• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

no, it absolutely doesnt make me a hypocrite. collectively bargaining the terms and conditions of employment is not incompatible with the market. in times when conditions favour labour, we'll do well. in times when conditions are against labour, we won't do well. clearly, we are in conditions that aren't good for labour, so every single teacher would tell you we aren't getting raises or going to make advances in our compensation package. we know that, and that bitch broten's statements over the past few weeks shouldnt fool you into thinking we don't know that. but what they are doing is much, much more.

-they are moving to basically eliminate the future right to bargain contracts. the province would take control and be able to impose conditions as it sees fit.

-they are flat out LYING about how this entire process has happened. they are saying we (ETFO) petulantly walked out of negotiations. it is a flat out LIE. i can tell you because i know people who were in the room. i could tell you how it went down. they weren't negotiations. it was a 1-hour presentation of what the gov't was going to do, it was a canned video call from the premier, and then it was sign on to this by this date and there will be no discussion. those weren't "negotiations", so ETFO decided to do what has been done for decades, to do what is called for under the law, which is bargain directly with our employers, the school boards. at NO TIME were we planning to not be in school by the first of the school year. legally, that would have been impossible, and the minister knew that.

-starting salaries for teachers are pretty low. in many cases, mid-40s. we have an almost uniquely long salary grid, it takes 11 years to reach top salary. that was bargained over many years in exchange for other things in our compensation package- including things like a retirement gratuity. many professions have 2-5 year grids. we have more than twice that, and the gov't might even be moving to get us to a 15-year grid. our salaries are depressed for a fairly long time, which more than pays for a retirement gratuity. and if you want to talk about gratuities- take a look at what MPPs get as retirement gratuities after as little as 4 years in the legislature, and its not even linked to sick day usage.

-teachers don't use 20 sick days a year unless they have been injured or have a critical illness. the usage rate is less than 9 days a year in a profession where it is very, very, very easy to get sick. eliminating the sick bank will NOT actually "save" the province the $1.4bil they are claiming, because the bank only exists on paper. those "savings" would only occur if every teacher in the province used up their entire 20 days in the same year, which aint gonna happen. the sick plan they are suggesting will actually likely COST them money over the long haul, because without being able to bank days, usage will probably go right up to the max., especially when teachers see this gov't is trying to bend them over and f*ck them up the ass.

-teachers are reasonable. we know we are in for a period of retrenchment. we aren't looking for exhorbitant raises. our unit (ETFO) actually took 2% less last time than everyone in the province. what they are going after is much worse. they are looking to CUT our pay, to dramatically cut benefits and pensions that have been bargained over decades, and strip away forever our right to sit down and bargain in he future. and that weasel mcguinty is trying to ram this all through while LYING to parents that this is all about stopping the big bad teachers from not showing up for work at the beginning of sept.
 
no, it absolutely doesnt make me a hypocrite. collectively bargaining the terms and conditions of employment is not incompatible with the market. in times when conditions favour labour, we'll do well. in times when conditions are against labour, we won't do well. clearly, we are in conditions that aren't good for labour, so every single teacher would tell you we aren't getting raises or going to make advances in our compensation package. we know that, and that bitch broten's statements over the past few weeks shouldnt fool you into thinking we don't know that. but what they are doing is much, much more.

-they are moving to basically eliminate the future right to bargain contracts. the province would take control and be able to impose conditions as it sees fit.

-they are flat out LYING about how this entire process has happened. they are saying we (ETFO) petulantly walked out of negotiations. it is a flat out LIE. i can tell you because i know people who were in the room. i could tell you how it went down. they weren't negotiations. it was a 1-hour presentation of what the gov't was going to do, it was a canned video call from the premier, and then it was sign on to this by this date and there will be no discussion. those weren't "negotiations", so ETFO decided to do what has been done for decades, to do what is called for under the law, which is bargain directly with our employers, the school boards. at NO TIME were we planning to not be in school by the first of the school year. legally, that would have been impossible, and the minister knew that.

-starting salaries for teachers are pretty low. in many cases, mid-40s. we have an almost uniquely long salary grid, it takes 11 years to reach top salary. that was bargained over many years in exchange for other things in our compensation package- including things like a retirement gratuity. many professions have 2-5 year grids. we have more than twice that, and the gov't might even be moving to get us to a 15-year grid. our salaries are depressed for a fairly long time, which more than pays for a retirement gratuity. and if you want to talk about gratuities- take a look at what MPPs get as retirement gratuities after as little as 4 years in the legislature, and its not even linked to sick day usage.

-teachers don't use 20 sick days a year unless they have been injured or have a critical illness. the usage rate is less than 9 days a year in a profession where it is very, very, very easy to get sick. eliminating the sick bank will NOT actually "save" the province the $1.4bil they are claiming, because the bank only exists on paper. those "savings" would only occur if every teacher in the province used up their entire 20 days in the same year, which aint gonna happen. the sick plan they are suggesting will actually likely COST them money over the long haul, because without being able to bank days, usage will probably go right up to the max., especially when teachers see this gov't is trying to bend them over and f*ck them up the ass.

-teachers are reasonable. we know we are in for a period of retrenchment. we aren't looking for exhorbitant raises. our unit (ETFO) actually took 2% less last time than everyone in the province. what they are going after is much worse. they are looking to CUT our pay, to dramatically cut benefits and pensions that have been bargained over decades, and strip away forever our right to sit down and bargain in he future. and that weasel mcguinty is trying to ram this all through while LYING to parents that this is all about stopping the big bad teachers from not showing up for work at the beginning of sept.

I have heard these same things down here in Kitchener, KB. Some shady stuff this Mcguinty is up to and I can't believe how easy it is for them to get away with it. Pretty incredible.
 
completely. news flash- politicians tend to exaggerate when they present their fiscal plans. creating a massive new bureaucracy to take over 1/6th of the US economy will NOT end up in the gov't spending less money.

exaggerate?

the whole issue stems from the fact that he really hasn't said much of anything, other than we will cut taxes without increasing the deficit.

ostrich-head-in-sand.jpg


as for the 'massive new bureaucracy', tell me how (then) health care costs are lower in canada, and every toher country that has massive government bureaucracy in health care, than they currently are in the united states?

you fundamentally misunderstand the patient protection and affordable care act.
 
Last edited:
i'm not a healthcare expert, but i suspect that costs are pushed upwards by:

-a litigious environment that forces doctors to overprescribe/overtreat/overtest to defend themselves from future charges of malpractice
-very expensive costs to insure doctors against malpractice lawsuits, costs that are passed on to the "consumer"
-a very very high level of care given to people with top shelf healthcare

if i had a serious disease, there is no other place in the world i would rather be than in the US with a very good healthcare package. how many of the world's drugs, medical machines, lifesaving techniques, new technologies are developed in the US? i would say a very high proportion. why? because there is a profit motive in developing these things. that costs money. doctors and institutions who develop those things expect to be paid for them. get rid of that whole mechanism and i wonder what the worldwide cost to health innovation will be.
 
I have heard these same things down here in Kitchener, KB. Some shady stuff this Mcguinty is up to and I can't believe how easy it is for them to get away with it. Pretty incredible.

K/W is ground zero. massive teacher resources are going to be spent there to ensure that mcweasel doesnt get his majority gov't. i suspect a lot of this is his posturing before that election to drum up support for his candidate there. if he loses, i think his position weakens a lot and the pressure on us will slacken somewhat. there are a lot of factors at play here, and the public isnt aware of many of them.
 
and just as you can google 'problems with runaway health care costs in the united states' you can also google 'how health care reform plans on tackling problems with runaway health care costs in the united states'.

regulation can be used to curb costs, which is a central plank of the reform bill.

every major study conducted to date demonstrates that the reform will in the long run, at the very least, be revenue neutral and almost certainly cut certain costs.
 
and spinning the shortcomings in romney's tax plan into some idiotic rant on health care reform is just an easy way out from having to defend the fact that romney is running as the responsible fiscal candidate, but is yet to set forth an actual plan for the tax reform which he says he wants to achieve.

like i alluded to before -- head in the sand.
 
ah yes. "regulation" always fixes things. just ask the EU. people on the left always believe that taxes, gov't, and "regulation" will always fix things. its lunacy.

and i didnt need gurgle to argue what i argued.
 
but i suspect that costs are pushed upwards by:

Stop suspecting, start researching.

You're partially right, but only partially. A much larger reason for the disparity is administrative costs associated with their system. There are entire admin floors in every US hospital that are dedicated to dealing with insurance companies. A monstrous level of administration that simply doesn't exist in a single payer environment.
 
petulant argument?

what was petulant about that?

did you just pull those argumnets out of thin air?

no, you got them from articles you have read about health care.

and nice backtracking when ME called you out.
 
if i had a serious disease, there is no other place in the world i would rather be than in the US with a very good healthcare package. how many of the world's drugs, medical machines, lifesaving techniques, new technologies are developed in the US? i would say a very high proportion. why? because there is a profit motive in developing these things. that costs money. doctors and institutions who develop those things expect to be paid for them. get rid of that whole mechanism and i wonder what the worldwide cost to health innovation will be.

Government lead initiatives in other scientific fields have managed just fine...unless you're suggesting that we would have reached the moon in the 50's if NASA had just gotten out of the ****ing way.

To put a different spin on your..well...spin. What motive is their for a profit earning company to research a wildly expensive drug/treatment for a disease that could quickly, and econonomically eradicate said disease? On the flip side, the long term cost savings for a single payer, government driven health care system is absolutley apparent under the same scenario.
 
what do you think a lot of that "administration" is directed towards? covering their asses against lawsuits.


You're an idiot.

The administration is required because getting paid is a monumental task when dealing with insurance companies. Ever made an insurance claim ****o? Now try making 10,000 of them a day....and ask yourself why hospitals require a ****ton of admin staff to deal with it all.
 
Back
Top