I cannot believe that I am going to say this.  The New York times has a must read article.  Believe it or not this piece in the New York times widely quotes the work of a Libertarian economist from the Cato Institute.

Basically the premise of the article is that almost all of Europe and the United States are completely screwed because they have unfunded pension obligations that are monstrous.  

There may be hope yet.  Even the ultra liberal New York Times realizes that the unfunded pension obligations in this country are unsustainable.

Mike

Facing potential bankruptcy, the board that governs the once flush-with-cash Kansas City school district is taking the unusual and contentious step of shuttering almost half its schools.

Administrators say the closures are necessary to keep the district from plowing through what little is left of the $2 billion it received as part of a groundbreaking desegregation case.

The Kansas City school board narrowly approved the plan to close 29 out of 61 schools Wednesday night at a meeting packed with angry parents. The schools will close before the fall.

The article briefly mentions the $2 billion worth of funding for desegregation but what it fails to mention is what a dismal failure that was. Taxpayers were forced to pony up unprecedented amounts of money and years later they had absolutely nothing to show for it - dismal test scores remained and the acheivement gap between white and black students remained.

This is the same sort thinking that the FWCS administration uses to justify its racial balance fund and the failed building plan. None of it works but it won’t stop them from pretending that schools (and more specifically teachers) should be able to solve all of society’s problems and inequities. Here’s the executive summary from a report on the failed Kansas City desegregation experiment:

For decades critics of the public schools have been saying, “You can’t solve educational problems by throwing money at them.” The education establishment and its supporters have replied, “No one’s ever tried.” In Kansas City they did try. To improve the education of black students and encourage desegregation, a federal judge invited the Kansas City, Missouri, School District to come up with a cost-is-no-object educational plan and ordered local and state taxpayers to find the money to pay for it.

Kansas City spent as much as $11,700 per pupil–more money per pupil, on a cost of living adjusted basis, than any other of the 280 largest districts in the country. The money bought higher teachers’ salaries, 15 new schools, and such amenities as an Olympic-sized swimming pool with an underwater viewing room, television and animation studios, a robotics lab, a 25-acre wildlife sanctuary, a zoo, a model United Nations with simultaneous translation capability, and field trips to Mexico and Senegal. The student-teacher ratio was 12 or 13 to 1, the lowest of any major school district in the country.

The results were dismal. Test scores did not rise; the black-white gap did not diminish; and there was less, not greater, integration.

The Kansas City experiment suggests that, indeed, educational problems can’t be solved by throwing money at them, that the structural problems of our current educational system are far more important than a lack of material resources, and that the focus on desegregation diverted attention from the real problem, low achievement.

H/T: Mish

Just think about what the program promises - unlimited medical care at essentially no cost from retirement age until you die. Oh and now we’ll go ahead and throw in prescription drugs as well. It’s asinine. At least social security has a defined benefit and thus you can actually budget for future expenses. Does anyone pretend to know what medical costs and/or life expectancy will be 50 years from now? Of course not. This doesn’t mean that Medicare isn’t a noble cause but if you want to “fix” it then people are going to have pay more - A LOT MORE.

I would bet anything that 99% of the people on Medicare today will have paid in less than they will use. How in the world can anyone think that is sustainable? It’s a pyramid scheme that requires ever larger numbers of people to pay for those using the services. But those contributions aren’t tied to costs so bankruptcy is the only outcome…

Last year I predicted on this blog that a major reform policy would NOT pass by 12/31/09. 

Kevin Knuth and Jeff Pruitt both disagreed with me.  Both felt that major health care reform legislation would be law by 12/31/09.

Well, I am going to have to say “I told you so.”

I did not think the Demcorats would be able to pass this legisialtion even with their large majorities for a wide variety of reasons.

Kevin and Jeff why do you think the Democrats failed to implement their signature legislation last year?

Mike

Dear Resident:

About one week from now  you will receive a 2010 Census form in the mail.  When yuo receive your form, please fill it out and mail it in promptly.

Your response is important .  Results from the 2010 Census will be used to help each community get its fair share of government funds for highways, schools, health facilities, and many other programs you and your neighbors need.  Without a complete, accurate census, your community may ot receive its fair share.

What a waste of taxpayer dollars.  Why do they need to send me a “warning letter” telling me that I will get a form to fill out next week?

Mike

I have decided to compare my wife and her earnings to that of the average local teacher.  I think this comparison will surprise many of you!

First off the average teacher has a Masters Degree; they likely have about 144 credit hours of college education.  My wife has a Bachelors Degree in International Business and she has a Post Bachelors Certificate in Accounting.  My wife has 149 credit hours.  I would argue that my wife has a similar educational background as the average local teacher.  If the average teacher in fact does have a Masters Degree it could be argued that they have slightly more education than my wife.

Secondly my wife has worked in accounting for the last eighteen years.  The average seniority of teachers vary depending on the school district; however, I would argue that my wife’s experience is similar to that of the average teacher.

Third my wife is a Certified Public Accountant.  She had to pass a two day written exam after college and she has to get 40 hours of Continuing Professional Education each year.  Teachers also have to get Continuing Education each year.  Realistically I think it is a little harder to become a CPA than it is to become a teacher; however, I think the two professions are once again similar enough for a direct comparison.  I think this likely offsets #2 above.

Fourth is a comparison of hours worked.  My wife worked 1641 hours last year.  I would estimate that the average teacher works about 1657.5 hours per year.  I think my estimate for the average teacher may be a little high; however, here it is:  I assume the average teacher teaches 180 days a year, I assume they work an average of 8.5 hours a day on the days they teach, and I assume they work an additional 127.5 hours (15 days) for their continuing education, days they work in school with no students present, etc.  Once again my wife and the average teacher likely work a very comparable number of hours per year.

Fifth is a comparison of the rarity of the professions as this often effects pay.  I think accountants and teachers are both common professions and therefore their compensation should be comparable.

Sixth is a comparison of their responsibility levels.  CPA’s work with numbers, confidential client information, tax returns, etc.  My wife handles the accounting for a large number of local businesses and handles the tax needs of a lot of local businesses and families.  Teachers work with children they are responsible for and have to deal with Administrators as well as parents.  I feel the responsibility levels are comparable.  This is a hard factor to compare to be honest with you; however, I feel the two professions are comparable.

So far I would argue that my wife is very comparable to a teacher and they should be compensated about the same.  The last item is where the difference lies for me.

The average teacher works for a school system and has a guaranteed job (At least until the economy tanked); unless they really made a major mistake.  This provides the average teacher with more job security than the average CPA (and certainly more job security than a person who operates a small business).  My wife started her own business out of our house in July of 2001 after our daughter was born.  She has grown a business from nothing and our business currently employs three CPA’s (My wife, myself, and Brent) full time and we employ two very qualified people part time during “tax season.”  My wife undertook a great deal of risk and she is a small business owner.  In my mind this would tend to indicate that my wife should make at least a little more than the average local teacher due to the risk she has undertaken.

Drumroll please…

The average teacher at FWCS made about $75,000 in 2009 according to FWCS once benefits are counted.  They made about $51,000 in salary and about $24,000 in benefits.

My wife made $52,000 last year in total compensation.  So my wife received about 2/3 of the compensation of the average FWCS teacher in 2009.  

I hope that you find this comparison helpful.  I have always felt that CPA’s and Teachers should be comparable as far as compensation if they work the same number of hours per year. 

What do you think of my comparison?

Mike Sylvester

His column, which read as a plea from your administration to raise taxes, isn’t going to help. The people of Huntington are tapped out and they simply can’t afford to let you and your cronies tax them to oblivion to support more government jobs. So let me offer a few suggestions in place of your whining:

“But if you don’t have enough money to plow the streets, to pick up the garbage, if you don’t have enough firefighters to put out fires … where does it end?”

It ends where the taxpayers want it to end. And obviously they don’t want, or can’t afford, to pay anymore. Why does the city need to provide trash services in the first place? The entire city’s trash service should be privatized. This was the case in the city I grew up in with a population of over 400,000 and it worked just fine there. There’s obviously a market for trash service and a private company (or two) will fill the need. It will also likely do it more efficiently and the cost will be born by the users directly.

As for firefighters, more and more cities around the country are moving back to volunteer firehouses. Has Huntington considered this? If not, why not? According to the article, 15% of property tax payments are delinquent. Why not get some of these people to pay their debts by plowing the streets, hauling garbage or volunteering at a firehouse?

You might be surprised at how much people are willing to chip in when they can see the results and it doesn’t go to an ever-increasing black-hole of government spending…

Good grief.

That is absolutely out of control. Cutting that budget by merely 25% would save $5 million per year. That’s $5 million that could be transfered into the general fund (assuming the state legislature approves such transfers come next week) to eliminate teacher layoffs and reduce classroom sizes.

This district simply can’t afford to pick up every kid that lives just a few blocks away from school. Indiana guarantees every child the right to a free education but that should not include a chauffeur service to and from school paid for at taxpayer expense. The vast majority of the district’s transportation budget should be born by the riders. If you want your kid to take the bus then you have to pony up something to help pay for it.

We need to drastically reduce the bus program at FWCS, privatize it if necessary, and put the savings into areas that will improve academic achievement.

The entire community is struggling right now and your membership is certainly no different. Unfortunately your struggles are being compounded by the lack of leadership from the FWCS administration and poor oversight from the board. Bad financial and academic decisions from years past are coming back to haunt the district, but what you are starting to see is that the administration has no real plan to turn things around. They flailed away blaming teachers in hopes of scraping out some of the “Race to the Top” funds but that pipe dream is now squashed.

The administration’s inability to turn around this struggling district has bred a level of mistrust and apathy into the heart of taxpaying residents. Now they are attempting to drag you down with them and somebody is going down for the lack of academic progress so who do you think they want that to be? Think they will point the finger at themselves? Have you seen any such thing lately? Of course you brought much of this on yourself through your blind support of the administration and their hand-picked members on the school board.

The financial crisis this district faces is not a some sort of classic corporate union squeeze where concessions are being asked for in order to support bonuses and other forms of looting for upper management. Nor are these concessions being asked for in order to appease Wall Street in the hopes for a 50 cent increase in the stock price. No, what we are all facing in this community is a new baseline of economic conditions.

Unemployment is going to stay elevated for years and property tax and other state revenue will continue to decline or stay neutral as well. What that means is that this isn’t just some temporary crisis that you can ignore in hopes that it will fix itself; this is a major problem that requires bold decisions from all public servants including yourself.

This district cannot afford further teacher reductions. Student achievement is already suffering and what we need is a reduction in classroom size, more parental involvement, an increased focus on discipline and an end to social promotion. None of that will be accomplished without the support of the FWEA and its membership.

Currently the $6 million teacher allocations layoffs being discussed are only 40% of the required $15 million cuts. Considering that teacher salary and benefits make up 60% of the budget that’s not so bad. But not one teacher need lose their job. Increasing the portion of insurance payed by employees from 10% to 20% would cut $3.2 million and yet you would still retain benefits that are significantly better than most other workers in the private sector.

An additional 2 year pay freeze coupled with changes in after-school stipends and other bonus compensation would likely make up the rest of the $6 million cut. Ideas as simple as setting up a two-tiered pay/benefits scale that only affects new hires could also help mitigate the problem. Something has to give to end the death-spiral of this district. The more academic achievement suffers, the more people will move out to the suburbs or send their kids to private school. As that happens, property values steadily decline which means less revenue and larger future cuts.

Cuts at this point in time are inevitable. The only question is are you willing to make them strategically to help end the district’s death spiral and prevent student achievement from taking yet another hit? It’s time for FWEA to set aside the idea of teacher layoffs and re-evaluate its contract to find the most student-friendly solutions.

Public servants have to make tough choices but they don’t always make wise ones. What will you do?

Our Federal Government is spending an unsustainable amount of money each and every year.  This is evidenced by the fact that the Congressional Budget Office is currently projecting the the Federal Government will spend 9.7 trillion dollars more than it brings in over the next ten years.  In other words the National Debt will increase by 9.7 trillion dollars over the next decade!

Clearly this is unsustainable and members of both political parties have been clamoring about fiscal responsibility for as long as I can remember.  That being said; when each Party is in the majority they rapidly forget their campaign promises and start spending money to ensure their re-election.  

The USA Today article referenced above is an excellent article and highlights the problem.

USA today analyzed a wide array of Federal jobs and those jobs with an equivalent in the private sector were analyzed.

When the comparable jobs are analyzed Federal workers make 12.7% more than their private sector counterparts.  Worse yet is when benefits are analyzed.  

Over the entire private sector the average benefits paid per worker in 2008 was $9882.  The average Federal worker’s benefits were $40,785.  In 2008 the average Federal worker’s benefits were worth 4.13 times the average private sector worker’s benefits. 

This unfairness needs to be addressed and it needs to be addressed in a hurry.  That being said; it will not be addressed because the Democrats are beholden to the Federal workers unions.

The statisticyou must take from this analysis is that in 2008 the average Federal worker’s compensation and benefits cost the taxpayers of this country almost $110,000 each.  This does not include bonuses, per diem, etc. 

This is clearly unsustainable.

Unfortunately the public sector unions have control of the National Democratic Party andthey will fight against the needed reforms.

I think Federal workers should make the same amount of compensation in total salary and benefits as those people in the private sector.  

Mike Sylvester