And, my respect. From WFSB:
“Tough times in Wethersfield mean nearly 50 teachers are being laid off.”
Yes, I feel bad for those teachers and I understand that it hurts the students a bit (Wethersfield high school ranks 60th as a top school with a student:teacher ratio of 14:3). But their response?
“The school district has revised its request, asking for a 6 percent spending increase.”
What part of “we’re hurtin’ ” don’t these people understand? These bad times are temporary and in an idealistic world, everyone should be willing to sacrifice. Don’t they get it that the government doesn’t just print money to cover shortfalls? Don’t they understand that raising their budget (if approved) just translates into higher taxes on their private-sector neighbors who are likely holding onto their homes and their “new” jobs sweeping floors at Home Depot because that’s all they could get after two years of unemployment after being laid off from jobs that paid less than these teachers are making now? I’m sure they can stretch that minimum wage into paying another 6% in local taxes to cover somebody else’s job.
Where’s the fairness in that? Frankly, if you’ve managed to collect your salary for the past three years while people were losing their jobs and houses, (yes, everyone got furlough days and no raises), then you’re one of the lucky ones. And, if you were smart as well, you had these years to save up against the economy finally reaching you.
We’ve come a long way in improving the educational system, just as in all areas of life and innovation. But doesn’t it make just a bit of sense that if education was so bad, was so inadequate twenty, forty, years ago, that we wouldn’t have people smart enough to be teaching students today?
I own my own very small business. I’ve been hurt by the economy, just as everyone else has been. What if companies, in order to save jobs in hard times, simply said, “well, we’ll just raise prices again instead.” How do you think that strategy would play out?