Hydraboss Posted December 18, 2008 Report Share Posted December 18, 2008 Nah, I never flunked. Now Dr., remove tongue from cheek... Apparently, teachers are quite the little hot button for a few of you. If you want to investigate the big, bad Alberta conservative and why he doesn't like teachers, go here http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....mp;#entry193425 That thread has little or no association to this one, but I'd be happy to continue the conversation over there if you wish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griz Posted December 19, 2008 Report Share Posted December 19, 2008 Nah, I never flunked. Now Dr., remove tongue from cheek...Apparently, teachers are quite the little hot button for a few of you. If you want to investigate the big, bad Alberta conservative and why he doesn't like teachers, go here http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....mp;#entry193425 That thread has little or no association to this one, but I'd be happy to continue the conversation over there if you wish. I heard Alberta is a loss cause when it comes to retards...something to do with the chinook winds...no wonder that province is full of wackos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted December 19, 2008 Report Share Posted December 19, 2008 Maybe a teacher flunked him and he is still angry. While not the most ignorant thing posted here, it is up there. Way up there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydraboss Posted December 19, 2008 Report Share Posted December 19, 2008 I heard Alberta is a loss cause when it comes to retards...something to do with the chinook winds...no wonder that province is full of wackos That would be "lost cause", not "loss cause". Might want to take an English upgrading course. I know some really great teachers if you're interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydraboss Posted December 19, 2008 Report Share Posted December 19, 2008 Way up there. So you think my mention of the sacred cows (teachers) ranks up there with the various accusations of "you are like Hitler" that float around the forum? Interesting. Before you moved to Manitoba, what part of Ontario were you from exactly? (P.s. - My earlier offer stands. If you want to discuss teachers, I bumped the old thread for you.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted December 19, 2008 Report Share Posted December 19, 2008 So you think my mention of the sacred cows (teachers) ranks up there with the various accusations of "you are like Hitler" that float around the forum? Interesting.Before you moved to Manitoba, what part of Ontario were you from exactly? I was born in Manitoba, and I have great respect for educators. They certainly aren't sacred, but to say they don't contribute is beyond ignorant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydraboss Posted December 19, 2008 Report Share Posted December 19, 2008 Teachers "contribute" a great deal. To their bank accounts. To their vacation accounts. To their pension accounts. That's about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griz Posted December 19, 2008 Report Share Posted December 19, 2008 That would be "lost cause", not "loss cause".Might want to take an English upgrading course. I know some really great teachers if you're interested. I heard Alberta is a "lost cause" when it comes to retards...something to do with the chinook winds...no wonder that province is full of wackos Ever hear of a typo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrGreenthumb Posted December 19, 2008 Report Share Posted December 19, 2008 Teachers "contribute" a great deal.To their bank accounts. To their vacation accounts. To their pension accounts. That's about it. Teachers are university educated for 5 years, are responsible for educating our children( usually 30 or so per classroom), and make less than your average plumber, or auto mechanic. Give your head a shake but make sure your brain cell doesn't fall out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydraboss Posted December 19, 2008 Report Share Posted December 19, 2008 I heard Alberta is a "lost cause" when it comes to retards...something to do with the chinook winds...no wonder that province is full of wackos Ever hear of a typo? Aww, relax. Me never no made a misteak when I'ma tiping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydraboss Posted December 19, 2008 Report Share Posted December 19, 2008 Teachers are university educated for 5 years, are responsible for educating our children( usually 30 or so per classroom), and make less than your average plumber, or auto mechanic. Give your head a shake but make sure your brain cell doesn't fall out. Read the thread, Green. This is a provincial thread and the fact is that in Alberta teachers are required to be educated for four years (more are optional). Let's stop the hijack and move the discussion on this topic to the appropriate thread. I bumped it for you (that means I posted a reply to move the topic to the top of the thread board so you could find it. Really.) Use your letters to find it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted December 23, 2008 Report Share Posted December 23, 2008 Teachers are university educated for 5 years, are responsible for educating our children( usually 30 or so per classroom), and make less than your average plumber, or auto mechanic. Give your head a shake but make sure your brain cell doesn't fall out. In Ontario a Grade three teacher can make $94,000. Plus, Pension, Benefits, and paid sick days. An Auto Mechanic Tech teacher, sometimes called "Transportations" or some other dumbass name by elitist who dumb down the curriculum, is in the $44-$52,000 range. They leave the bench, where $50 to $85,000 is possible to both instruct and get away from nagging injuries. An Automech apprentices for 5 years and writes college exams. The are required to go to University and Teachers College to instruct in the colleges. Teachers do not have to go to University for 5 years. Some do and some don't and it is done to increase their credentials to be hired, and to increase their pay based on credentials among other things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted December 23, 2008 Report Share Posted December 23, 2008 Teachers do not have to go to University for 5 years. I don't think that's true anymore. Its certainly not true here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrGreenthumb Posted December 24, 2008 Report Share Posted December 24, 2008 I don't think that's true anymore. Its certainly not true here. In Manitoba to be hired as a teacher you need a bachelor of eductation. It is a 5 year university degree. You might get hired as a teacher's aid, or para-educator with less, but you are not paid a teacher's salary, you do not get paid over the summer. A friend of mine just retired from teaching, and after working more than 35 years at it he was paid a little over 50 thousand dollars in his final year. Hardly a fortune. He paid about 30 % of that into income tax. no new combine to hide his earnings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted December 24, 2008 Report Share Posted December 24, 2008 you do not get paid over the summer. Well, you might if you get to be a guidance councilor or such...but usually that requires an applied counseling diploma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted December 24, 2008 Report Share Posted December 24, 2008 (edited) In Manitoba to be hired as a teacher you need a bachelor of eductation. It is a 5 year university degree. You might get hired as a teacher's aid, or para-educator with less, but you are not paid a teacher's salary, you do not get paid over the summer. A friend of mine just retired from teaching, and after working more than 35 years at it he was paid a little over 50 thousand dollars in his final year. Hardly a fortune. He paid about 30 % of that into income tax. no new combine to hide his earnings. Yes it is a 5 year program in Manitoba, or a 2 year if you have a degree, which is normally 3years. Overkill IMHO, but whatever works. I personally believe that teachers need to hold real jobs prior to becoming an instructor. Growing up in the education system, having summers off, then going to University and Teachers College, leads to a disconnect with the working public. It is not uncommon for students to stay in University in order to avoid what they term the "real world". Education is a great thing. But experiencing life outside of the education system is a must to me. That is neither here nor there with regards to this thread. I don't know any teachers who make under $50,000 in Ontario that are employeed full time. Manitoba may have it right. $42,887 $65,310 is the spread. Alberta, ironically pays the most to its Public Teachers. Edited December 24, 2008 by madmax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted December 24, 2008 Report Share Posted December 24, 2008 I personally believe that teachers need to hold real jobs prior to becoming an instructor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted December 24, 2008 Report Share Posted December 24, 2008 I see you have a problem with that. I have no problem with you expanding past the eyeballs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted December 24, 2008 Report Share Posted December 24, 2008 I see you have a problem with that. I have no problem with you expanding past the eyeballs. Teaching is a real job. Is just as real as your job or a job that anyone else does. Frankly, I'm rather shocked when it comes to peoples attitudes concerning teachers on this forum. I never realized there was such resentment for the people that educate children. I'm not saying that all teachers are good and should be teaching, but many seem to be painting all teachers with this terrible brush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkness Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 (edited) Preferably welfare should be a temporary, incentive-based "support" program and not an alternative lifestyle. I guess we are talking economics here in whether to have a smaller or larger government. In any case, the market, however free it is, should be proactive and diverse so as to limit extreme fluctuations in it's ability to support itself. Edited January 4, 2009 by York Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyStone Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 (edited) Drea, you as well seem to belive that welfare is insurance and support it as a safety net which you would use if the circumstance arose again. What about those who see no value in a safety net. Perhaps their circmstance is that their likelyhood of using such a system is very remote. Should they be allowed to "opt out" (ie not pay through their taxes for welfare, and not be eligible to collect)? Think of welfare as a form of insurance. You may need it, you may not. But everyone pays the premiums, and they payout to those who need it. Opting out, is sort of like being able to buy fire insurance after your house burns down, but not contributing otherwise. As for what the purpose of welfare should be, that is debatable. At a minimum, it should provide the necessities of life to those who can not provide for themselves. I think almost all non-Albertan Canadians would agree with that. Where the disagreement occurs, is: Should we provide the necessities of life to those who can provide for themselves? Should we provide more than just the necessities? Should we provide enough to lead a dignified life etc? Edited January 11, 2009 by KeyStone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkness Posted January 12, 2009 Report Share Posted January 12, 2009 Think of welfare as a form of insurance.You may need it, you may not. But everyone pays the premiums, and they payout to those who need it. Opting out, is sort of like being able to buy fire insurance after your house burns down, but not contributing otherwise. As for what the purpose of welfare should be, that is debatable. At a minimum, it should provide the necessities of life to those who can not provide for themselves. I think almost all non-Albertan Canadians would agree with that. Where the disagreement occurs, is: Should we provide the necessities of life to those who can provide for themselves? Should we provide more than just the necessities? Should we provide enough to lead a dignified life etc? I will attempt to answer your questions. I believe that welfare should not be available to those who can provide for themselves. I think this is quite obvious. The point of welfare is to provide for a person in the opposite situation. Welfare should definitely be utilitarian, any extravagances can be obtained through the free market. This creates independence of individuals in the market. I ask one question: If welfare provided more than the necessity, why would people then work? Why would they endure hardship if they could live "dignifiably" on their fellow taxpayer's tab? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brunopolis Posted January 12, 2009 Report Share Posted January 12, 2009 I see you have a problem with that. I have no problem with you expanding past the eyeballs. Teaching is a difficult job. Most teachers do have to work more hours than listed due to prep time and be on their toes at all times. It's a demanding job that requires you to be thinking and active almost the entire time. You also have to deal with a lot of crap from both teens and little kids. Personally, I only have one problem with teachers. Bad teachers simply cannot get fired. Their is no incentive to be a good teacher as seniority is more important than anything else. Also the teacher program overall in Canada is rather poor. Teacher's college is simply too short to teach all the essentials and the requirement for a Bachelor degree is just extra time tacked on. If teacher's college became a University Bachelor program(3-4 year program), not only would we have better teachers but the money required to educate them would be less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade Posted January 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 12, 2009 Think of welfare as a form of insurance.You may need it, you may not. But everyone pays the premiums, and they payout to those who need it. Opting out, is sort of like being able to buy fire insurance after your house burns down, but not contributing otherwise. I'n not following your analogy. If for example you don't pay for welfare (say by getting a reduction on your taxes) and thereby are ineligible for welfare should you need it, how is that like "being able to buy fire insurance after your house burns down, but not contributing otherwise"? As for what the purpose of welfare should be, that is debatable.At a minimum, it should provide the necessities of life to those who can not provide for themselves. I think almost all non-Albertan Canadians would agree with that. Where the disagreement occurs, is: Should we provide the necessities of life to those who can provide for themselves? How do you distinguish between those who "can not" provide for themselves from those who "will not" provide for themselves? Should we provide more than just the necessities? Should we provide enough to lead a dignified life etc? What justification is there to do so? Even if it was justified, who defines what a "dignified life" is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyStone Posted January 12, 2009 Report Share Posted January 12, 2009 I believe that welfare should not be available to those who can provide for themselves. I think this is quite obvious. The point of welfare is to provide for a person in the opposite situation. Welfare should definitely be utilitarian, any extravagances can be obtained through the free market. Well, alright, there are the people who can obviously not provide for themselves - such as the handicapped. Then there are other groups: An 80 year old woman - do we make her get a job at Mcdonalds? Do we say that she should have saved her money? I realize we have Old Age pensions, but I am looking at this in a broader context. What about those with poor skills, looking for a job but unable to find one? Do we just dismiss them and tell them that they should try harder because there are jobs out there? What about those with various mental illnesses that are hard to diagnose? Depression, chronic-fatigue, anxiety? Do we just assume that all those healthy people without jobs, just don't want to work? If welfare provided more than the necessity, why would people then work? Why would they endure hardship if they could live "dignifiably" on their fellow taxpayer's tab? Well, it's like this. Currently, I think welfare in Ontario pays around $550. With that amount of money, you live in a dive, with a roommate, eat Ichiban noodles 3 times a week, and have no entertainment budget. You'll never buy a car, go on vacation, or in the case of men, never really be able to take a lady out on a date. Is that really something that appeals to many of us? Would we trade in our $4000/month incomes for that, so that we can avoid working? Obviously, if welfare is so high, that it is similar to the wages someone can produce, we have created a disincentive to work. However, I see nothing wrong in raising welfare rates to a level, where people can have a place to live, decent food, and some quality of life. Look even a minimum wage job pays $1400/month - of which about $1300 is take home pay. Even if we raised welfare to $650, it's still double the amount they would get on welfare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.