Father Orthoduck has been trying to avoid the Wisconsin controversy, but he cannot avoid it any longer. The governor of Wisconsin is following standard supply-side economics thinking. Now that it has not succeeded, just like it has not succeeded before, he has decided that the blame is on the teachers. But, what are the facts of the situation? The cartoons above have already given you an intimation.
1. Last year Wisconsin lowered the tax rate, under the supply-side economics mantra that you can incessantly lower your income but end up with more income because the lower taxes will spur both consumers and producers to spend, which will mean a strong increase in sales taxes and other similar taxes. Of course, it did not work. USA consumers are finally beginning to save at a higher rate than they have for many a year, out of fear of what is coming. As a result, the extra income was thankfully not spent, but was retained. Besides that, the unemployment and subemployment rate grew, which means that there was less money to be spent. More than that, producers are also not “investing” at the rate they used to because they have learned some lessons in the current economic debacle.
2. As a result, this year Wisconsin has a deficit. One would think that the governor would return taxes to the taxes of two years ago, but instead he has looked for a scapegoat. As a result of decades of Republican insistence that union people are bad and stifle the economy, they looked like a good target.
3. Unfortunately, Wisconsin teachers are neither willing to lay down and let themselves be rolled into poverty, nor are they the highest paid teachers in the nation. This has certainly discomfited the governor who continues to insist that a “rich” class of people is hurting the state. It is certainly too bad that his claims do not fit the facts. However, he is likely to get away with it, since most people do not do research, but rather are willing to believe that the easy road of blaming an entire class of people is the answer to all their economic problems.
So, what are the facts? Well, Father Orthoduck has gathered some figures, but not from political sites, but rather from neutral sites that list the actual wage of Wisconsin teachers. Here are the facts:
4. The starting salary for a Wisconsin teacher with a simple B.Ed. is $25,222 in the average school (there are some exceptions). This puts Wisconsin as 49th out of 50 states in what a raw beginning teacher, with no other compensating factors, makes to start out. Not exactly rich, is it?
5. The average salary of a Wisconsin teacher is $46,390. This puts Wisconsin as 20th out of 50 states in what the average teacher makes. Again, if you look at the figures and compare it to the salary of a plain nurse in Wisconsin, which is $42,000 this appears to be right in the range. Father Orthoduck would mention, however, that an ER nurse makes up to $85,000 in WI while an operating room nurse makes about $64,000. Father Orthoduck just knows that all of you would be willing to let a Master’s degree teacher make an equivalent salary. Is this the time to mention that a sofware engineer in WI makes about $100,000? The median WI architect salary is $66, 585.
As you can see, the average salary of a teacher is already lower than the average salary of a programmer or an architect, and roughly equivalent to that of a registered nurse, who only needs a two-year Associate’s degree to be an RN. Wait, you mean that an Associate’s degree nurse can earn about as much as a Bachelor’s degree teacher? Yes, that is absolutely true in WI. Is it any surprise that the teachers in WI blew up and began to do massive demonstrations at the state capital? Is it any wonder that the Democratic representatives fled the state to prevent such an injustice?
The solution is to return to sound fiscal policies and not to try to punish those who already are not at the top of the heap.
Salary for teachers is not the only relevant indicator. There are also administrators (who soak up a major part of the educational cost), and there are also fringe benefits.
The average total compensation for a Wisconsin teacher in 2010 was $75,587. (Source. Yes, it’s a biased source, but the raw data it drew from is here.)
Thank you so much for weighing in on this. Your choice of cartoon gets to the heart of the matter. The Koch brothers bought the Governor of Wisconsin, and now they’re collecting on their investment.
Why is it that if you raise tax rates on the wealthiest by a percentage point or two; or, heaven forfend, object to so many WI corporations paying zero in corporate income taxes, that’s “socialism”; but if you make working people take a 15% hit in their compensation, that’s “just asking them to do their fair share”?
This is not only about govt. vs. worker’s rights, which is bad enough. This is about democracy vs. plutocracy.
Thank you so much. As a teacher’s wife, the attacks we are hearing—-that we are “rich” and “undeserving”, “lazy” and “overpaid”……”Liars”……etc. Are so disheartening.
Meanwhile, our income drops each year because we do pay more of our health insurance and health care costs, and we work more to cover for those who were laid off. And do more with less, for kids that have less and need more.
And apparently it is our fault. And so we may loose our jobs too.
But we should be good consumers and spend more? Huh? There is no more, and no guarantee there will be any for us.
I am so thankful for teachers and other workers that are standing up and saying something.
I am so sad that many are mislead, and afraid that we are getting the government they think they want.
Trying to understand this whole mess, but I confess, the conflicting info is confusing. I hope you continue to post about this situation.
Why are you feeling sorry for the Public sector unions, they have it better than the private sector. Alot in the private sector don’t have pensions or retire after age 50 or 55 with 3/4 pay or more. This is why California is in such a mess.
That is partially true. But, I guess that it is wrong for members of our military to be able to retire after 30 years even if they are only 49 years old. They should be forced to work until they are 65. The same is true for anyone who works for the Pentagon. Oh, and the nurses and medical technologists and pharmacists, etc., who work for the VA Medical Centers should also not be allowed to retire after 30 years. You see, the problem is that you are not noticing the 3/4 pay. There are many private industries in which people can retire with less than full pay beginning at 55. By the way, the “or more” only would apply if one had 30 years or more in.
So, what you are saying is that it is wrong to allow people to take early retirement provided they agree to take less than the full amount? There is a tradeoff involved. People who retire early get less money, so it is not unfair.
C’mon. Unfair post. Mandatory union membership and collective bargaining are not mandatory Bible teacfhings last time I checked. I am a teacher. I was a union shop steward. And I am with the governor here. These teachers have very healthy salaries and retirements, and we have over-promised what we can deliver. Sorry if not everyone gets to retire at 60, or get a Disney vacation every year. Try teaching at a private college, where there IS no retirement, and pay increases have been 1% for ten years. No one is “blaming” teachers — well maybe blowhards on the Right to match those on the Left. But unions, another story. Check out Union Leader salaries for a reality check against your unqualified swipes at Wall Street. Wealth is not bad: Greed is. Unions look every bit as greedy as a lot of others these days.
Joe, first, thank you for your service as a shop steward. While I happen to agree with some of the things you write above, especially about the salaries of union leaders in many cases, ultimately all of what you mention is beside the point, and could be easily rectified if the the following were corrected:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110223/ts_yblog_thelookout/separate-but-unequal-charts-show-growing-rich-poor-gap
And why has this come about? Primarily two reasons: first because of ever-decreasing unionization in the private sector and second, because of ever less progressive tax policies at all levels.