The gender pay gap 
battle returns to Bongistan as r/UK reacts 
to a new study saying moids are the new oppressed.
- 94
- 92
Top Poster of the Day:
911roofer
Current Registered Users: 31,258
BROWSE EFFORTPOSTS
SITE GUIDE
HOLES
PING GROUPS
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
/u/violetrain1 is like "ugh they think it's fair they get paid more just because they generate more profits for their employer"
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
0 IQ take lol without education, no profits for these employers
It's a real problem that teachers get paid like shit so it's impossible to get good ones
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The education system in the west is excessive if not outright hedonistic. The idea you need 12+ years of schooling to push a broom, stock shelves or work a cashie is absurd.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Teachers aren't hired or promoted or given raises based off merit so increasing their pay would do nothing to increase their quality.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Ah yes thus they should not be paid well
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Well yes, all paying them more will do realistically is raise my taxes.
If we could convince teachers unions that they should be paid based off merit I'd agree with you though.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
So you agree that ur first comment was bs?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Not really, why?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
They should get paid more, from the wages of all the administration, bureaucracy and of course DEI that overtake school districts. That seems to be where most of the money goes when it gets poured in to education.
Also dock the wages of any teacher using social media under their own name, or reddit and TikTok in any form.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
It would increase retention. Look up "cost disease" - why should anyone be a math teacher when they could take those same skills and make 200k slinging javascript or 300k in insurance or 500k in finance?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Because they suck at math
There's also opposition to paying teachers significantly different amounts based off what they teach though. Like realistically math teachers should probably get paid like double what english teachers do, but no teachers union would ever approve that.
The effect you're describing is real ofc. If we paid teachers like double then yeah we might get better teachers - not like universally better bc the people who are teachers now would still be teachers. But it would cost SO much. Here in Chicago, our school system is by far our largest expense, it costs triple the police dept and related stuff. So just realistically, a 30% raise for teachers usually works out to like a 10% increase in property taxes across the board. I just don't think it's a reasonable use of resources in comparison to simply rewarding teachers who actually do their jobs well, which also gives other teachers an incentive to step it up which they simply don't have right now.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Higher education does discriminate in salaries based on area of study. Humanities will pay as low as $60k for a professor while STEM is anywhere from $100k-200k depending on the exact field simply because there's no private sector for the first tranche to compete against. Law profs end up being the highest paid at most schools because of this and because law schools are such moneymakers for a university that they're willing to pay for it.
Chicago is screwed and no amount of teacher salary will change it. You can't make school systems work when the majority of the parents are completely disinterested in their children's education. Suburbs and private schools have much lower per-student spending and teacher salaries and still have superior outcomes because the students there have parents that are actively involved and making certain that their children are learning.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
cause they wouldn't get too groom children. trans lives matter
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Each job has its perks
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
The ones that merit it do
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
teachers are r-slurred monkeys who deserve to get paid nothing
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This but unironically
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Teachers make 6 figures after 5 years in Washington
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Sounds poor to me
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
this is also why police suck. You get the quality that you pay for.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Maybe the economy that thinks plastic crap and fake digital "money" is more valuable than caring for children and the elderly is actually what's wrong.
All this first-order analysis is so
. Yes, it's tautologically true that adtech for spam email is more profitable than keeping vulnerable infants alive.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
the economy doesn't "think" anything
those things just are more valuable
caring for children and the elderly is not hard, just often unpleasant. and if you want those people paid more to filter out psychopath abusers who otherwise flock to these jobs like flies to shit, then it has to cost more
so grandma can either get beaten by a 300 pound jamaican foid, or be priced out of any kind of care at all. at which point YOU can care for her yourself
since you're all so selfrighteous in what society should do, lead by example
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Go google "is-ought problem" you mouth breathing trog.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
you're the one oughting it up in here
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
This is what my family always does. Even hospice care.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Wonder which gender spends all the money on plastic crap instead of caring for gender
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
kindergardener is an easy and fun job.
elder care / r-slur care is hard work, but there's lots of men in those jobs nowadays.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Teachers are terrible at carrying for students. I'd let any random !biofoids watch my kid before someone with a degree in Edu or child care because those degrees amazingly make you worse at understanding and raising up children
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
I think the forces of a profit motive are strong and it doesn't make much sense to get rid of them, which you would be doing if you like set all salaries at a govt level, kinda like price fixing but for pay.
At the end of the day, with the exception of minimum wage laws, your compensation is between you and your employer, and I don't think the government should really be getting involved. Obviously if somebody reneges on an agreement - like an employer saying they'll pay you $X and they don't - then it should. But not for negotiations. It's really one of the best ways to get people paid based on merit. It's not perfect - nepotism of course exists, but tbh I find it generally less common than redditors whine about. Like I'm sure there's some people at my company who are there bc they're family members or whatever of some partner but they're a tiny minority, the vast majority are hired and retained due to their profitability/skills.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Only a very tiny number of highly skilled employees can negotiate their own salaries. Most workers take or leave what's offered.
I'm not advocating for a command economy, but I would put a thumb on the scale for socially beneficial outcome.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Strong disagree here. Maybe it's still a minority as in less than 50% but I think you're underestimating how much leverage a really good/productive employee has. Even at larger companies with more rigid pay structures, management usually has the ability to influence promotions.
Realistically though, what would such a policy even look like? Some kind of head tax based on the work somebody does? Or a discount if the work is "good for society"? But who would even pick and choose which jobs are "more good" than others?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I think you're overestimating how many people ever get promoted.
Anyway I'd slap Pigouvian taxes on funkopops, social media and HFT and use it to subsidize early childhood arts education. We need more citizens and fewer consoomers.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context