In 2022, 31-year-old Maggie Perkins quit her eight-year teaching job and got a job at Costco. She doesn’t regret the decision, and she’s never been happier. Here’s a look at a day in the life working at Costco.
She got a job working in a corporate office for a big company. This is pretty typical of not-retail-worker-salary beating out public sector nine times out of ten.
Why would someone ever be a teacher for <50k? Anybody with an education background can move to Seattle, Washington (or other state close to big city pay) and be a corporate trainer and move up to a director level role and get paid many times what they would ever be paid as a teacher…
…except so many want to stay near family, not be near a big city, can’t move because of xyz, want a couple months off each year… etc etc etc.
To quote somebody: Schools should be palaces. The competition for the best teachers should be fierce. They should be making six-figure salaries. Schools should be incredibly expensive for government and absolutely free of charge to its citizens, just like national defense.
Just isn’t that way today and there is a big political and economic mess in the way of getting there.
Uneducated people overthrow governments. Educated people involve themselves so they make a better, longer lasting, more stable and effective government in the long run.
There’s this consistent delusion that if we just burn everything down and start anew that this time it will all work out for the best.
It hasn’t worked for the past two millenia, it’s not going to magically work now. All it does is give rise to new fascist states.
The mess is allowing decades of union-busting to be effective. Teachers in my state of Victoria (Australia) are heavily unionised, so US$50k is the starting salary. You would absolutely be making what she is now, $64k, if you’d worked for 8yrs like she had.
Edit: And that’s just for public teaching jobs. Australia has way more private schools than the US and those pay even more. With 8yrs of experience it would be easy to get one of those positions and be making $70k.
Those salaries still sound far too low for a teacher, especially since, as I understand it, your dollar doesn’t buy you guys as much as our (US) dollar, or is that just in electronics and video games?
Either way, the vice principal in The Breakfast Club cites that he’s making $35,000 a year in 1985. I’ll assume that’s the higher end of the scale since he’s admin, and has been teaching for years at that point. The thing is that adjusted for inflation that $35,000 is closer to $87,000 today. It’s not just teachers either. No essential worker has had a raise since the early 1970s, in fact we’ve had pay cuts when you look at inflation, and expected productivity.
Edit: just noticed you specified US dollars, sorry.
The +30 or +60 refer to credit hours of additional college coursework
Each row showed the number of years of experience.
In 1998, the upper-left (fresh out of college, no experience) salary was around $38,500 or something.
The bottom right (masters+60 or doctorate, and 30 or 35 years of experience [I forget]) was $151,000. And they got a great pension (fatter than what teachers in IL starting now will get).
You also got a small multiplier for each extra curricular you ran.
We had mostly excellent teachers as a result. Couple of duds too, but that’s life. 70+% of graduating seniors went to college of some kind within two years. I believe I went to a good school.
But this is what happens when you fund schools through property taxes: the good neighborhoods get good schools, and it propels a virtuous cycle. The bad neighborhoods get bad schools, and they just spiral downward. It’s a dumb way to fund education.
I see it as part of the contract between the government and the people. All citizens are asked to help plant trees they won’t get to enjoy the shade of.
So, expensive for me who is already completely priced out of ever responsibly having children. We all have a responsibility to the future generations so I’d still vote for it. But oof. It is a tough sell to place even more tax burden on people who will never realize the benefits.
It’s not a sell for the people who will have children. It’s a sell for the children who will grow up under that education and have their job prospects determined by it. Hey - weren’t you once a child?
It is a tough sell to place even more tax burden on people who will never realize the benefits.
But you will. We all benefit from a well-educated society. A poorly educated workforce isn’t competitive with one that is well-educated, and they attract employers with jobs that can take advantage of them. They provide the work for good-paying jobs and drive the economy we’re growing old in and hopefully retiring from someday.
Public education benefits everyone, not just the children.
She got a job working in a corporate office for a big company. This is pretty typical of not-retail-worker-salary beating out public sector nine times out of ten.
Why would someone ever be a teacher for <50k? Anybody with an education background can move to Seattle, Washington (or other state close to big city pay) and be a corporate trainer and move up to a director level role and get paid many times what they would ever be paid as a teacher…
…except so many want to stay near family, not be near a big city, can’t move because of xyz, want a couple months off each year… etc etc etc.
To quote somebody: Schools should be palaces. The competition for the best teachers should be fierce. They should be making six-figure salaries. Schools should be incredibly expensive for government and absolutely free of charge to its citizens, just like national defense.
Just isn’t that way today and there is a big political and economic mess in the way of getting there.
Educated young people overthrow governments. You do the math.
I would but there’s no teachers so I don’t know math
Mission accomplished
Uneducated people overthrow governments. Educated people involve themselves so they make a better, longer lasting, more stable and effective government in the long run.
There’s this consistent delusion that if we just burn everything down and start anew that this time it will all work out for the best.
It hasn’t worked for the past two millenia, it’s not going to magically work now. All it does is give rise to new fascist states.
They also want children to learn, which is the biggest thing that draws them to the job and gets them to accept shitty pay.
Teachers should get paid way more than they do.
The mess is allowing decades of union-busting to be effective. Teachers in my state of Victoria (Australia) are heavily unionised, so US$50k is the starting salary. You would absolutely be making what she is now, $64k, if you’d worked for 8yrs like she had.
Edit: And that’s just for public teaching jobs. Australia has way more private schools than the US and those pay even more. With 8yrs of experience it would be easy to get one of those positions and be making $70k.
Those salaries still sound far too low for a teacher, especially since, as I understand it, your dollar doesn’t buy you guys as much as our (US) dollar, or is that just in electronics and video games?
Either way, the vice principal in The Breakfast Club cites that he’s making $35,000 a year in 1985. I’ll assume that’s the higher end of the scale since he’s admin, and has been teaching for years at that point. The thing is that adjusted for inflation that $35,000 is closer to $87,000 today. It’s not just teachers either. No essential worker has had a raise since the early 1970s, in fact we’ve had pay cuts when you look at inflation, and expected productivity.
Edit: just noticed you specified US dollars, sorry.
25 years ago in my suburban Chicago public high school district, my stats teacher brought out the teacher pay schedule for us to play with.
There were six columns:
Bachelors, bachelors+30, bachelors+60 Masters, masters+30, masters+60
The +30 or +60 refer to credit hours of additional college coursework
Each row showed the number of years of experience.
In 1998, the upper-left (fresh out of college, no experience) salary was around $38,500 or something.
The bottom right (masters+60 or doctorate, and 30 or 35 years of experience [I forget]) was $151,000. And they got a great pension (fatter than what teachers in IL starting now will get).
You also got a small multiplier for each extra curricular you ran.
We had mostly excellent teachers as a result. Couple of duds too, but that’s life. 70+% of graduating seniors went to college of some kind within two years. I believe I went to a good school.
But this is what happens when you fund schools through property taxes: the good neighborhoods get good schools, and it propels a virtuous cycle. The bad neighborhoods get bad schools, and they just spiral downward. It’s a dumb way to fund education.
Teaching needs to be a cushy, highly competitive job with entry pay starting at 100k a year. It needs to attract the very best and brightest.
deleted by creator
I see it as part of the contract between the government and the people. All citizens are asked to help plant trees they won’t get to enjoy the shade of.
It’s not a sell for the people who will have children. It’s a sell for the children who will grow up under that education and have their job prospects determined by it. Hey - weren’t you once a child?
deleted by creator
But you will. We all benefit from a well-educated society. A poorly educated workforce isn’t competitive with one that is well-educated, and they attract employers with jobs that can take advantage of them. They provide the work for good-paying jobs and drive the economy we’re growing old in and hopefully retiring from someday.
Public education benefits everyone, not just the children.