Skip to main content

View Diary: Starving America's Public Schools - financially - an important new report (77 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Re (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    soros
    Increases in public wages and benefits will naturally force up private compensation as well.

    No, it won't. Compensation is always driven by the market. As another poster noted, high paying government jobs will simply become patronage or 'lottery ticket' jobs. Additionally, paying workers more when you could get them for less essentially is a fraud upon the taxpayer, who expects his/her tax money to be spent efficiently, not wasted.

    (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
    Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

    by Sparhawk on Sun Oct 16, 2011 at 10:16:19 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Paying people fairly (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jeff bryant

      is not inefficient. Paying people well reduces turnover and increases morale. Paying people poorly is only good at extracting wealth - it accomplishes nothing more. And a strong middle class creates a strong and stable economy. Taxpayers derive obvious benefits from that.

      Please explain how private employers competing for workers with public employers would not, as a result of market mechanisms, have to pay more. Either markets drive employment or they don't. You can't deploy the idea of a market to make one point and ignore the consequences elsewhere.  

      Logic doesn't dictate your call for paying teachers and fireman and other public employees poorly.  Defend that if you like. Me, I support good jobs for public and private workers.  

      Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

      by David Kaib on Sun Oct 16, 2011 at 10:56:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What's 'fair' (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        soros

        To me, 'fair' is whatever they could get in the private sector. If you think private sector compensation is too low, the proper thing to do is increase private sector compensation (somehow).

        And I don't want to pay them poorly, I want to pay them what they are worth, which is whatever they would earn in the private sector.

        The government is not capable of driving private pay rates because private rates are driven by what companies can afford to pay. Government pay rates are merely limited by the government's ability to tax.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Sun Oct 16, 2011 at 01:25:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Most people understand what fair is (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jeff bryant

          and they don't think it means 'as low as an employer is able to push it.'  That you think otherwise is fine but that 1) isn't an argument and 2) is not what most people think.  

          You really think that minimum wage laws, living wage laws, labor laws, whether we have a single payer / non-profit / for profit health care system, macroeconomic policy, trade policy, tax policy, monetary policy, etc. have no impact on wages?  Seriously? The number of government policies that affect wages is vast.

          Given that the amount of profits that companies make is variable, and not approaching zero, this statement:

          private rates are driven by what companies can afford to pay
           

          is simply false.

          Of course, I do think private sector compensation is too low and I support various policies that address that.  But there is no difficulty in doing that while simultaneously opposing austerity via public sector wage cuts, in no small part because such wage cuts will reduce demand and lead to more unemployment and lower wages in the private sector.

          I also support a strong public school system, and as Jeff points out, that requires paying people well.  That is true no matter what else is true.  

          Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

          by David Kaib on Sun Oct 16, 2011 at 01:44:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Wages should be in balance but not driven down (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      David Kaib, fhcec

      by artificial market forces.   The private market is what is out of balance, wages are being determined by wages overseas in developing countries, which is an unfair comparison.  Our wages need to be determined by a standard of living that we as a developed country should have in place.  If we move below that then the government needs to step in and either force private wages up or step in and make it impossible for private business to profit by their ability to manipulate the wage market by their overseas enterprises(raise corporate taxes or impose tariff's on their products).

      •  Lol (0+ / 0-)

        So, it should be impossible under your theory for the US's net standard of living ever to fall. Good work if you can get it.

        In reality, our standard of living can only be maintained by how competitive we can be. If we are competitive, we'll be rich. If we fail to compete, we will be poor. No one else cares at all.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Sun Oct 16, 2011 at 01:30:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Been brainwashed much....compete with what, (0+ / 0-)

          we are one of the large consumer engines in the world, other people's standard's depend on us.  The thing that makes us unable to maintain a decent standard of living for our population is our absolute obsession with empire building and building an oligarchy where the top 1% gets a disproportional amount of wealth(which is a complete waste of our resources).  How many times does that need to be proven, we did this before the Great Depression and we have done it again.  Too much loose money in the hands of a few morons is a recipe for economic and social disaster.

          •  No one cares (0+ / 0-)

            "Grow food? No I don't grow food, I contribute by eating food, that's how I contribute!" It's laughable, other countries are increasingly realizing how little they need our consumer 'economy'. What you produce is all that matters, production is what enables you to consume.

            (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
            Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

            by Sparhawk on Sun Oct 16, 2011 at 04:20:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Of course they care, where would they sell the (0+ / 0-)

              cheap shit they produce and the multinational corporations wouldn't be able to make trillions of dollars that never trickle down into wages or jobs.

              •  Dollars... (0+ / 0-)

                ...are only valuable to the extent that they can be translated into useful goods and services. It is almost meaningless to 'sell' a good to a country that produces nothing of value in return (or produces it at unaffordably high prices). That's the whole point of trade.

                (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                by Sparhawk on Mon Oct 17, 2011 at 03:21:06 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site