I said 60k after 25 years, plus a college education of at least 5 and probably 6 or 7 years. The per hour wage is not particularly high, no more than carpenters and mechanics (good, honest professions that should be compensated well, but which don't involve years of higher education), and certainly not commensurate with the educational requirements involved. It is "OK" at best, and not "sweet" by any stretch.<quoted text>
but with 15 years in education, and all of this well documented and easily accessible online, you have little to dispute.
PV district salaries for 2007-2008
Let's say you're right.$60,000+ for working 180 days out of a normal 260 day year? Wow, that is pretty sweet. Now I never said anything about that vacation time being paid, did I?
Funny how you label everything as "c.rap," but you can only pull out a salary dispute (which is wrong) and only a part of a tax break. If what I posted was truly that bad, you'd have a lot more to say.
A lot more to say? Everything you write is an exaggeration of reality, with an angry vendetta against educators seething beneath the surface. Why should I dispute point by point, when a couple of examples suffice to point out that your arguments are silly at best, hateful at worst? UCSC offers a Masters in 5 years, a grueling program that is, admittedly, a stretch, but not for the reasons you cite (i.e. none). It's a stretch because education is as much an art as a science, and without tangible classroom experience, theoretical knowledge alone does not a balanced equation create. That said, no other program that I'm aware of does this. You take the exception and point to it as the rule. This is disingenuous, and you know it. The point is if you will lie about one point you'll lie about them all, and that is essentially the case. And speaking of cases, I rest mine. C.rap. is what you spew, and c.rap is what I call it. 80k after 2 years is the same as 60k after 25? Yeah, right.