1 in 2 Americans now classified as Poor

I remember there was someone who said that teachers shouldn't be paid more because higher wages would "attract the wrong people."

I'm sure there are plenty of good reasons to not pay higher teacher salaries, and that is not one of them.

I'm actually fairly sure that there aren't.

I'm with Best Of on that one. Teachers are far too important.

What about 'because the country is completely broke'?

I mean, seriously. Soooooooooooooo much debt. Even if the US sold off everything it owns it still wouldn't be left with the change I have in my pocket.

Because we have the money, it's just being spent badly. Do I need to go dig up that comparison chart of $/student?

You don't have the money, that's the problem. The US doesn't have any 'money' at all. All it has is a line of credit with China.

Most US debt is not owned by China, and comes from internal sources. And that's not how international debt works to begin with.

Not to mention teachers are generally paid via local/state revenues, not federal.

You dont understand the first thing about how national debt works, do you?

You know those government bonds you always see banks trying to sell you for like 50o bucks that mature over 10 years?

Thats what the national debt is made up of for the most part. Most of the national debt is owned by americans. China just has the next largest chunk after private US investors.

edited 13th Mar '12 10:25:00 AM by Midgetsnowman

China does not even have a plurality of the debt. they own 26%, which, granted, is more than the 6% they had at the start of the century, but still, not the majority by a long shot. Foreign ownership of the debt is about 32% of all debt.

They hold a plurality of the minority of the debt, someone sound the alarm!

Anyway, off-topic.

'Sides we're on a set payment plan with everyone. We wouldn't be allowed to give everyone their money now even if we had it.

Private investors get their money when the bonds mature, for example.

As of yet, we're not so terrible with finances that we can't make our payments. Saying that we shouldn't pay teachers more because of the national debt is like telling someone they shouldn't go out to eat because they have a mortgage.

Besides, most school money isn't federal. States are required to balance their budget, so if they wanted to pay teachers more, they'd have to raise their taxes. The federal national debt would be unaffected.

You could argue that it'd be more accurate to say that we have a mortgage for more than our house is worth, but that's demonstrably false-Ameica is still an economic powerhouse after all.

@Tomu: Well, a lot of Americans do have mortgages that are more than their house is worth.

And they shouldn't be eating out!

According to the aforementioned people saying we shouldn't hire teachers, anyway.

wait, people eat out on more than special occasions?

@Lance: yeah, they do...because cooking a meal takes time, and if you are poor and working class you are likely putting in long hours for little pay. So you go with the slightly more expensive fast food (or pre-packaged food like oven pizza) because after being on your feet for 10-12 hours doing something unpleasant, the last thing you want to do is stand over a stove for another 45 minutes or so.

Also, good fresh ingredients (the type one uses to create healthy meals) are getting more and more expensive.

Some people do, yeah. A lot of places also expect stuff like business lunches, where you don't get paid for it or anything, but you're expected to build relationships over lunch, for example. And sometimes it's just plain easier to grab some fast food.

edited 14th Mar '12 11:45:25 PM by DrunkGirlfriend

my family's sort of a bootstrap success story, but even when we were still dirt poor we ate almost all our meals at home. granted, it was things like Hamburger helper, or things that were fast/decently healthy and made ample left overs to be eaten the following 2-4 days.

I don't mean to pass any judgements, it just struck me as very odd because I'd never experienced that.

edited 14th Mar '12 11:59:45 PM by Lanceleoghauni

Yeah, that's what we do too.

I was using the "going out to eat" metaphor since plenty of middle class (and higher) citizens owe on a mortgage, and it's as silly to expect them to dedicate the entirety of their discretionary income to paying it off, as it is to expect the US to cut expenditures to needed programs.

Makes sense. Sorry to get hung up on that little bit.

it was just one of those things, I could never figure out why people with little discretionary income would EVER eat out aside from absolute necessity, or a sanity meal they don't have usually. but then I'm one of those weird people who's generally ok with a single meal a day.

Like said previously, it's a convenience and time thing.

Interesting quiz from PBS that determines whether or not you live in a bubble I got in the upper 60s, which I suppose fits because even though I'm from a working class family, my culture is very biased against consuming American media.

Anyway, how in touch do you guys think the upper-middle class is with the working and lower middle classes? Apparently not that much.

Interesting quiz. I got an 80, but I suspect that's because I grew up in a severely low-income neighborhood and have done factory jobs and the like.

As for the bubble effect, I'm fairly certain that the middle-class and higher don't get it, especially after the latest round of proposals to cut social programs.

I got 23...

But I do understand that these social programs help out so much, and that they keep a lot of families afloat, as evidenced by the fact that the enrollment has increased. And cutting them off won't help them, it'll just make things harder, because they sure as hell aren't poor because they're satisfied with food-stamps.

edited 15th Mar '12 2:41:14 PM by Enkufka