Those would be the ones with strong unions.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4matic
<shocker>
Printable View
Those would be the ones with strong unions.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4matic
<shocker>
I am absolutely POSITIVE this is public information and all you have to do is go look for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by MontuckyFried
Assuming it's CalPERS. My sister-in-law was a member for about a decade. Once vested, it's a pretty good retirement package.
Another Montana-native friend of mine has been teaching in CA for 30 years. Makes 100 grand in the south SF bay area but still lives month to month and rents a place. He never got married and having only one income these days makes it tough to afford a house. Fortunately for him his dad left him and his sister 40 acres in the Missoula valley which is where he plans to retire. Although he loves California and says he will miss it a lot.
In the last 30 years there’s been opportunities to buy on a single income. Especially with a tenured job and income certainty.Quote:
Originally Posted by yeahman
I said I couldn't handle it and they deserve every penny, but that people need to be honest about how many hours they actually work. I also said most teachers couldn't hack a 12 hour shift nursing, which is equally important to society IMO, so this argument goes both ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by funkendrenchman
Very few teachers are making 43k. That is entry level in some of the crappiest school districts in the country. Teachers here in NH are averaging double that in my district. Even in craptastic Idaho where I lived previously, teachers made more than that after 2 years, and that was only if they had just a bachelors and were brand new. Oh and they only have to teach 4 days a week now in my former Idaho district. Quit sensationalizing the argument.
You fucking tool, you started this whole argument. You’re just a clown talking shit you know nothing of.Quote:
Originally Posted by AdironRider
I'm not defending the delta between median salary vs exec comp at large companies. It is out of control.Quote:
Originally Posted by MontuckyFried
But your reasoning is flawed on the topic at hand. Peter Zaffino makes $75m at a company (AIG) that makes $10b in net income. AIG does more than insure residential homes. A good leader of a for-profit company probably looks at sectors of the company that are losing the company money and says we should do less of that unless it's something that is a short term blip. The long term outlook for insurance in the private homeowner space is quite bleak. The leader is protecting his company from bleeding money. That is why he makes $75m. PS-AIG's stock is up 30% YOY so he's probably doing something right for the shareholders and I doubt they mind his pay.
You do realize almost every public school teachers pay, hour requirements, and entire compensation package including benefits is public record right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzworthy
PS I literally quoted the person who started the argument.
Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by funkendrenchman
Talking about how many hours teachers work after they leave the building. With a family of teachers, you are talking out your ass. Maybe shut up and learn something from others instead of just talking to hear yourself talk.Quote:
Originally Posted by AdironRider
Whatever man, I hope you find peace someday but if you want to continue taking your misery out on me thats fine.
You arent the only one with teachers as family, or with close friends as teachers. And AD is correct that the salary schedules for public school teachers is easily available online, and it does vary considerably depending on geographic location. Some teachers make good money when you look at their hourly equivalent, while others make dirt... and it would be very much the exception for a public school teacher to work as many or more hours as a teacher during a full year than your average 40-45hr/week w/ 2weeks vacation worker.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzworthy
Maybe, depending on where you live of course. A bigger problem for him is that he's moved at least a dozen times all around the state. He's got a masters in library science so has been the victim of budget cuts multiple times. And sometimes it's his fault for not playing nice with the administration. But regardless, he knows he missed the opportunity he had to build that equity over the years. Lesson being in the long term it is always better to buy, even if it's a stretch financially.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4matic
I have family like that, zero sence of urgency about financial security, serial renters for decades which was great until there was nothing to rent and if they could find it they could not afford it and there are lots of people like that out thereQuote:
Originally Posted by yeahman
then they whine/ get angry how can you justify the rental prices ?! dude i don't have to the market justifys it
i bought and paid off a house on the single income thanx to 20 yrs of basement tennants but people don't want to be inconvienienced by someone knocking on the door to give them rent $
but I couldn't even do that now ...snooze you lose
Big Picture View
In a society, the most important task overall is educating the youth and growing them into responsible and productive adults. As such, teachers should be the highest paid people in the society. We have our priorities all wrong. Teachers should be paid minimum of $1 million per year. Expensive as hell, well yeah. Tax the fuck out of the rich to pay for it.
Dramatic improvement in society IMHO.
Big picture view FIFY
Compensation is too low for teachers, absolutely. But rewarding those that excel as educators with modern currency just begets more of the same shit we endure from the elites now. We gotta find a better way.
Bitcoin ?Quote:
Originally Posted by BCMtnHound
Heh. Bitcoin is just another example of once we combined fiat currency with fractional reserve banking that ‘currency’ just became a plaything of the elite. Having an ever decreasing level of usefulness and ultimately damaging society. The pyramid scheme just keeps getting larger. Basing a human’s value on such nonsense compensation is a fool’s errand. Sort of like playing the lottery - fine for entertainment but as a serious plan for advancing our future? 99% of us are falling ever further behind, being bought off with shiny trinkets and false promises. Got to be a better way to recognize and reward excellence and contribution to society.
Pretty sure if teacher's salaries were doubled and they put up with less admin/parent bullshit due to societal expectations things would be much better in the US. Same with encouraging more men to become school teachers at all age ranges. Montucky, you should check # of admin in yr district and their associated salaries.
My ignorant, transplant understanding of the schools in Beverly Hills adjacent is that a decent elementary education costs about ~3M for a house in a good public district or starting ~30k per year per kid at the right private. We will be pulling our hair out over the next few years making the decision about which direction is best for our family.
While $1M sounds nice, I am certain every teacher would for go that comp for 15-20 kids in a class with a teachers assistant to help with the slower learners or to help break out into groups. No more bitchy parents and admin that actually supported their efforts. Problem students would be ban from public education and the parents would get a voucher to help send their shit head to a military academy or whatever tougher than shit private school would have them.
Yeah, I've always thought there was a market failure here.Quote:
Originally Posted by ghosthop
One of the big reasons that teacher salaries are low in a lot of places is that, frankly, you don't have to pay that much to staff your classrooms. Lots of people are capable of becoming a teacher and it is a pretty cushy job (especially if you are a bad teacher who is mostly coasting and phoning it in): Summers off, nice benefits, good job security, reliable schedule. Hard workers know they could give up some of those benefits and make double the money outside of teaching easy...
So if your goal is just to have bodies in classrooms, you can lowball it and still get plenty of applicants. To be clear, I'm not saying they are all bad--lots of great teachers still pursue the career in low pay areas because they love it, they feel a duty to the children, etc.--but low pay means your pool of applicants is going to be worse on average because many of the top performers will go elsewhere.
That's the wrong goal. We want skilled and caring teachers in classrooms. For that you need to A) improve the pay to be on par with what the GOOD teachers could make elsewhere and B) tweak the interview and review/evaluation process so that you hire and retain more of those good teachers and aren't just giving a big raise to a bunch of coasters.
I know B is hard but I think doing A might make it happen naturally--the more you bring in excellent teachers and have strong candidates fighting for the jobs, the less you will end up hiring the low performers (and the more they will stick out like a sore thumb). Just look at some of the high pay industries like ibanking or management consulting where there's an AGGRESSIVE interview process that people prepare for extensively, including paying for interview prep resources, spending months doing mock case interviews, etc. all to score an entry level job where the only real skill is being an excel monkey who is comfortable getting yelled at. The middling candidates never even make it to the interview stage.
Teachers need to earn higher pay on merit and not years of service. They can’t be fired. They can refuse a new assignment. Etc etc. job security should have an opportunity cost.
I don't know what school district you are talking about, but where my wife and I have taught in Montana and Washington teachers cannot refuse a new assignment, unless they quit. Also the job security does not exist for new teachers. If enrollment is declining they will pink slip you in a heartbeat.
My youngest is going the teacher route.
His goal is to become a college professor.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
They make good money now but colleges are shrinking. I expect a lot of small college closures over the next decade. Good buddy was a Community College teacher. He basically made $150 an hour working 15-20 hours a week plus pension.Quote:
Originally Posted by skiballs
The community college professor gig takes forever to land a regular job. Part time, bouncing between multiple colleges seems to be the MO for years where we live. Honestly, for a kid smart enough who can deal with 7+ years of university, be a P.A. My buddies daughter recently graduated and landed a job with a cosmetic surgeon doing Botox fills for $150k to start.
So in other words this is the prefect time to regulate it out of existence. Before it becomes entrenched in the system.
exactly. I like the way you thinkQuote:
Originally Posted by yeahman
I don’t really oppose that, but I see people all the time blaming institution investors for housing problems and that just ain’t it.Quote:
Originally Posted by yeahman
like everything else it's a combination of factors and a contributing factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong
I think the more important tidbit is not existing stock owned by investors, rather buyers having to compete with these investors to buy a house. I mean what percentage of houses hit the market in a given year?
"In the first quarter of 2024, the share of homes purchased by investors was 19%, according to Redfin."
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/04/investor-home-purchases-jump-for-the-first-time-in-two-years.html
I think the problem has generally been supply, and when investors are buying a quarter of available homes to flip into SFR it indeed fucks up the market and creates a weird mania.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong
This is not a problem in some areas, and has been a huge problem in other areas. Speaking first hand, it sucks to compete against investors who can simply move way faster with cash offers and pocket listings. I lost out on a couple homes for that reason.
Sure. Share of -institutional investors- is still small:Quote:
Originally Posted by NBABUCKS1
Attachment 503021
https://www.freddiemac.com/research/...ePrices-12.pdf
Its neither nor. It is all of it. As to focus on one factor just creates a smoke screen. If sure everyone could list 10 bullet points contributing to housing inaffordability and 9 of them would be correct.
Yeah, it’s mostly a supply issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mustonen
And in areas where maybe institutional investors are buying up a large share of SFH offered for sale, allowing for increased supply solves that.
There’s a reason institutional investors back NIMBY policy.
Yeah, but even that is limiting. "Supply issues" in any market only exist when there is demand for said product. So yeah, where I live supply isn't keeping up with demand but their is all lot of fucking new supply. But not enough to keep up with all the people that want to own property here.
It is even worse than that--I believe that Redfin statistic is purely based on looking for home buyers who use a company name.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong
So that includes institutional investors and large/medium scale landlords.
But it also includes smalltime landlords who usually buy homes to rent under an LLC (not a great idea to buy it in your own name). And it includes individuals buying for themselves via an LLC or trust...which is pretty common for people seeking privacy or with various accounting issues...
That being said, the flip side is that real estate is a local issue. Doesn't really matter what the institutional share is nationally because homes in Cleveland don't really compete much with homes in Phoenix. A corporate landlord who owned 10% of the housing stock in a metro area within a certain price point would have a lot of power even if nationally the only own 0.001%.
Agree, the national stats don't reflect impact on individual cities or within particular price points. Google says there's only about 2 million airbnbs in the US, which is only about three or four x the number of homes owned by institutions (A little hand wavy because I don't know how airbnbs break down across apartments, condos, and single family). There's not much doubt that ABB is impacting housing prices, easy for me to imagine. Institutional ownership is at least contributing to the issue.
https://vancouversun.com/business/re...n-rents-report
apparently STR's affect rents, who knew ?