What was the orginial intent of the poster with this threads starting post?
You started it out with "I just gotta say this" type of language as if you needed to vent about something. I would say that you may have posted facts and figures in an attempt to justify your stance, but in doing so ignored other relevant information that might put a different perspective the issue because you wanted to defend your view. Simply put you were looking for an argument (Whether that means discourse or a verbal scrap I don't know) and you got one. Deal with it.
I, personally would like to see how you respond to some the other 'facts and figures' that people have put forth. Hitting and running is just as much a reflection on the poster as personal attacks...or is that a bigotted attack on an entire professional strata?
I, personally don't give a hang about your facts and figures because they are like kicks and punches - tools to put up a good attack. Only this is a verbal attack/argument and not a physical one. What I do care about is what is your motive/message/theme that you are putting forth and using facts to support? Other people seem to have a different perspective - supported with facts/figures and, I would say a different theme/message/motive.
Your response to these other perspectives would be a nice thing to see:
Run, resist or acknowledge and counterpoint..... all reveal something.
You started it out with "I just gotta say this" type of language as if you needed to vent about something. I would say that you may have posted facts and figures in an attempt to justify your stance, but in doing so ignored other relevant information that might put a different perspective the issue because you wanted to defend your view. Simply put you were looking for an argument (Whether that means discourse or a verbal scrap I don't know) and you got one. Deal with it.
I, personally would like to see how you respond to some the other 'facts and figures' that people have put forth. Hitting and running is just as much a reflection on the poster as personal attacks...or is that a bigotted attack on an entire professional strata?
I, personally don't give a hang about your facts and figures because they are like kicks and punches - tools to put up a good attack. Only this is a verbal attack/argument and not a physical one. What I do care about is what is your motive/message/theme that you are putting forth and using facts to support? Other people seem to have a different perspective - supported with facts/figures and, I would say a different theme/message/motive.
Your response to these other perspectives would be a nice thing to see:
Run, resist or acknowledge and counterpoint..... all reveal something.
Phoenix44 said:OK, let me repeat what I said. Teachers earn a base salary of $47K for working 5.5 hours per day 180 days per year in their workplace. If they earned the same hourly rate, but worked 7 hours/day, 5 days/week, for 48 weeks, as most full time workers do, that would be equivalent to a base salary of >$80K--a very nice full time salary--plus benefits. Most workers earn more money when they work more hours.
By the way, this is my last post to this thread. I quoted facts and figures, and gave my opinion about those facts and figures, which some of you disagree with, as you have every right to--that's what makes for lively discussion. However, I never made personal cracks directed at individuals, as some of you think is appropriate to direct at me. I don't appreciate it, especially since you people don't even know me. It lowers the level of discourse; makes the originator of the personal comments look small and foolish; and based on the moderators' comments, it is not the intent of this board.