RTE frontline show: Teachers good ,bad ,indifferent?

Status
Not open for further replies.

No, it reduces the net cost of services but it doesn't increase net revenue.
 
Purple said:
No, it reduces the net cost of services but it doesn't increase net revenue.
Click to expand...

Careful Purple - you're getting into the dangerous position of discussing economics with a socialist which is always a complete waste of time
 

I would argue the opposite....increasing the tax in the private sector to pay the wages in the public sector will obviously depress the economy. The result of this is that people will emigrate leaving less taxpayers in the private sector to meet the same tax amount to fund the public sector.
 
DB74 said:
Actually it is

Just because the govt expenses have increased doesn't mean that their revenue hasn't
Click to expand...
Revenue has not increased! Here is my example of a family again. Let's say I had monthly revenue of €1000 and then I child is added to the family. I give the child €100 in pocket money, but request that the child contributes to the costs of running the household, which includes paying the child's pocket money. So, I tax the child 10%. This has not resulted in my revenue increasing to €1010. To say so is simply nonsense.


Let's say the government employees are recruited from the islanders. Then that would mean that the private enterprises either have to find a way to produce the same with less people, or they have to recruit outsiders which would not have been needed were it not for the government. What the government does through taxation is make the private economy less efficient. The private economy then has to find a way to counteract this. If the private economy simply said they would not recruit more people then government revenue would be unchanged. So it is not the government employee that is the source of extra revenue. Any increase in productivity causing an increase in revenue would still come from the private economy and not the government employees.
 
What about all the tax the teachers pay on the money they receive for grinds, running summer camps etc ??

Ooops Delete Deete Delete !!!
 
Yorrick said:
What about all the tax the teachers pay on the money they receive for grinds, running summer camps etc ??

Ooops Delete Deete Delete !!!
Click to expand...

And all the excise duty they spend on petrol driving to Newry...

Ooops Delete Deete Delete !!!
 

Actually Chris, your revenue, from an accounting point of view (the term which you yourself used in your first post on this thread), HAS increased to €1,010. To claim otherwise is nonsense.

There is no arguing that your net profit or net income or whatever you want to call it has decreased from €1,000 to €910 but your actual revenue, in accounting terms, has increased to €1,010
 
Shame that none of the political parties have the gumption to tackle the teachers unions as Thatcher did with the NUT. There is no way she'd have Joe O'Toole laughing in the face of the taxpayer snidely comparing benchmarking to a free ATM machine.

I fully agree that effective teachers should be paid well, but there are so many poor teachers out there protected by their unions and a raft of labour laws at the expense of students and their parents.

Ireland's continued slide in the education league tables, while teachers' terms and conditions go the opposite way, is a shameful track record
 
And it's a shame that you didn't address the ridiculous claim you made about your school children getting "completely unannounced" half days, when I replied to it. (Post No. 19 on this thread).

I had hoped you'd have the gumption to reply to that.

It appears that the lack of gumption you speak about isn't just confined to political parties.
 
+ 1

A few further facts wouldn't go astray either , the last pay increase teachers received was in 2008.

Since then then their pay has been unilaterally reduced twice .
 
I have three children in school. It has happened many times that a note has been put in their bags about a half day two days before the event.
 
Purple said:
I have three children in school. It has happened many times that a note has been put in their bags about a half day two days before the event.
Click to expand...

Two days notice seems very short to me but I'm sure you'd agree that it wouldn't come under the heading of "completely unannounced."

Part of my point was that unannounced half days could surely have legal consequences for any school and I find it hard to believe that any school would be silly enough to engage in that practice.
 
I agree but it is very short notice to give.

I have no problem with the length of the school day; it should be set to suit the needs of the children and expecting then to learn for 8 hours a day is daft.
I do have a problem with the length of the school year; as things have been added on to the curriculum over the last decade or so the school year should have increased to accommodate them rather than eating away at the time available to teach English and maths.

The secondary school year is far too short. After three months off in the summer kids have forgotten a good chunk of what they were taught the previous year and they have to learn to learn again after three months of doing nothing.
 
Could posters use the report post facility if they think that the PG's are being breached and refrain from making comments on the face of thread? Such posts are off topic and will be deleted as such.

aj
moderator
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register