Hey, he needs that unionized public teachers campaign contributions and votes
Obama: My plan will save teachers’ jobs
President Obama again urged Congress to pass his jobs bill Saturday, this time with an emphasis on teachers.
“Since 2009, we’ve lost more than 300,000 education jobs, in part because of budget cuts at the state and local level,” Obama said during his weekly radio address.
Um, wasn’t the Stimulus supposed to save those jobs? Well, it did. In the short term. This dovetails into my post earlier this morning in terms of the Stimulus being about short term goals and measures, which meant any recovery and/or slowdown of horrible economic conditions ended up being simply short term. The Stimulus gave money to the states to keep teachers on the job. But, because the economy hasn’t improved and the States aren’t seeing revenues increase through sales taxes, property taxes, and income taxes, the three primary sources, they don’t have the money. Especially since public pensions and costs are out of control.
So, now Obama is back to trying to save public sector teacher’s jobs. Because the Stimulus should have been called “here’s some money.”
Education cuts are “the opposite of what we should be doing as a country,” Obama said. “States should be making education a priority in their budgets, even in tough fiscal times. And Congress should be willing to help out — because this affects all of us.”
I always have to wonder if this kind of talk from Obama simply highlights his cluelessness on economic, an inability to divorce himself from his ingrained far left thoughts, or pandering to his liberal base. Education is worthless if there are no jobs to be filled. We can’t keep spending money we do not have. The solution is to increase economic output, which results in money coming in to the state treasuries. If the Feds simply give money to the states for teachers (again), that means a temporary reprieve.
“There’s nothing more important to our country’s future than the education we give our kids. And there’s no one more important to that education than the person at the front of the classroom.”
Which would be for naught if the economy is in free fall.
The average ratio of students per 1 teacher is 15.4 in the United States.
That sounds just dandy to me. It’s about half of what I remember when I attended Elementary/Middle/High School. Perhaps it is even too few…and more redundant teachers need to update their resumes…
Cheers,
The Worm
Clarfication: “too few” as in “too few students” per teacher. 15.4 seems low.
I graduated from high school in 1980. In those days, most classes had around 30 students in them. When I did my stint of intern teaching in 1984, it still about the same. 15.4 does sound a little low.
I wonder how many more times we are going to have to save these teaching jobs?
Maybe there’d be more money for the classrooms if so much wasn’t siphoned off for multiple, redundant layers of administration.
well Worm perhaps you are comparing your personal experience (class size) to teacher/student ratio. The AVERAGE class size in the USA is 25 for primary and secondary public schools.
Here are the government statistics on Public school teacher to student ratios as of 2007. As of 2007 it was 15.8 students per one teacher. I saw the 2009 figures at is was 15.4. I’ll try to find that for you. As I recall…the article pointed out that over the last ten years teaching jobs increased over 9% while students only increased by 1%.
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_qpt.asp
There…I showed my work…show yours John. And remember, stay away from the leftist NEA toting bloggies…Show stats…
Cheers,
The Worm
Yeah, when I was in school, they were pushing for a limit of 30 kids per room. Guess they used that to then put more teachers in each room.
When I was in school, mid-80s, it was also 30 or more kids per room. usually around 40. But then, we were also fairly respectful and quiet. It was only our music that was loud and irreverent.
And, yes, Teach, there was a specific stimulus that targeted the firefighters and teachers after the main stimulus passed.
Note, that it also threw $16 billion in to medicare even before ObamaCare was killing it. This bill only gave out $10 billion for teachers and firefighters.
Few months later, Obama was demanding another $50 billion for teachers and firefighters.
In my state, after the stimulus ran out, pink slips went out. It’s a crock. It’s been going on for years, long before Obama. Most of the money goes to admin or a state of the art gym.
[…] Linked at Pirate’s Cove in the Fine 15 (he has Rule 5 links too), and more on Obama wanting more for teachers after failing so spectacularly with the stimulus. […]
And, I’ve wondered about the legality of using Federal tax dollars to fund a local city employee.
… maybe that’s just me.
But, you are right Maggie. IT did end up the same end, as this was just an election year tickle for the teacher’s and firefighter’s unions. They were laid off the next year as this man, as usual, can’t see past the nose on his own dawling face.
Cities without budgets one year, are not going to have the budgets next year when the feds end their teacher subsidies.
And, I have yet to hear a decent argument about why it is better for the Feds to take our money and then give it back to our cities and towns, instead of us giving it to them. … oh, right. Redistribution.
What Obama doesn’t get is that we can’t just dump money on states and municipalities, we have to stimulate growth, which would mean money coming in to the state, country, and local treasuries on a constant basis through income tax, property tax, and sales tax.
nah, he gets it Teach. he understands what he is doing. All Marxists do. He is getting people more and more used to having to rely upon gov’t handouts for things.
People get used to hearing that it is the FEDS that will pay for your teachers, not your local community. It is the FEDS that come to the rescue to save your firefighters, not the racist bigoted town councils.
Thus, it is completely OK for FEDS to be spending so much money. It saves my firefighter husband’s, or my nurse wife’s, job and pension. Without the FEDS to protect us, we would not have a job.
Thus, the opposite is true. He and his ilk have been pushing for decades now, and more than half this country believe it…. .. that wen Federal spending is cut, direct and personal services are eliminated, local jobs are removed, aid to poor is defunded.
Think of how far this society has come in the last 60 years of thinking the FEDS are in charge of everything? Hoover campaigned he would put a chicken in every pot .. just for you. FDR claimed the old would never want. Clinton and Bush said the old should not have to pay for medical services and being called poor should not be limited to the poor. Obama has claimed to stop rising seas and reduce GLOBAL warming while giving FREE and deficit-neutral health care to (almost)all peoples living in America at the same price that 30 million people get it now.
They may not get the policies changed they want, but you better believe they are changing the mindset.
How long did it take for Republicans and patriots to be seen as racist, while those who wanted to restrict rights and voting on minority segments are hailed as champions?