wkfan;964941 wrote:Yes, I am...simply for the reason that a Teacher int he State of Ohio needs to be licensed to practice their profession.

So does a dump truck driver.

QuakerOats;964946 wrote:You are completely out to lunch .... again. Probably a paid lunch, to boot.

yes, because the private sector doesnt have paid lunches...

sleeper;964852 wrote:+1

Especially the part about teachers being forced to get a masters degree. More education = more costs that don't produce any results in the classroom.

really? you ever met anyone from south of the mason dixon line?

QuakerOats;964946 wrote:You are completely out to lunch .... again. Probably a paid lunch, to boot.

Sorry, I gave up free lunches when I retired from the private sector.

Had the vote been close at all, you supporters of Issue 2 would have had, at the least, a decent argument that many citizens of Ohio felt as you do. Unfortunately for you, the issue got creamed. That tells me that folks like you are in the vast minority, at least in Ohio. I think the voters of Ohio saw this for what it was: an power-grab attempt by the party in office. Nothing more, nothing less. They used budget issues as a smokescreen to try and disguise the social agenda. Fortunately the good people of Ohio saw through it and rejected it.

stlouiedipalma;964973 wrote:Sorry, I gave up free lunches when I retired.

Had the vote been close at all, you supporters of Issue 2 would have had, at the least, a decent argument that many citizens of Ohio felt as you do. Unfortunately for you, the issue got creamed. That tells me that folks like you are in the vast minority, at least in Ohio. I think the voters of Ohio saw this for what it was: an power-grab attempt by the party in office. Nothing more, nothing less. They used budget issues as a smokescreen to try and disguise the social agenda. Fortunately the good people of Ohio saw through it and rejected it.

Actually the majority of people that I know that voted against it that are not public union employees voted purely by emotion. They were worried a friend/relative would be affected by the law. I wouldn't really call it a mandate against the policy, but it was just something that was too emotional, good or bad policy aside.

Ok, let's break down the numbers and do a little math. It appears that those directly benefitting from the public trough voted themselves more of the public trough.

There were 3.5 million votes cast on Issue 2. That means the repeal bunch needed 1,750,000 votes. Assuming about 380,000 public sector workers, all that was needed was their vote, their spouse's vote, 1 parent's vote, 1 child's vote, and 1 one best friend's vote, or any similar combination thereof. This is basically what they got, plus maybe 2 parent's vote instead of 1.


So, to even begin to say that the "people spoke" is somewhat ludicrous. The repeal vote was simply a matter of numbers; essentially it was a lock, based on the number of votes represented by those benefitting from the public treasure.

It also means that everyone else who voted, voted 100% in support of SB5.

The conclusion: those profiting off the taxpayers simply outnumber those who do not, pure and simple.

As Ben Franklin said: "When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic". Ladies and gentlemen, we are there.

LJ;964981 wrote:Actually the majority of people that I know that voted against it that are not public union employees voted purely by emotion. They were worried a friend/relative would be affected by the law. I wouldn't really call it a mandate against the policy, but it was just something that was too emotional, good or bad policy aside.

I was just about to post this. I know a lot of people that couldn't tell you what was going but that they had friends/family who were union members that may be affected.

It will be interesting to see how many public employees end up getting laid off as a result of this law being rejected.

So you prefer to discredit the election results?

D E L U S I O N A L

wkfan;964941 wrote:Yes, I am...simply for the reason that a Teacher int he State of Ohio needs to be licensed to practice their profession. Simply having a bachelor's degree in a subject matter (i.e. Mathematics, as I stated in my post) does not allow a person to teach in the State of Ohio. They also have to pass 'board tests' (called Praxis) in order to obtain a license to teach. The same goes for a Doctor or a Lawyer.



According to the State of Ohio, yes.



You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Most hiring corporations, entities, etc would disagree with you, however.

LOL....I know the state requires this, I'm saying, it is ridiculous that the state does require this, and changes need to be made to those requirements. The education needed to be a teacher is overkill.

Writerbuckeye;964990 wrote:It will be interesting to see how many public employees end up getting laid off as a result of this law being rejected.

Writer, I've said all along that layoffs will be coming to the poorer communities regardless of the results of the election. State aid to local communities is being cut. That's how Kasich plans to balance the state budget. Only the more affluent communities will be able to finance government services if they choose to do so.

LJ;964959 wrote:So does a dump truck driver.

True...but they do not need a college degree, or even a High School diploma, in order to take the test.

http://www.cdldigest.com/cdl/how_to_get_a_cdl_license.html

se-alum;965002 wrote:LOL....I know the state requires this, I'm saying, it is ridiculous that the state does require this, and changes need to be made to those requirements. The education needed to be a teacher is overkill.

Again, you are entitled to your opinion.

So, I'm assuming that you are OK with your children being taught by people who have never taken a class in how to teach, or even have a college class?? After all, they went to school for 13 years in those subjects.

wkfan;965014 wrote:True...but they do not need a college degree, or even a High School diploma, in order to take the test.

http://www.cdldigest.com/cdl/how_to_get_a_cdl_license.html

They still have to be tested though. I am actually offended that you would put a freaking teacher on the same level as a Dr. or a Lawyer. My wife is a Veterinarian and I can tell you that a teacher is nowhere on her level of education, sacrfice, or practical knowledge BEFORE licensure.

stlouiedipalma;965003 wrote:Writer, I've said all along that layoffs will be coming to the poorer communities regardless of the results of the election. State aid to local communities is being cut. That's how Kasich plans to balance the state budget. Only the more affluent communities will be able to finance government services if they choose to do so.

This..along with HB136 will eb the end of public education in the State of Ohio, if John Kasich has his way.

bigdaddy2003;964988 wrote:I was just about to post this. I know a lot of people that couldn't tell you what was going but that they had friends/family who were union members that may be affected.

Yup.

I said way back when signatures were being collected for repeal that this would never pass if voted on. Take all the people in a public union, add in the people that KNOW someone in a public union, and you have your Issue 2 defeated.

LJ;965022 wrote:They still have to be tested though. I am actually offended that you would put a freaking teacher on the same level as a Dr. or a Lawyer. My wife is a Veterinarian and I can tell you that a teacher is nowhere on her level of education, sacrfice, or practical knowledge BEFORE licensure.

Don't care that you are offended....doesn't change the point and facts as stated.

wkfan;965027 wrote:Don't care that you are offended....doesn't change the point and facts as stated.

But it's not a fact, it's an opinion of yours, which I think is complete bullshit. Show me where a teacher in the state of Ohio has to take a post grad exam just to be considered for acceptance to a program that is 3-4 years of classroom and practical experience before they can take their licensure test and start working? Because that sure the hell isn't the way it works with teachers in Ohio, seeing as how I know many teachers that graduated undergrad with me, took their praxis and started teaching immediately

Ty Webb;964756 wrote:Belly....why waste money when you know it will get defeated again

Because I don't quit nor do I give up .. Defeat is never a reason to stop, it is a new plan to victory. Unlike you I'm a free thinking individual, dedicated to my dreams, and believes and goals, finding a way to overcome diversity not to surrender to it.

If every time something did not go my way or I was told no or I did not achieve what I want or was defeated by life misfortunes and stopped or quit what type of an individual would I be . . ?

LJ;965034 wrote:But it's not a fact, it's an opinion of yours, which I think is complete bull****. Show me where a teacher in the state of Ohio has to take a post grad exam just to be considered for acceptance to a program that is 3-4 years of classroom and practical experience before they can take their licensure test and start working? Because that sure the hell isn't the way it works with teachers in Ohio, seeing as how I know many teachers that graduated undergrad with me, took their praxis and started teaching immediately

What was their undergrad degree in? I would bet it is in Math EDUCATION, English, EDUCATION, etc. These courses of study are light in the subject matter (i.e. Mathematics, English) and contain courses in Education.

As I stated very explicitely in my example, many people are getting their undergrad degree in their subject matter..i.e. Mathematics. You cannot teach as a regular classroom teacher in the State of Ohio with a Bachelor Degree in Mathematics without taking coursework in Education methods, etc in order to qualify for a teaching license.

Please re-read my original post and you will find that is exactly the picture that I painted.

wkfan;965045 wrote:What was their undergrad degree in? I would bet it is in Math EDUCATION, English, EDUCATION, etc. These courses of study are light in the subject matter (i.e. Mathematics, English) and contain courses in Education.

As I stated very explicitely in my example, many people are getting their undergrad degree in their subject matter..i.e. Mathematics. You cannot teach as a regular classroom teacher in the State of Ohio with a Bachelor Degree in Mathematics without taking coursework in Education methods, etc in order to qualify for a teaching license.

Please re-read my original post and you will find that is exactly the picture that I painted.

That doesn't make it the same, whatsoever. You can take that coursework in undergrad, as many did. Ohio does not require you to have an advanced degree to become a licensed teacher. It does to become a Dr or a Lawyer. Not only that, but you have to test into said programs.

QuakerOats;964986 wrote:Ok, let's break down the numbers and do a little math. It appears that those directly benefitting from the public trough voted themselves more of the public trough.

There were 3.5 million votes cast on Issue 2. That means the repeal bunch needed 1,750,000 votes. Assuming about 380,000 public sector workers, all that was needed was their vote, their spouse's vote, 1 parent's vote, 1 child's vote, and 1 one best friend's vote, or any similar combination thereof. This is basically what they got, plus maybe 2 parent's vote instead of 1.


So, to even begin to say that the "people spoke" is somewhat ludicrous. The repeal vote was simply a matter of numbers; essentially it was a lock, based on the number of votes represented by those benefitting from the public treasure.

It also means that everyone else who voted, voted 100% in support of SB5.

The conclusion: those profiting off the taxpayers simply outnumber those who do not, pure and simple.

As Ben Franklin said: "When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic". Ladies and gentlemen, we are there.

This is silly! "If you take away all the people that voted against SB5/Issue 2, 100% of the other voters wanted it defeated!


HURRRRR, I'm a DURRRRR

ernest_t_bass;965055 wrote:This is silly! "If you take away all the people that voted against SB5/Issue 2, 100% of the other voters wanted it defeated!


HURRRRR, I'm a DURRRRR

Maybe I should rephrase it for your benefit:

Absent those who directly/indirectly benefit from the public trough, EVERYONE voted for SB5/Issue 2. Get it now?

QuakerOats;965074 wrote:Maybe I should rephrase it for your benefit:

Absent those who directly/indirectly benefit from the public trough, EVERYONE voted for SB5/Issue 2. Get it now?

No, I get it completely. How does my mother indirectly benefit from SB5?

ernest_t_bass;965086 wrote:No, I get it completely. How does my mother indirectly benefit from SB5?

Because she is emotionally attached to you, and your concerns worry her and your happiness affects her. C'mon that's pretty obvious.