUR FIGURES! Do you have any idea what the booster clubs raise to subsidize the athletes?

This could have a negative affect. Why donate to a fiftyt-fifty if you have to write a check? Why buy a bunch of candles or calendars that you don't need or want if you have to pay to participate?

20k in a 57 million dollar budget!
Mike Ruggiero
 
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 7:29 am

Postby Michael Pelletier » Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:03 pm

Mike Ruggiero wrote:I'm on my third in the system. For those of you that don't realize it, student/athletes in Merrimack DO pay to play. Do you have any idea what it cost the parents of a athlete on one of the school teams? Some sports cost FOUR FIGURES! Do you have any idea what the booster clubs raise to subsidize the athletes?

So how does it follow that everyone in town should be forced to subsidize your children's athletic endeavors whether they want to or not?

Ask your friends and neighbors if they are willing to split the bill for your child's taekwondo class. Not through some sort of fund-raising activity, but a simple splitting of the bill; fifty-fifty. Go ahead. Most of us would be too proud to even consider asking that question; we wouldn't want to be seen as begging for money. Yet in a collective sense, we accept the same means through the ballot box.

Those who push for additional taxes to benefit high school sports are not the champions of a greater good. No, they are simply bandits using more accepted means to force their neighbors to split the bill. Asking is seen as inappropriate; coercing is celebrated.
User avatar
Michael Pelletier
 
Posts: 4219
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:43 pm
Location: 3 Woodbine Lane

Postby Mike Ruggiero » Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:43 am

So how does it follow that everyone in town should be forced to subsidize your children's athletic endeavors whether they want to or not?


That's easy Michael. Because we will gladly subsidize yours!

That's how it works. Do you pay for the fire trucks and the street sweepers? Did you ask for them? Have you used them?

How about that fire hydrant in your front yard? Did you ask for it? I'm paying for it.

Where do you draw the line? Do you believe the individual tax payer should stop paying tax on their property once their kids are out of school? Should you be paying social security now? You are forty years from collecting.

Less govenrment, fine I'm all for trimming the fat. Eliminate all broad based taxes and fees? Won't work.

Should we lay off 50% of the police? Cut the teaching staff in half? Let's not pave the roads any longer. That way, your tax bill will go down.

To make it clear, I hate the high tax bill as much as you do. Where does New Hampshire rate nationally in low taxes? #2 in the nation? What do you want? #1? #1 by a higher percentage? What?

Let me repeat this again so I don't get attacked as a screaming heart tax and spend liberal. I LOVED the 1.5M cuts last year. I LOVED the fact that the schools created a budget that was thin. I LOVED that they have pledged to get the health care contracts more in line with industry. I LOVED that we are looking at this very closely. My caution is that at some point in time we will go too far and that could lead to the downfall of our Town.

Trying to make a point by cutting kids out of athletics is for schools in desperate trouble, financially, academically, and socially. It could be one of the reasons Merrimack turns into a Lawrence. High crime, bad schools, poor living conditions.

But hey, ITS CHEAP! What is the value of quality of life?
Mike Ruggiero
 
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 7:29 am

Postby ragin cajun » Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:29 am

There's some interesting data and insight from those in and outside of Merrimack school district below:

Pay-to-play in the cards?

By Mark Ouellette

Published: Friday, Jan. 26, 2007

The School Board is considering a “pay for playâ€
ragin cajun
 
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:33 pm

Previous

Return to School Topics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron