|
silence_kit posted:According to the following BLS survey, this is unusual. The average full-time teacher works about 40 hours a week, which is a pretty reasonable workweek, IMO. https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2008/03/art4full.pdf I remember at about the time I graduated from high school, public school teachers in my hometown successfully negotiated for a shorter workday of seven hours. They also mark work and prepare lessons outside their classroom hours.
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 02:45 |
|
|
We are really going full Hitler today.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:after reading your posts, im actually starting to agree you should have been put in some kind of institution where you couldn't harm the public Not an expensive one, though. That would be a waste of my taxes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
All of a sudden I'm hearing on various sites that teachers are actually super lazy. Is this something from the latest right-wing email forward? You guys are organized!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:There will be an adjustment period where religious schools thrive but since those schools don't really teach anything the market will ensure they fall apart pretty quickly. If this was true the Middle East wouldn't be full of religious schools that teach little but how to be a fanatic and we'd all be much better off. There's also no reason why a religious school shouldn't be excellent. I went to a religious state school in the UK and it had an excellent reputation. My agnostic parents chose it over the other nearby secular school (which was just fine) because of this. In the UK religious state schools are legally forced to provide an education equivalent to secular schools - they just have extra lessons about the school religion. I have this sneaking suspicion that Betty DeVos will *not* require that religious schools provide the same quality education!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
Crabtree posted:If they're seriously going to force private schools to be christian than that's only going to make the rich stupid. Not to mention flood the market with a bunch of kids with a completely useless skill of selective bible passage recitation - if that information even retains outside of a more useless mandate to see it on SATs. I mean, what, are they going to expect preacher to be a paying job? I'll have you know that my encyclopedic bible knowledge has come in handy for internet arguments! As for private schools being just for the rich, that's just the high quality ones. There are plenty of private religious schools in the USA that are quite cheap because they are subsidized by churches with the aim of winning souls via a lot of religious propaganda in the lessons.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2017 14:44
|
|
|
Finland has no private education at all. It is illegal.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
Triangle Shirt Factotum posted:If said 18 year olds could file bankruptcy and discharge the loans, I'd call it fair. Making the loans non-dischargeable is pure bullshit. If people could go bankrupt at 22 and keep the degree they just earned, they all would do it. The bankruptcy would be discharged just about when they were thinking of settling down and buying a house. Perhaps for people who realize their degree is useless, they could have the degree voided and lose the debt. The same for people who didn't finish.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
PT6A posted:It's a horrible idea to void a degree for non-payment of student loans, and it would further hamstring class mobility, but it's technically possible. My idea is that it would be a voluntary thing - you chose to give up the degree so that the student loan agreements become dischargeable in bankruptcy. I've heard from plenty of people who got a degree because it was the thing to do, but couldn't find work in their field, and are working in a job that doesn't require a degree, but the payments are a millstone around their neck. If they didn't have the degree, their career would be fine to support themselves, but with the payments, they are never going to earn enough to buy a house or have a family. This is not a healthy situation. This was what bankruptcy was designed to prevent. If you would rather not give up the degree, you just keep on making the payments like you would today, and it wouldn't be taken away from you even if you weren't keeping up (just the normal penalties.) This would discourage lenders from lending too much and hopefully slow the rate of tuition increases. It *would* hinder class mobility - grants would be needed for talented young people who don't have any money.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:The idea of voiding a degree because the degree holder doesn't make enough money is horrifying. They worked for that degree for years, they earned it, it's theirs. If they get injured and can't earn enough money, or if their industry collapses, or if they don't get the job they wanted, or if they were led to believe their industry was much more lucrative than it turned out to be, and as a result they can't pay off their loans, the solution is not to take away the degree; it's to take away the loans. We do this for every other kind of loan, and the banks find a way to deal with the increased risk. So why not student loans? My point was not that the degree should be taken away for non-payment (that would indeed be horrifying), but that people who decide they don't want the degree anymore should be able to VOLUNTARILY give it up when they go bankrupt to have the student loans discharged as well in the bankruptcy. Student loans currently can't be included in a bankruptcy which traps people in hopeless debt - there have been suicides. Just got to the BFC forum to see the problem. A lot of people are like "I have $10,000 in credit card debt, and $90,000 in student loans from my degree 10 years ago that I didn't finish. I work as a waiter, but I can't afford to eat. Can I go bankrupt?" and the answer is always NO, which is ridiculous. A person $100k in debt on a low wage should absolutely be allowed to go bankrupt and get out from under their situation. Sure, it'd be infinitely better to have free education, but America collectively loathes that sort of thing. Harm reduction, you know. Compare to Obamacare - Obamacare is not UHC but it's better than what went before and what the Republicans plan to replace it with. My idea wouldn't be of any use at all to most students, just those trapped in absolutely hopeless debt - the very situation bankruptcy was designed to prevent. Excluding student loans from bankruptcy is cruel and pointless.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Voiding someone's degrees in the first few years of someone's career would be devastating. After that who even cares? Before my first job trying to get by with a voided degree would be a huge problem, but now? Who even cares. If someone called me up to tell my my degree was "voided" it would have near zero impact on my current life. Yeah, older folks well established in their career would be able to do this no problem, but bankruptcy is the kind of thing that is more of a problem to older folk than younger, because they tend to have stuff that they don't want to give up. Otherwise it would be optimal for just about everyone to declare bankruptcy on the way home from getting their degree certificate, because the negatives (losing your stuff, not being able to get home loans) are immaterial to a student that owns nothing but debt and would be crazy to buy a house any time soon. And please note that I'm not considering this a "threat" that would be done TO you, just an optional part of a voluntary bankruptcy.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
Triangle Shirt Factotum posted:Also, this whole non-dischargeable student loan debt is a new thing, and it's not like there was a massive repudiation of education debt before it happened back in 1976. Suggests they are correlated, no?
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Hastings posted:Other than this being a terrible idea that places responsibility on former students instead of the loan companies that actually gouging people, you forget that virtually all American jobs require a degree. It does not matter what kind, just that you have obtained a degree. Voiding a degree could end up leading to job termination for many people since they could no longer legally be considered qualified for their positions. Even if their current job does not require a degree, nulling the degree takes away what makes them competitive to bosses. It would be useless to people who are benefiting from their degree - it's for the situation where the student didn't finish, or got a degree that did not benefit them. Happens more than you'd think.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
Triangle Shirt Factotum posted:What point are you trying to make? That the massive inflation in the cost of a university education started when students were unable to discharge debt in bankruptcy. This allowed the tuition fees to inflate, because the banks were guaranteed to get even crazy high loans back. Everyone seems to be thinking that my point is that universities should be allowed to take degree certificates for non-payment, which is absolutely not my point. That would be extremely evil. This would be for degrees the holder doesn't want anymore (failed, not finished, not relevant to career.)
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
BigFactory posted:I think you're talking about all sorts of edge cases unrelated to the specific, but relatively profound scenario of someone who is saddled with onerous student debt who is unable to find employment in the field they trained in. Their degree is an albatross around their neck, not a benefit. Yeah, that's exactly what I meant! BigFactory posted:It's all pretty stupid, though, because when a bank forecloses on a house, they do it because a house has transferable value. A degree does not. In that situation it literally is just a piece of paper the bank is collecting. It's strictly punitive, but if the alternative is not being able to get debt relief under any circumstance, it's better than what we have now. I think that foreclosed houses are less valuable than you might think. They tend to be delivered in bad condition because the inhabitants are pissed off, and in areas that are going downhill (otherwise they would be able to sell the house and pay off the debt.) It's mostly punitive. If bankruptcy for student loans was possible, lenders would be more willing to make deals like they do with medical debt, potentially benefiting people who have a degree they want to keep, but who can't reasonably pay the full price. Medical debt can't be repossessed either (sorry guy, we're going to have to take your pacemaker.)
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 02:45 |
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:The point is that voiding a degree is really really dumb. You keep the education. And if you want to pretend paper is all that matters it opens millions of unanswerable questions about how a revocable degree would even be implemented. Here's how: An employer would phone the university to say "Did John Doe obtain a degree in the field of underwater basket weaving at your institution? You can't confirm that? OK, thanks!" If the employer didn't care it wouldn't matter. But this would be largely for people who didn't envision ever using the degree - usually because they didn't complete it.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 20:57
|
|