Not because I'm a so-called "baby-boomer", or because I want to rant and rave at younger people, particularly so-called "gen-Z" people (don'tcha hate those labels?!)
No, more because I'm curious as to why it is such a thing these days. (If you don't think so, Google "Geb Z Ageism.)
A woman who is a friend and someone I used to work with who is 75 told me she is really bummed because she hears about it all the time. She has a used book store and still works as hard as she can to keep going. She recalled how when she and my wife were younger they struggled to make ends meet for many years. At that time, this friend lived it what had been a chicken coop and my wife at that time was living in a cabin that had no heat or running water. I had similar experiences. I lived in a converted chicken coop for a couple of years when I was younger. I also lived in my van for a few years. I've never lived "high on the hog".
That same friend keeps hearing young people say they are angry with "boomers" because they had it so easy and took everything and now everything is fucked up for them now because of us. She also told me that a lot of these people voted for d.t. because he (himself born the first year of baby boomer generation) is going to make everything better for them.
Yes, I know there were some very career oriented and greedy boomers in Silicon Valley, but that's not how all of us were/are. I don't understand all this hatred. Shit, I'm almost 74 and it looks like I'm going to have to go back to work again soon. WTF? I supposedly "have everything"? I don't get it.
It’s obviously very generalized, but there is some truth in that. look at pensions for public employees. Teachers retiring now are getting a much better pension that I will in 20 years. I’m paying more into it and getting less out of it. That’s the case for a lot of public pension plans.
Obviously not everyone, but a lot of people you’re age (you’re the exact age as my dad and he’s be befitted from it) were able to work and retire comfortably at 55 and live another 25-30 years or more. Anyone who is 40 now has no dream to retire as early as 55. We have to keep working to fund the pensions of those who did.
I must be hanging with the wrong peer crowd, lol. I only know one person my age who retired at age 55. I know several people my age who still work, mostly part-time, but if they didn't, they would have a difficult time of it. For example:
CB: Age 77. Gets work where and when able to, has had to move several time due to cost of rent.
N: Age 76. Works hard four days a week. Often comments on how hard it is to keep going.
C: Age 72. Works very part time, but has bills to pay and does not get much social security.
J: Age 82. Finally had to quit two years ago. Can't drive any more and is now living with one of the kids.
B. Mid 70's. Saw him working at Office Max a few years ago. Doing OK, but not great.
Me: Age 73, soon to be 74. Went back to work part time to pay for major unexpected car expenses from last month.
Honest to God, I don't know who all these people are that you say retired at 55. Must be nice. But honestly, that' not the norm.
Sorry bud, but none of what you say is a reason for ageism/ hatred of older people (not saying you do). I rest my case.
Of course it’s not an excuse for ageism, and I noticed you pointed out that’s not what I was saying.
I’d say it’s definitely the minority, but not that uncommon for boomers to have retired from 55-60. Those who got to work early and stayed in a single career definitely had a chance. My dad joined the sheriff dept at 22 and retired at 55 with 100% (or, I think actually 99%) pension. My uncle joined the dept around the same time and retired a year or so later. I have friends whose parents are teachers, and if they started their career at 22,23,24 were able to retire before 60. Teachers at my school who retire every year, red usually a few in the 55-60 range. Again, those who started right out of college and stuck with the career are able to retire after putting in 30 years. I’m not “ageist” against them. But it is frustrating knowing they are retiring at an earlier age than I will be able to mostly because I am paying more into the system than they had to. I’m paying for their retirement. The reality of the situation is frustrating. They underestimated the cost and the longevity of their retirement, so we’re paying the difference now.
Maybe it’s because I know more law enforcement through family and family friends than most, and through education because of my job, and those are 2 careers with state pensions, I see it more than you do. Unless you’re going into politics and running for sheriff or something, cops don’t work into their 60s. You’re an old cop at 55.
Look, I am saddened that the future outlook is not as good as it could/ should be for younger generations.
But as I said, I'm not accusing you of being ageist. I just think blaming "boomers" as being responsible for difficulties younger generations are having it is too much generalizing. I think an argument could be made for the G.I. generation being just as responsible. They had the longest longevity of any generation. I think an argument cold be made for too many younger generations voting a dictator into the office of president is a part of the problem. Or spending too much money on tattoos and lattes, spending too much time on the cell phone, and every kid needing to have their own TV could be considered reasons.
But I'm not for any of those generalizations. I think the problem is an American People issue.
I'm going to go and relax now. I have to work tomorrow.
Sorry if I came across as generalizing blame on boomers. It’s not their fault. It’s the ones in charge of financial responsibility for public pension plans underestimated the cost for years. And honestly, being able to retire at 55 and collect a full salary for 30 years seems a little ridiculous and unsustainable. And you are right, younger generations spend too much on Starbucks, new iPhones every other year, etc.
Back in the nineties, here in NY, you had to “know someone” to get a teaching job in a good school district. So these government paying jobs were never accessible to the masses. The excuse for the absurdly above market pension, was they will never make what you can make in a private business. But the truth is a lot of teaching jobs, not all, are recession proof. The teachers I knew were getting solid raises during recession years while those of us working for private business, were getting laid off or skipping multiple years of getting raises. Yes, the pensions were ridiculous back then but that does not mean we can afford the same pensions now.
Still to this day teachers I know in their 50s, can retire younger than people in private business more often. And they could climb to the highest reaches of the salary ladder, without having a target on their back, like exists in private business. If you’re young, and you’re a teacher, come to New York and try to get in the union.
As far as one advantage people have who are younger now is DEI is creating a huge problem for older workers now. When companies decide to make decisions based on diversity, someone has to pay the price to facilitate their quota system. And usually that someone looks a lot like a man who’s playing for Pearl Jam, if they are wearing a golf or dress shirt
Teachers retiring now, for a large part, have better pensions than those who will be retiring in 10 or 20 years. If you search retirement systems for teachers by state, many will say teachers hired before X will get 2.75% a year, teachers hired after X will receive 2% a year, or something like that. And that date is usually somewhere around 2008-2012. Not only that, but every couple of years we get a notice that they are increasing our contributing by about 0.25% of our pay. They also recalculate how they determine your base salary (average of top 5 years instead of top 2). So they’re taking more out of newer teachers and giving them less in return.
As far as climbing that ladder, I don’t know what it was like in NY when other states had freezes. But many other states had pay freezes, where you did not advance on the salary schedule for several years. Or if they did, they took it out in other ways. In 2020 my district was bragging that they were the only district in the area that didn’t have a pay freeze, but they reduced benefit contribution by $500/month, which was significantly larger than any raise I ever got. My pay actually went down by like $300/month after that “raise.” But on paper they announced to the entire community that teachers got raises that year. My wife taught in NY before we met. Her first day as a teacher was 9/10/2001 in Brooklyn, just on the other side of the bridge. More than half of her paycheck would go towards rent. And she rented a 2 bedroom apt with 3 people. It was a terrible school and got assaulted more than once. She left after 2 or 3 years. So there’s a reason their salary is higher than most. She does have teacher friends still there who got into good schools. They weren’t connected, just got lucky I guess. But they all have spouses in finance and make far more than any teacher.
in New York State they have tiers, so if you were hired 15 years ago, you were locked into the tier that existed back then. Teachers hired after that date if new law passed, get worse, lower benefits, higher, contributions, etc. but they get locked into the tier that exists at time of hiring. The unions here are decent for teachers, as opposed to the rest of the us “at will” workers, who can get fired immediately for no reason and no severance.
many teachers, I know in their their mid 50s can retire well before the age of 60 with an excellent pension, and they are not in the best tier, although it’s worse for the younger teachers today. AI claims that teachers around here make around $90,000 a year, but I know many teachers who are close to 150k in their early fifties. It’s almost impossible, finding a job on indeed, for that salary in the private sector, and the benefits on much crappier
And working in the private sector in New York State, near the New York City Metropolitan area, where many large corporations, especially during the Biden administration, are aggressively seeking workforce diversity targets.
Well, the better a teacher is paid, the better. I absolutely love to hear that a teacher might earn $150k a year. Too bad that is almost never the case.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
With twenty years experience in NY, it’s fairly standard 140-150k. But it’s very HCOL region. I love that our northern friends continually want to spend our tax dollars and raise our taxes. But ask them to join in, oh no! But thanks for keeping Russia and China out!
With twenty years experience in NY, it’s fairly standard 140-150k. But it’s very HCOL region. I love that our northern friends continually want to spend our tax dollars and raise our taxes. But ask them to join in, oh no! But thanks for keeping Russia and China out!
You made me look it up. The average salary for teachers in the state of New York is under $93K. Starting salary is under $65K. Amazingly, there is one area that pays a bit over $150K in the state, which is fantastic. Saying it is fairly standard that teachers in NY make $140-150K is a lie, and the last 3 sentences of your post here... I just can't, lol. If someone doesn't want their tax dollars to go to good education (which high teacher salaries directly contribute to), along with accessible healthcare for all, I'm curious to know wtf they do want their tax dollars to go towards.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
With twenty years experience in NY, it’s fairly standard 140-150k. But it’s very HCOL region. I love that our northern friends continually want to spend our tax dollars and raise our taxes. But ask them to join in, oh no! But thanks for keeping Russia and China out!
You made me look it up. The average salary for teachers in the state of New York is under $93K. Starting salary is under $65K. Amazingly, there is one area that pays a bit over $150K in the state, which is fantastic. Saying it is fairly standard that teachers in NY make $140-150K is a lie, and the last 3 sentences of your post here... I just can't, lol. If someone doesn't want their tax dollars to go to good education (which high teacher salaries directly contribute to), along with accessible healthcare for all, I'm curious to know wtf they do want their tax dollars to go towards.
Anti-DEI efforts and prevention of the elimination of the white race.
Not because I'm a so-called "baby-boomer", or because I want to rant and rave at younger people, particularly so-called "gen-Z" people (don'tcha hate those labels?!)
No, more because I'm curious as to why it is such a thing these days. (If you don't think so, Google "Geb Z Ageism.)
A woman who is a friend and someone I used to work with who is 75 told me she is really bummed because she hears about it all the time. She has a used book store and still works as hard as she can to keep going. She recalled how when she and my wife were younger they struggled to make ends meet for many years. At that time, this friend lived it what had been a chicken coop and my wife at that time was living in a cabin that had no heat or running water. I had similar experiences. I lived in a converted chicken coop for a couple of years when I was younger. I also lived in my van for a few years. I've never lived "high on the hog".
That same friend keeps hearing young people say they are angry with "boomers" because they had it so easy and took everything and now everything is fucked up for them now because of us. She also told me that a lot of these people voted for d.t. because he (himself born the first year of baby boomer generation) is going to make everything better for them.
Yes, I know there were some very career oriented and greedy boomers in Silicon Valley, but that's not how all of us were/are. I don't understand all this hatred. Shit, I'm almost 74 and it looks like I'm going to have to go back to work again soon. WTF? I supposedly "have everything"? I don't get it.
It’s obviously very generalized, but there is some truth in that. look at pensions for public employees. Teachers retiring now are getting a much better pension that I will in 20 years. I’m paying more into it and getting less out of it. That’s the case for a lot of public pension plans.
Obviously not everyone, but a lot of people you’re age (you’re the exact age as my dad and he’s be befitted from it) were able to work and retire comfortably at 55 and live another 25-30 years or more. Anyone who is 40 now has no dream to retire as early as 55. We have to keep working to fund the pensions of those who did.
I must be hanging with the wrong peer crowd, lol. I only know one person my age who retired at age 55. I know several people my age who still work, mostly part-time, but if they didn't, they would have a difficult time of it. For example:
CB: Age 77. Gets work where and when able to, has had to move several time due to cost of rent.
N: Age 76. Works hard four days a week. Often comments on how hard it is to keep going.
C: Age 72. Works very part time, but has bills to pay and does not get much social security.
J: Age 82. Finally had to quit two years ago. Can't drive any more and is now living with one of the kids.
B. Mid 70's. Saw him working at Office Max a few years ago. Doing OK, but not great.
Me: Age 73, soon to be 74. Went back to work part time to pay for major unexpected car expenses from last month.
Honest to God, I don't know who all these people are that you say retired at 55. Must be nice. But honestly, that' not the norm.
Sorry bud, but none of what you say is a reason for ageism/ hatred of older people (not saying you do). I rest my case.
Of course it’s not an excuse for ageism, and I noticed you pointed out that’s not what I was saying.
I’d say it’s definitely the minority, but not that uncommon for boomers to have retired from 55-60. Those who got to work early and stayed in a single career definitely had a chance. My dad joined the sheriff dept at 22 and retired at 55 with 100% (or, I think actually 99%) pension. My uncle joined the dept around the same time and retired a year or so later. I have friends whose parents are teachers, and if they started their career at 22,23,24 were able to retire before 60. Teachers at my school who retire every year, red usually a few in the 55-60 range. Again, those who started right out of college and stuck with the career are able to retire after putting in 30 years. I’m not “ageist” against them. But it is frustrating knowing they are retiring at an earlier age than I will be able to mostly because I am paying more into the system than they had to. I’m paying for their retirement. The reality of the situation is frustrating. They underestimated the cost and the longevity of their retirement, so we’re paying the difference now.
Maybe it’s because I know more law enforcement through family and family friends than most, and through education because of my job, and those are 2 careers with state pensions, I see it more than you do. Unless you’re going into politics and running for sheriff or something, cops don’t work into their 60s. You’re an old cop at 55.
Look, I am saddened that the future outlook is not as good as it could/ should be for younger generations.
But as I said, I'm not accusing you of being ageist. I just think blaming "boomers" as being responsible for difficulties younger generations are having it is too much generalizing. I think an argument could be made for the G.I. generation being just as responsible. They had the longest longevity of any generation. I think an argument cold be made for too many younger generations voting a dictator into the office of president is a part of the problem. Or spending too much money on tattoos and lattes, spending too much time on the cell phone, and every kid needing to have their own TV could be considered reasons.
But I'm not for any of those generalizations. I think the problem is an American People issue.
I'm going to go and relax now. I have to work tomorrow.
Sorry if I came across as generalizing blame on boomers. It’s not their fault. It’s the ones in charge of financial responsibility for public pension plans underestimated the cost for years. And honestly, being able to retire at 55 and collect a full salary for 30 years seems a little ridiculous and unsustainable. And you are right, younger generations spend too much on Starbucks, new iPhones every other year, etc.
Back in the nineties, here in NY, you had to “know someone” to get a teaching job in a good school district. So these government paying jobs were never accessible to the masses. The excuse for the absurdly above market pension, was they will never make what you can make in a private business. But the truth is a lot of teaching jobs, not all, are recession proof. The teachers I knew were getting solid raises during recession years while those of us working for private business, were getting laid off or skipping multiple years of getting raises. Yes, the pensions were ridiculous back then but that does not mean we can afford the same pensions now.
Still to this day teachers I know in their 50s, can retire younger than people in private business more often. And they could climb to the highest reaches of the salary ladder, without having a target on their back, like exists in private business. If you’re young, and you’re a teacher, come to New York and try to get in the union.
As far as one advantage people have who are younger now is DEI is creating a huge problem for older workers now. When companies decide to make decisions based on diversity, someone has to pay the price to facilitate their quota system. And usually that someone looks a lot like a man who’s playing for Pearl Jam, if they are wearing a golf or dress shirt
Teachers retiring now, for a large part, have better pensions than those who will be retiring in 10 or 20 years. If you search retirement systems for teachers by state, many will say teachers hired before X will get 2.75% a year, teachers hired after X will receive 2% a year, or something like that. And that date is usually somewhere around 2008-2012. Not only that, but every couple of years we get a notice that they are increasing our contributing by about 0.25% of our pay. They also recalculate how they determine your base salary (average of top 5 years instead of top 2). So they’re taking more out of newer teachers and giving them less in return.
As far as climbing that ladder, I don’t know what it was like in NY when other states had freezes. But many other states had pay freezes, where you did not advance on the salary schedule for several years. Or if they did, they took it out in other ways. In 2020 my district was bragging that they were the only district in the area that didn’t have a pay freeze, but they reduced benefit contribution by $500/month, which was significantly larger than any raise I ever got. My pay actually went down by like $300/month after that “raise.” But on paper they announced to the entire community that teachers got raises that year. My wife taught in NY before we met. Her first day as a teacher was 9/10/2001 in Brooklyn, just on the other side of the bridge. More than half of her paycheck would go towards rent. And she rented a 2 bedroom apt with 3 people. It was a terrible school and got assaulted more than once. She left after 2 or 3 years. So there’s a reason their salary is higher than most. She does have teacher friends still there who got into good schools. They weren’t connected, just got lucky I guess. But they all have spouses in finance and make far more than any teacher.
in New York State they have tiers, so if you were hired 15 years ago, you were locked into the tier that existed back then. Teachers hired after that date if new law passed, get worse, lower benefits, higher, contributions, etc. but they get locked into the tier that exists at time of hiring. The unions here are decent for teachers, as opposed to the rest of the us “at will” workers, who can get fired immediately for no reason and no severance.
many teachers, I know in their their mid 50s can retire well before the age of 60 with an excellent pension, and they are not in the best tier, although it’s worse for the younger teachers today. AI claims that teachers around here make around $90,000 a year, but I know many teachers who are close to 150k in their early fifties. It’s almost impossible, finding a job on indeed, for that salary in the private sector, and the benefits on much crappier
And working in the private sector in New York State, near the New York City Metropolitan area, where many large corporations, especially during the Biden administration, are aggressively seeking workforce diversity targets.
Who was your preferred dem candidate for 2024 and what would they have done about it?
With twenty years experience in NY, it’s fairly standard 140-150k. But it’s very HCOL region. I love that our northern friends continually want to spend our tax dollars and raise our taxes. But ask them to join in, oh no! But thanks for keeping Russia and China out!
This is bullshit. Just stop with the nonsense and stick to the topic of the thread.
Speaking of education in the U.S., I find the issue of charter schools to be paramount. To those concerned with equality in our great nation, I don't understand how anyone can be against charter schools. Why is it fair that children born and raised in our poorer communities don't get the same quality education that those living in say, Martha's Vineyard or Beverly Hills receive? Parents should have the option of choosing a school for their child to attend - not politicians. What say you?
And, to circle back to the op, is it fair that these children who received inferior educations have to spend their "retirement years" living in a van and working as a greeter at Walmart? I think not.
Labels are just language. A way to describe a group. If the majority of that group did some shitty things or shitty things happened on their watch, so to speak, the entire group gets lumped in.
Some people intend to lump the entire group, like when someone says “the left”, others don’t, like when we say “boomers fucked us”. 😂
... or, "All boomers are elitist radical leftist commies."
I thought you became more conservative when older?
My theory is folks go through an arc. Start out young, idealistic and liberal. Get to prime earning years and see what the gov't is taking in taxes and turn conservative. Reach retirement age and need the gov't handouts so turn back to liberal.
He who isn't a Liberal when young has no heart. He who doesn't become more Conservative as they age, has no brain.
He who makes rude generalizations isn’t worth listening to.
Well, it isn't a generalization, but a paraphrased quote. More of a concept to think about. It is attributed to a lot of people historically, who put it into their own words and languages, so I couldn't use a direct quote. French statesman and historian François Guizot, Founding Father and President John Adams, King Oscar II of Sweden, and many others. I am sorry if I offended you.
Labels are just language. A way to describe a group. If the majority of that group did some shitty things or shitty things happened on their watch, so to speak, the entire group gets lumped in.
Some people intend to lump the entire group, like when someone says “the left”, others don’t, like when we say “boomers fucked us”. 😂
... or, "All boomers are elitist radical leftist commies."
I thought you became more conservative when older?
My theory is folks go through an arc. Start out young, idealistic and liberal. Get to prime earning years and see what the gov't is taking in taxes and turn conservative. Reach retirement age and need the gov't handouts so turn back to liberal.
He who isn't a Liberal when young has no heart. He who doesn't become more Conservative as they age, has no brain.
He who makes rude generalizations isn’t worth listening to.
Well, it isn't a generalization, but a paraphrased quote. More of a concept to think about. It is attributed to a lot of people historically, who put it into their own words and languages, so I couldn't use a direct quote. French statesman and historian François Guizot, Founding Father and President John Adams, King Oscar II of Sweden, and many others. I am sorry if I offended you.
Not an asshole, just quoting one and not attributing it to them. Got it.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
With twenty years experience in NY, it’s fairly standard 140-150k. But it’s very HCOL region. I love that our northern friends continually want to spend our tax dollars and raise our taxes. But ask them to join in, oh no! But thanks for keeping Russia and China out!
You made me look it up. The average salary for teachers in the state of New York is under $93K. Starting salary is under $65K. Amazingly, there is one area that pays a bit over $150K in the state, which is fantastic. Saying it is fairly standard that teachers in NY make $140-150K is a lie, and the last 3 sentences of your post here... I just can't, lol. If someone doesn't want their tax dollars to go to good education (which high teacher salaries directly contribute to), along with accessible healthcare for all, I'm curious to know wtf they do want their tax dollars to go towards.
Maybe acknowledge the debt before spending $$? Is McDavid helping us oot at all with that, eh, or keeping his loot to himself? It’s nice he gets to live in a peaceful region when Russia has its eyes on your northwest passage.
Lie? You skip the part where I mention I am referring to the suburbs around nyc, and I know many teachers earning that salary. While earning that in a private business gets you a target on your back. Not only do they make those salaries, their pensions are free for ny tax. So we have paid for their salaries, their benefits that far exceeds what’s typically available from private employers and then don’t pay the taxes we pay in retirement. There is a reason NY (and the other blue states) is losing electoral votes and the southern states are gaining them.
You must know the intricacies of the region where I’ve spent my entire life because I certainly know yours. Your people want me and my fellow taxpayers paying for medical research and medicine that will save your lives for pennies on the dollar, and military protection from Russia and China for free.
….
”
Newsday reported in February 2025 that the median salary across Long Island school districts (including Nassau and Suffolk) rose to $130,000 or higher in 34 districts in 2023-24.
A majority of Long Island school systems (72 out of 125) reported median salaries of $120,000 or higher in 2023-24.
Top-Paying Districts:
Several districts in Nassau and Suffolk counties have median salaries exceeding $140,000, including Cold Spring Harbor ($150,089), Syosset ($146,892), Jericho ($146,105), Commack ($143,402), and Three Village ($142,041).
With twenty years experience in NY, it’s fairly standard 140-150k. But it’s very HCOL region. I love that our northern friends continually want to spend our tax dollars and raise our taxes. But ask them to join in, oh no! But thanks for keeping Russia and China out!
You made me look it up. The average salary for teachers in the state of New York is under $93K. Starting salary is under $65K. Amazingly, there is one area that pays a bit over $150K in the state, which is fantastic. Saying it is fairly standard that teachers in NY make $140-150K is a lie, and the last 3 sentences of your post here... I just can't, lol. If someone doesn't want their tax dollars to go to good education (which high teacher salaries directly contribute to), along with accessible healthcare for all, I'm curious to know wtf they do want their tax dollars to go towards.
I looked it up too. I wasn’t going to respond, but you’re right. And to get that 150, you’d need a phD or MA+ extra hours or something.
Not many people take the time to get a phd and go teach high school. If you’re making 80k in nyc, you’re still struggling to afford rent on an apartment. I talk about this at work, I don’t know how new teachers can make it, or why you’d become one right now. If we didn’t buy our house when we did (13 years ago) we’d never be able to buy. Salaries have gone up maybe 10% in that time frame, but housing costs have gone up 3-4 times. In many cases, a house that sold for 150k and was affordable 15 years ago is now worth 500-600. That same house 25 years ago was probably 75-100k.
So if you’ve been teaching for 30 years, you could afford a nice house on a new-teacher salary 30 years ago and are ready to retire with a nice pension plan. A new teacher now has little hope of buying a home unless their spouse makes significantly more and will probably have to work part time when they retire in 38 years instead of 30.
Comments
many teachers, I know in their their mid 50s can retire well before the age of 60 with an excellent pension, and they are not in the best tier, although it’s worse for the younger teachers today. AI claims that teachers around here make around $90,000 a year, but I know many teachers who are close to 150k in their early fifties. It’s almost impossible, finding a job on indeed, for that salary in the private sector, and the benefits on much crappier
You made me look it up. The average salary for teachers in the state of New York is under $93K. Starting salary is under $65K. Amazingly, there is one area that pays a bit over $150K in the state, which is fantastic. Saying it is fairly standard that teachers in NY make $140-150K is a lie, and the last 3 sentences of your post here... I just can't, lol. If someone doesn't want their tax dollars to go to good education (which high teacher salaries directly contribute to), along with accessible healthcare for all, I'm curious to know wtf they do want their tax dollars to go towards.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
2003: 4/29 Albany, 5/2 Buffalo, 7/9 MSG 2 2006: 5/12 Albany, 6/3 East Rutherford 2
2008: 6/27 Hartford 2009: 10/27 Philadelphia 1 2010: 5/15 Hartford, 5/21 MSG 2
2013: 10/15 Worcester 1, 10/25 Hartford 2014: 10/1 Cincinnati
2018: 9/2 Fenway 1
2024: 9/3 MSG 1, 9/4 MSG 2 , 9/15 Fenway 1, 9/17 Fenway 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Lie? You skip the part where I mention I am referring to the suburbs around nyc, and I know many teachers earning that salary. While earning that in a private business gets you a target on your back. Not only do they make those salaries, their pensions are free for ny tax. So we have paid for their salaries, their benefits that far exceeds what’s typically available from private employers and then don’t pay the taxes we pay in retirement. There is a reason NY (and the other blue states) is losing electoral votes and the southern states are gaining them.
You must know the intricacies of the region where I’ve spent my entire life because I certainly know yours. Your people want me and my fellow taxpayers paying for medical research and medicine that will save your lives for pennies on the dollar, and military protection from Russia and China for free.
….
”
If you’re making 80k in nyc, you’re still struggling to afford rent on an apartment.
I talk about this at work, I don’t know how new teachers can make it, or why you’d become one right now. If we didn’t buy our house when we did (13 years ago) we’d never be able to buy. Salaries have gone up maybe 10% in that time frame, but housing costs have gone up 3-4 times.
In many cases, a house that sold for 150k and was affordable 15 years ago is now worth 500-600. That same house 25 years ago was probably 75-100k.