Capitalism is better than socialism

[Catta]

So... pretty much exactly what I said I was familiar with and exactly what gets taught in American schools.

You said western Europe. Ural mountains is the "border" between Europe and Asia.

[Masark]

It's probably too early to say who a lot of people are going to vote for but please do vote against that MP. We don't have a lot of that Canada so snip it in the bud while you can.

The bud? He's been in Parliament for 8 years. And his predecessor (Larry Spencer) was even worse. He was sufficiently nutty to get kicked out of the Conservative caucus.

I've been voting against him since I could vote, but the bible college set outnumbers me around here.

[Wells]

Yes. That's one of the major things that needs to change. Teachers need to be far more qualified before they deserve the salaries some of them get. Why the hell isn't a master's degree in X required to teach X in high school?

I don't see why it necessarily should be required.

[Laize]

You said western Europe. Ural mountains is the "border" between Europe and Asia.

Yes but he said with the exception of the baltic states.

---------- Post added 2013-04-12 at 03:23 PM ----------

I don't see why it necessarily should be required.

Because you'er talking about a $50-$70k/yr position with lavish benefits AND you need to make sure the teacher absolutely knows his/her shit before he starts teaching it to kids. High School is where education begins to get pretty technical in many fields and I'd rather not have someone with just a bachelor's teaching kids.

[Wells]

Because you'er talking about a $50-$70k/yr position with lavish benefits AND you need to make sure the teacher absolutely knows his/her shit before he starts teaching it to kids. High School is where education begins to get pretty technical in many fields and I'd rather not have someone with just a bachelor's teaching kids.

Yeah still not seeing how you need more than a Bachelors to teach highschool history, technology, PE, English, or art.

The only one I can see requiring a Masters is math and science.

Also you're being pretty loose with numbers there Laize. About half of all teachers have a Masters right now. So that 50-70k a year (varying wildly by location) already includes a significant population that have Masters.

---------- Post added 2013-04-12 at 03:29 PM ----------

Yes but he said with the exception of the baltic states.

I misspoke and corrected myself pages before the post Catta quoted.

[Endus]

Because you'er talking about a $50-$70k/yr position with lavish benefits AND you need to make sure the teacher absolutely knows his/her shit before he starts teaching it to kids. High School is where education begins to get pretty technical in many fields and I'd rather not have someone with just a bachelor's teaching kids.

You don't need more than a Bachelor's level of understanding to teach the high school curriculum to kids. And if teachers had a Masters degree requirement, they would be paid significantly more than they currently are, with a Bachelor's. That system is already in place. Teachers are paid at the lower end of the spectrum for professions with similar qualification requirements. If you're talking about bumping those requirements significantly, then you're talking about a 30% pay hike or thereabouts, as well.

You don't seem to have any real grasp of what starting salaries are like in other fields. Teachers are not overpaid, for their work. If you normalize their pay per work day (to adjust their salaries for the shorter work year), they are comparable paid to architects and the like, who have similar qualification requirements (Bachelor's plus 1-2 years additional training).

You're just anti-teacher for no justifiable reason, and it's baffling.

---------- Post added 2013-04-12 at 12:09 PM ----------

Also you're being pretty loose with numbers there Laize. About half of all teachers have a Masters right now. So that 50-70k a year (varying wildly by location) already includes a significant population that have Masters.

He's not even quoting starting salaries. New York state's starting numbers are ~$45,000 for a teacher with a Bachelor's degree. You need a Master's plus 30 credits plus 7.5 years teaching experience elsewhere for a starting salary of $75,000. And that's not really a "starting" salary, since you've been working as a teacher for the better part of a decade already.

http://schools.nyc.gov/nr/rdonlyres/...b/0/salary.pdf

These are not exorbitant salaries given their training and responsibilities.

[smelltheglove]

i do like how laize is still pretending a teacher is only working if there are kids in front of them, in spite of having been corrected on this numerous times. this is what is called "willfully ignorant"

[Deleted]

Because you'er talking about a $50-$70k/yr position with lavish benefits AND you need to make sure the teacher absolutely knows his/her shit before he starts teaching it to kids. High School is where education begins to get pretty technical in many fields and I'd rather not have someone with just a bachelor's teaching kids.

The empirical data (state by state and whole US):
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d...s/dt10_080.asp
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d...s/dt10_081.asp
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d...s/dt10_083.asp

Remember the data is from 2008, which means that the numbers are slightly higher now.

[Rendia]

Aren't a fair amount of Walmart employees only temps though?

No. Temp status is used fairly rarely. And I believe that stock-purchase is open to part-time associates as well.

---------- Post added 2013-04-12 at 01:53 PM ----------

In my experience, Americans tend to hear that one story about the guy who had a broken leg and waited in the waiting room for 4 hours and never got help. And they think that one story is somehow a representation of Canadian health care.

Exactly. My uncle is one of those people. He can't even begin to fathom how well a TRUE socialized medical program would work. All he hears is "MOAR TAXES!!" and he gets all crazy about it. He didn't speak to me for about a month after I got into an argument about it with him.

---------- Post added 2013-04-12 at 01:57 PM ----------

Plus you get actual treatment rather than a patch job.

You only get a patch job if you are with an HMO. If you have a PPO they do take care of you better. However, you pay more, like a whole lot more, for a PPO so it isn't really worth it in my mind.

[Catta]

No. Temp status is used fairly rarely. And I believe that stock-purchase is open to part-time associates as well

Isnt it Walmart who prevents its employees from joining a union?

[Wells]

Isnt it Walmart who prevents its employees from joining a union?

What they can get away with depends on state law, but yeah, they're incredibly aggressive against worker action.

---------- Post added 2013-04-13 at 12:40 AM ----------

Wal Mart doesn't talk about how many of their workers are part time, which indicates there are probably a ton of them. And given their wages I don't know how many of them are purchasing stock at what? 75 bucks a share? That could be a day's wages.

Fun fact, until 2008 Wal Mart's Mexican stores frequently paid their employees in vouchers only usable at Wal Mart

[Theinquisition]

You don't need more than a Bachelor's level of understanding to teach the high school curriculum to kids. And if teachers had a Masters degree requirement, they would be paid significantly more than they currently are, with a Bachelor's. That system is already in place. Teachers are paid at the lower end of the spectrum for professions with similar qualification requirements. If you're talking about bumping those requirements significantly, then you're talking about a 30% pay hike or thereabouts, as well.

You don't seem to have any real grasp of what starting salaries are like in other fields. Teachers are not overpaid, for their work. If you normalize their pay per work day (to adjust their salaries for the shorter work year), they are comparable paid to architects and the like, who have similar qualification requirements (Bachelor's plus 1-2 years additional training).

You're just anti-teacher for no justifiable reason, and it's baffling.

---------- Post added 2013-04-12 at 12:09 PM ----------



He's not even quoting starting salaries. New York state's starting numbers are ~$45,000 for a teacher with a Bachelor's degree. You need a Master's plus 30 credits plus 7.5 years teaching experience elsewhere for a starting salary of $75,000. And that's not really a "starting" salary, since you've been working as a teacher for the better part of a decade already.

http://schools.nyc.gov/nr/rdonlyres/...b/0/salary.pdf

These are not exorbitant salaries given their training and responsibilities.

im anti- shaman...wats up.

[Rendia]

Isnt it Walmart who prevents its employees from joining a union?

Prevent? No. Indoctrinate against, yes.

They honestly can't prevent it, but they speak out against it a lot. You can't be fired for participating in a walk-out, or any other form of protest or pro-union gathering. In fact, I believe in one state Wal-Mart's actually unionized, but then didn't like it and dropped the union later. I could be wrong on that, but I swear I read it somewhere.

What they can get away with depends on state law, but yeah, they're incredibly aggressive against worker action.

---------- Post added 2013-04-13 at 12:40 AM ----------

Wal Mart doesn't talk about how many of their workers are part time, which indicates there are probably a ton of them. And given their wages I don't know how many of them are purchasing stock at what? 75 bucks a share? That could be a day's wages.

Fun fact, until 2008 Wal Mart's Mexican stores frequently paid their employees in vouchers only usable at Wal Mart

The general aim is for a store to be around 70-30 part time. Every store is different, but those are the typical goals.

[belfpala]

The general aim is for a store to be around 70-30 part time. Every store is different, but those are the typical goals.

70-30 part/full isn't necessarily bad. Assuming the part time people aren't trying to make a living that way.

[Wells]

Its not like life is much better trying to make a living at full time.

[Redblade]

70-30 part/full isn't necessarily bad. Assuming the part time people aren't trying to make a living that way.

Here I was thinking the aim of any job was to make a living...

Its not like life is much better trying to make a living at full time.

This is what I don't get with the American system, a full time job being so bad that it's hard to make a living from it, not only that but you can get fired from it for no apparent reason and they aim to only have part time workers to avoid having to pay for extra benefits (I assume), the mind boggles over the fact that people defend such a system.

[belfpala]

Here I was thinking the aim of any job was to make a living...

Not if you're a student, or using a part time job for some extra money, or as temporary income as you look for something better, etc.

[Redblade]

Not if you're a student, or using a part time job for some extra money, or as temporary income as you look for something better, etc.

Some extra money to do what, invest, save, or perhaps to make a living? Same goes for temporary income while looking for something better, if you don't need that temporary income why wouldn't you just look for something better full time.

The reason people work is to get payed so they can live...

[Wildtree]

Rights of the individual should always come before the needs and desires of the majority.. this is how all the bad things in history got started. Nazis, keeping slaves, experimenting on people for the good of others in death camps, communism. To me rich having to pay the more is exactly the same as healthier and stronger people having longer workdays for the same pay. Equal opportunities doesn't mean people are equal and deserve the same.

I think you are incorrect.
All the bad things in history started from minorities taking up power and overthrowing the majority. That's the prime signature of every dictatorship.
The more a society leans towards the majority, the more it is protected from oppression, and dictatorship.
Civil rights, Human rights, all that could not have been established with minorities dictating or mandating. It was achieved through democratic process. And up until to date almost all violations of civil and human rights are caused through minority actions.
Where some people fail is, that there's a difference, and that difference is actually taken care off in a democracy. It would be horrible if a minority had no say at all. If people would get ignored and outlined. But that is not the case (unless for criminal charges reasons). Every single persons voice has the same value in a democracy.
What ever the topic is, at the start every opinion matters exactly the same. And then it gets decided - by majority rule - what's it going to be.
If you happen (like we all are at times) to be part of the minority, you still have options. You have the choice of either accepting the outcome and abide, or you take up the cause, and fight to convince enough other people to win them over for your opinion. Which then can become the majority rule. Our western political systems all allow for such procedure. I don't know any country in the modern world, where the population cannot kick the current leaders in charge out of office early. Or where the population cannot enforce changes on any official matter early through democratic means, from the lowest level of local government and rules, all the way up to the countries government and even their constitutions. And that - I see as a good thing.
I would not want to live in any other form of country and government. I would settle for a monarchy. But frankly the gamble on that level is just too high.
Monarchy can be the best form of state hands down. It can also be the worst, hands down. It all depends on that one person, and it's will... Which closes the circle again..... Minority with too much power is a very bad thing.

Found something earlier, which I think fits the thread about capitalism/socialism pretty good:

The Hard Truth about Economic Inequality that Both the Left and Right Ignore

[pucko97]

I think you are incorrect.
All the bad things in history started from minorities taking up power and overthrowing the majority. That's the prime signature of every dictatorship.
The more a society leans towards the majority, the more it is protected from oppression, and dictatorship.
Civil rights, Human rights, all that could not have been established with minorities dictating or mandating. It was achieved through democratic process. And up until to date almost all violations of civil and human rights are caused through minority actions.
Where some people fail is, that there's a difference, and that difference is actually taken care off in a democracy. It would be horrible if a minority had no say at all. If people would get ignored and outlined. But that is not the case (unless for criminal charges reasons). Every single persons voice has the same value in a democracy.
What ever the topic is, at the start every opinion matters exactly the same. And then it gets decided - by majority rule - what's it going to be.
If you happen (like we all are at times) to be part of the minority, you still have options. You have the choice of either accepting the outcome and abide, or you take up the cause, and fight to convince enough other people to win them over for your opinion. Which then can become the majority rule. Our western political systems all allow for such procedure. I don't know any country in the modern world, where the population cannot kick the current leaders in charge out of office early. Or where the population cannot enforce changes on any official matter early through democratic means, from the lowest level of local government and rules, all the way up to the countries government and even their constitutions. And that - I see as a good thing.
I would not want to live in any other form of country and government. I would settle for a monarchy. But frankly the gamble on that level is just too high.
Monarchy can be the best form of state hands down. It can also be the worst, hands down. It all depends on that one person, and it's will... Which closes the circle again..... Minority with too much power is a very bad thing.

Found something earlier, which I think fits the thread about capitalism/socialism pretty good:

The Hard Truth about Economic Inequality that Both the Left and Right Ignore

That is why the rich people in the USA needs to become less wealthier so they will have a harder time "convincing" the people that their opinion is right. Also you cant kick out some of the leaders in USA (example the judges in the supreme court are there for lifetime).