Gblock;1007148 wrote:so your solution is to cut teacher pay to pay for busing and extracrurriculars and sports as well as non essential staff?? seems like a short term solution. even in that worked for a year or two what happens then next time you are short? costs are going to continue to rise you are going to be short again very quickly. surely your only solution cant be cut teacher pay. u got any other ideas??

BGFalcons82;1007194 wrote:Issue 2 was partially about having public sector unions contribute more for their health plans, contribute more for their pensions, and thus save money for the taxpayers. In other words, it would save counties, cities, and school districts valued capital to spend on other things...like keeping their firemen, policemen, teachers, etc. employed. Who said anything about cutting teacher pay?

My point in all of this is that the taxpayers, you know...the ones without a seat at the "negotiating table" as unions bargain with their subsidized representatives, will be forced to make choices that will potentially cripple the Westerville School System. Since it has failed before, unless there is a dramatic paradigm change, it will fail again and the school system will do what it has to in order to survive. Unfortunately, this will lead to unintended consequences that the citizens of Westerville really don't want either as their school system will be their albatross.

Gblock;1007204 wrote:and you do have a seat at the table. its called a school board.

BGFalcons82;1007334 wrote:Uh-huh. When these individuals run for election, where do they get their funding? When state senators and state representatives run for election, how do they get their funding? When people run for US Congress, how do they get the funds to do so? Public unions have the unique ability to fund and thereby select their "negotiating" partner. If John Doe is running for school board and receives a $5,000 donation from the school union, whom will John listen to more at teacher contract negotiation time? The taxpayers, who aren't in the room or the people who help put him in his chair and are sitting across the table from him? It's pretty elementary, really.

For me, if we must have public unions (I still don't understand this whole public union concept...from whom do they need protection again?), then they should not have the power to subsidize, fund, nor select their negotiating partner to be rewarded with taxpayer's cash. At the end of the day, they work for all of us, not just those that help them to keep their jobs.

QuakerOats;1007091 wrote:A 1% school income tax is the kiss of death. It is merely just more extortion wrought by the greedy OEA, the organization that has made a fine art of holding school children and parents hostage.

QuakerOats;1007084 wrote:If you really knew John Kasich, you would be highly embarrassed by your hate speech regarding him.

BGFalcons82;1006658 wrote:The Westerville School District (just North of Columbus) is in dire straights. They are in financial ruin and their solution is to threaten to wipe out busing, eliminate sports, eliminate extra-curricular activites, and eliminate teaching positions that are considered, "non-essential". If this issue fails,then they will be forced to follow through with their threats or risk being taken over by the State...or worse...shut down. How many people will want to live in such a horrid school district? Better yet, how many people will flee a school system that is completely out of control as compared to Dublin, Pickerington, Reynoldsburg, etc.?

I suppose in the end, they'll have enough money left over to teach far less students. But the property taxes will be so exhorbitant, the inhabitants of Westerville will either revolt or beg the state/Feds to bail them out. In the end, the City of Westerville will lose, the property values will plummet, the taxes collected won't be enough to sustain the school system in its present state, and the other suburbs around the City will have the opportunity to teach the Westerville kids with budgets that won't be large enough. There isn't more magical money to be printed to save the unions, their teachers, and society from imploding from the largesse promulgated on us all.

But you people can claim that defeating Issue 2 was the best thing for everyone. Congrats. Now we all get to suffer.

Blaming any of this on the failure of Issue 2 is a smokescreen at best.

isadore;1007629 wrote:while the neighboring districts were quite willing to pay a small reasonable income tax to provide their children with an adequate education, the kid haters of westerville are not.

isadore;1007650 wrote:I never met Mussolini, Sadaam Hussein or Muamar Khadafi but I still know they were corrupt, evil abusers of their people. Kasich's Lehman Brother's Governor, expressed cop hater, enemy of public employees, and servant of corporate interests. Never met him, but the people I know who have, Democrat and Republican, say he is the most arrogant individual they ever knew.

QuakerOats;1008860 wrote:Parochial schools provide better educations at half the cost, so the tired old union argument that "we need more money" is an utter fail.

wkfan;1008886 wrote:This is a pretty subjective statement, don't you think? Or do you have any statistics to back up this claim?

wkfan;1008886 wrote:This is a pretty subjective statement, don't you think? Or do you have any statistics to back up this claim?

QuakerOats;1008964 wrote:Statistics abound that support this fact. And, in my own town, the total cost of a parochial education is approximately $5,500, while the per pupil cost in the public school district is closer to $10,000.

QuakerOats;1008964 wrote:Statistics abound that support this fact. And, in my own town, the total cost of a parochial education is approximately $5,500, while the per pupil cost in the public school district is closer to $10,000.

QuakerOats;1008964 wrote:Statistics abound that support this fact. And, in my own town, the total cost of a parochial education is approximately $5,500, while the per pupil cost in the public school district is closer to $10,000.

fish82;1008972 wrote:To be fair, the cost to educate a student at the typical private school is somewhat higher than the actual tuition.

wkfan;1008980 wrote:Let's not forget that parochial schools can choose who they educate while public schools have to educate everyone. The accomodations that must be made to educate everyone not only shows up in test scores but in the cost per pupil, too.

QuakerOats;1008875 wrote:There is help available:

http://therapists.psychologytoday.com/rms/cities/OH-Ohio-Therapists.html

Hate can be cured.

QuakerOats wrote:He already is the worst president in history; the only question is how much more damage will he inflict before his socialist/marxist arse gets booted out.

QuakerOats;1008860 wrote:There is plenty of taxpayer money already being provided without having to further rape the providers with an income tax. The problem is the proper allocation of the resources already being provided, but it is difficult to adequately allocate said resources when the public sector union monopoly wields more clout than the taxpayers and in many instances 'owns school board majorities'.

Parochial schools provide better educations at half the cost, so the tired old union argument that "we need more money" is an utter fail.

Pay attention, read, learn, understand ........ you too, can figure it all out.

stlouiedipalma;1009929 wrote:Have you got links, statistics or actual names to substantiate your claim of board majorities being owned by public unions, or is this just another of your wild-assed-guesses you like to use to back up your dream of 1950's America?

wkfan;1012057 wrote:Don't hold your breath. When asked to back up his claims...he vanishes.

wkfan;1012057 wrote:Don't hold your breath. When asked to back up his claims...he vanishes.