But in the end all staff are important, communities need to find more money.

Kids are the future, the whole future, and we need to invest in quality educational programs.

And many admins could be let go.

fired'. The answer is no one asked to have anyone fired.

names. nepotism runs rampant. every unnecessary position created there cuts the classrooms. and i taught for nearly 30 years. I know this stuff.

nationwide, codify salaries and pay for it like we pay for aircraft carriers or smart bombs. priorities.

It would be interesting to see what the budget looks like and find out where there are places to cut, and where there places to raise money. Usually school districts are funded by property taxes, so it might be useful to look at tax rates, classifications of real estate, what businesses may have been given property tax breaks, etc.

Details are important.

...IMHO. That is the spin it is hoped uninformed people will believe. This is about education reform and blaming teachers in order to make change.

They wanted a 4% raise, but Emmanuel offered a 2% raise with increased hours. The other things you mention (evaluations based on student tests, for example) are also involved.

...issues. But they are striking due to evals on tests, not $$.

"Union leaders and district officials were not far apart in their negotiations on compensation, Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis said. But other issues — including potential changes to health benefits and a new teacher evaluation system based partly on students' standardized test scores — remained unresolved, she said."
- http://www.ctunet.com/blog

The OP trying to frame this as about increasing taxes to pay the greedy teachers more $ is a false premise and an attempt at sewing rumor.
imho

There's plenty of ways to bring in more tax revenue. Tax stock transactions on the Chicago mercantile exchange for example.

if you try taxing them they simply move trading to NY. since the vast majority takes place over computers it would take almost no time to implement.
you cant raise taxes. thats the problem. chicagoans already pay some of the highest taxes in the country.the sales tax is 9.5% the highest in the country

Also, how do we know people won't be willing to pay higher taxes for education? Are we just assuming everyone is against this proposal?

How does it rank versus other major US cities? How is that spread over tax brackets? What makes you assume that taxes can't be selectively raised? What makes you say there is "no money" to pay teacher salaries?

Actually, you're asking at least four rhetorical questions with no stated basis. You're also repeating RW GOP talking points we've all heard too much of.

Why do you want to make a RW pest of yourself about this here?

the income tax has no brackets. its a flat 5%,having been raised 66% as of jan 1 2011

In Illinois there is not a uniform sales tax rate - cities and counties have additional local taxing authority.

Go here and search on Chicago:

http://tax.illinois.gov/Publications/taxratefinder.htm


And lets not forget the 29 other city taxes on commerce in Chicago

http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/fin/supp_info/revenue/tax_list.html

Might not the "pits" be a place to dig for some loot?

2 problems..
1. the majority of trading occures on screen
2. trading will rapidly migrate to where transaction costs are cheaper. if chicago imposes a transaction tax then trading will move to new york or philly or london or somewhere else. wherever costs are the lowest

threat to move the site of the exchange, that's unlikely and expensive.

Again, technological and legal solutions could be applied to assure that any effort to remove the power of taxation by moving the transaction personnel and recording equipment off-shore could be blocked. Naked trading and third-party speculation in commodities could be regulated for US entities so that they had to go through CBT and taxed. But, again, there would have to be the political will to do that. And, that, is the crux.

assure a record was made for the purpose of recording ownership and that the transaction fees imposed on each trade in futures and derivatives were paid. The rule is simple, but getting there is anything but.

If speculation in naked hedges and CDS, and such, have a social cost (as became apparent on September 2008), they should be paid by the users who incur and benefit from them. No different from any other kind of gambling.

also the cme already has divisions in other cities. they own for example the nymex in new york. they could easily shift what is traded in chicago to the nymex

Property taxes in our city funds a large portion of our public education. Is that not true in Cook County as well?

I found this to be of interest while I was trying to figure this out.

My city's sales tax rate is 9.75%

I smell an agenda.

Teachers who already have small salaries, kids whose classes are already too large.

Never administrators.

according to one study. even the teachers union calls then the second highest

They deserve every cent.

I never heard that.

Of course, different jurisdictions pay all their public employees differently, based on the going rates and ability of the state to pay. Poor states pay poor salaries, etc. Same thing in the private sector.

Without getting into this case specifically, there are tougher teaching venues in this country and Chicago teachers are the highest paid in the country. If you're tying salaries to the "toughness" of the district, there are many teachers in the U.S. who deserve to be paid more than those in Chicago.

... kinda like "some people say", eh buddy?

Where have I heard that before?

It's a result of having a strong union.

It's also a bit of a "world's tallest midget award."

Someone posts the "results" of some unnamed, unlinked "study," and we're supposed to be impressed that it means something?


Fuck the whole bunch of ANTI-Union, ANTI-education, ANTI-teacher excuses for short-changing our children and those that work so hard for them. I know sleazy propaganda when I see it.

You seem to have a fucking excuse for every ANTI-education, ANTI-teacher, ANTI-student, ANTI-Union piece of propaganda there is, doncha?

.. kinda like "some people say", eh buddy?

Where have I heard that before?

i then showed the teacher union itself agrees with that an dthen you accuse me of making up excuses....

im not anti teachers but i dont blindly support them either like some here do

Quit insulting our intelligence. Your posts are straight out of the ANTI-Union, ANTI-labor rightwing playbook.

But still, I think the question deserves an answer even if purely speculative because regardless, come payday, the funds have to be available.

The situation is going to be resolved one way of the other so I don't see how this is insulting your intelligence but what do I know?

This poster has been all over this thread and possibly others spewing one gawdamned rightwing ANTI-Union talking point after another.

Pretending THAT isn't that poster's ANTI-WORKER/TEACHER AGENDA is the insult to ANY thinking person's intelligence. So now you DO KNOW.

I really don't see how citing a fact laid out by the union is ANTI-everything fucking thing in the world.

that you got overly angry because you could not answer a simple question. You should of just said I do not know the answer. But instead you went on an onslaught of name calling. How mature! It seems you are an intelligent thinking adult...lol

You ever been part of a negotiating situation? Play any kind of the simulation types of games, board games or virtual?

countries. If you had said 'they are paid higher than teachers in Norway eg', that would have been impressive.

So the Union in Chicago managed to get a decent salary for its teachers, good for them, but no matter what they are paid if you are comparing to the rest of this country, it is still not enough.

Poland? Not to mention the cost of living in those countries. I don't see Finland or Norway or any of the other countries where teaching is a respected profession.

Not that the salaries are the main issue, as they are not in Chicago either. .The main issue is Working Conditions, proper materials, classroom size, infrastructure, availability of teaching tools such as BOOKS.

We are shamefully NOT in the same league as countries like Finland when it comes to Education, NOT because of pay differences, but because of all the other factors that make teaching a respected profession and put CHILDREN OVER PROFITS.

For Rahm and Walker and their ilk, it is all about privatization and PROFIT.

Btw, where do Rahm's children go to school?

Nice try.

Well, not really, pretty pathetic actually.

so I do not trust your stats.

.. don't think I give a shit what you think of me.

if the Chicago Teachers' Union managed to bring their salaries up a little, that is proof positive of WHY Unions are so important. Now the goal should be to have other areas of the country do the same thing.

Teachers should be paid as they are in other civilized nations where they are actually viewed as the professionals they are and paid accordingly.

The attitude towards education in this country is sickening and certainly explains why we have half the country willing to vote for someone like George W Bush.

The most important thing a country can put effort into, is its system of education and to attract the best and brightest into the profession, the salaries should be way higher than they are in Chicago and anywhere else right now.

Democrats are pro-union, Republicans are anti-union.

It's as simple as that.

Republicans to privatize everything, to be Democrats. When Rahm expressed his opinion of Progressive Democrats after the election in 2008, he showed clearly who he was. He belongs to the Third Way and at this point, considering how far to the right the Third Way is dragging the Democratic Party, it's time for huge pushback to their failed ideas.

how did the Democrats get in this situation then? Certainly looks like the Chicago teachers union has plenty of Democrats in city hall as enemies.

Now all he has to do is what any good Democrat would do, side with the working class instead of the privatizers.

as a legacy. This is his doing. He could end this in, literally, five minutes.

I am very glad he is no longer in the WH.

But, interestingly, his mother was the daughter of a Chicago union organizer. You'd think he'd have more support for labor.

I do think the folks who have grown up in the past 30 years of very conservative rule and shun labor organizing are going to find themselves regretting that as wages plummet downward no matter which party is in office. I am in fact a bit younger than Rahm and kept my pro-union sentiment, but then I wasn't the son of a doctor. It was my dad who was the steel factory worker.

Nothing more needs to be said.

Big trouble ahead, when someone goes after the public unions in Illinois. Will the general public get behind you? Maybe. But maybe not, after this. A short term view, IMO.

Dem Party, naturally oppose this strike. It shows that despite all their efforts, the Unions still have the power to stop their pro-Privatization agenda, and they worked so hard to weaken the people, their Unions, and their ability to do anything to stop the rolling train of Corporate takeover of our Public Institutions.

No pro-Union Dem is opposed to this strike, unless they do not understand why it is happening.

as I know. These aren't people with a few posts. Just sayin'.

Democrats. For one thing, pro-Union Democrats KNOW what has been going on in Chicago with Rahm Emanuel and they know that salaries are a small part of what this is all about. Pro-Union Democrats educate themselves about these issues as they did on Scott Walker in Wisconsin and the rest of the Union Busting Teabaggers for whom the Kochs bought elections.

But Rahm's actions regarding privatizing Chicago's schools and his attempts to weaken the power of the Union there, are so similar to what Walker was up to in Wisconsin, there is no way any pro-Union Democrat could ignore these things just because someone puts a 'D' next to their name.

I'd go a bit further...if you oppose this strike or any labor effort, I personally don't consider you a Democrat.

Not you obviously, sabrina, you're alright by me.

it reminds me of the tea baggers who consider anyone not as extreme as them as RINOS.

frankly I dont care if you consider me a democrat or not. last i checked blind obedience to unions was not a criteria for membership

this surprises nobody here, except that you and I have only just crossed paths.

I've long been the vocal advocate of a tent-shrinking purge of ideological outliers to strengthen what it means to be a Democrat. I went so far as to send many letters to the White House until they sent me a response to my missives requesting the expelling of Rahm Emanuel from the Democratic Party...not a form response, an actual signed response telling me about "party of inclusion", a letter signed by Rahm Emanuel...I made the motherfucker justify to me personally that he's a Democrat so I'd expect no less from you; I don't consider anybody a Democrat just because they say they are.

It's not a mere label, it has a meaning and that means there are conditions and expectations upon those that want to take that mantle.

You can't eat bacon and say you're a vegan.
You can't deny the messianic divinity of Christ and say you're a Christian.
You can't be a RW social and fiscal-conservative who opposes the working-class and say you're a Democrat.

Sorry, I'm not going to consider you a Democrat...you're free to consider yourself whatever you want though.
I'm equally free to disdain you for taking labels that you do not live up to.

My school district tried to tell me our teachers were among the highest paid in the country too. This seems to be a regular thing said whenever teachers are trying to strike. They're "highly paid."

There is no high pay for public school teachers. There are just various levels of low pay.

Salary figures provided by the Chicago Public Schools show teachers here have the highest average salary of any city in the nation. But, according to the Chicago Teachers Union’s calculations, Chicago teachers would rank second behind New York City.

No teachers are well paid. I don't care how they compare to other poorly paid people.

"A Chicago Public Schools spokesperson said average pay for teachers, without benefits, is $76,000."

"2010-2011: the CPS gives a starting salary of $50,577 for a first-year teacher with a bachelor's degree. "

to other cities in the country.

This can't be that hard to understand.

Since you asked: The composite cost of living index is 116.9, or 16.9% above the national average. However, the average Chicago teacher salary is 60% above the national average.

According to this article:

http://www.examiner.com/article/chicago-public-school-teachers-go-on-strike-teachers-union-sets-picket-lines

The average Chicago teacher salary is almost $71,000. And I just read in my local paper that the national average is $56,000. OK found it: http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=28

That isn't 60%. It's more like 27%.

When you take into account that big city schools can be more challenging than suburban and small town schools, I can understand why they'd be underpaid less horribly than teachers in those areas, though teachers as a whole should be paid more.

Your referenced article said " The city’s public school teachers are reported to make an average yearly salary of almost $71,000 per year." My referenced article said "A Chicago Public Schools spokesperson said average pay for teachers, without benefits, is $76,000." Which article is correct (if either)....I don't know. Though my referenced article was a little more definitive in purportedly quoting a CPS spokesperson. So I'll still give more weight to my link.

Regarding the $56,000 national average. Your article references school teacher salaries. I was referencing the US national average salary (all professions).

So for now I'll stand by the 60% differential.

which almost all teachers have. You can't compare teacher salaries to just salaries in general. That isn't an apples-to-apples comparison.

And the 76k number came from the school district that is trying to spin things in their benefit.

Because people are unemployed and underemployed, we should try to break unions and take down teachers? With stronger and more unions in this country, workers would have higher pay and less chance of being fired and laid off.

Chicago teachers = "low pay job"


I don't know where you get the idea I was advocating that "we should try to break unions and take down teachers". The numbers are what the numbers are.

of cost of living. They have to be able to live there - pay a mortgage or rent, buy groceries, and handle any other large city expenses. The number alone doesn't tell the story. If your laid-off neighbors go to school for five years to get a degree in education, then take an unpaid internship, then an unpaid student teaching job, and then move to an expensive place like Chicago, they can apply for a job there.