are firefighters and police more important than teachers ?

[WorldWatcher]

>


Kind of hard to say that teachers are more important than cops or cops more important than teachers...



............................. But I bet without teachers we'd need a lot more cops.



>>>>

I'd like to know exactly WHY it's so hard to say that cops are more important than teachers. It's certainly possible to say that teachers are more important than virtually everyone else, because people say it ad nauseam. So why is it we can't employ that same calculation to teachers and first responders and come to the conclusion that first responders are more important? Is it just because the whole entire calculation was "teachers = most important of all", no thought needed?

Personally I don't buy into the whole "teachers are more important" OR "cops are more important" because so much of such a conversation would be driven by context. To me it's an apples to oranges comparison.

If your context is society and an educated population able to be productive, engaged, self supporting, citizens able to hold down a meaningful job in this modern technologically driven world and to compete in the world market against other educated countries. Than ya, teachers are more important then cops.

On the other hand...

If someone broke into my house and stole everything of value - then I think I'd call a cop and not a teacher. When you need a cop, you usually need them NOW and at that point, cops are more important.

Context matters. Remove education and in the long term our economy would devolve into a feudalistic society similar to medieval Europe were there was a small group of "haves" able to pass on wealth to their children and the rest existing as basically serfs.


>>>>

 

[BrianH]

You are mistaken. You do more judging . . . but you spend very little time recognizing it or analyzing where it comes from. That's why my post was longer.



First things first: Everything in the world isn't all about you, so get over yourself. Professional sports is not automatically unentertaining and therefore valueless just because YOUR individual, sorry little ass doesn't happen to enjoy them very much. Next time, talk to me about something relevant, which means NOT your personal, anecdotal opinions and experience.



I'M not the one presuming to judge the worth of someone else's job based on my own personal perceptions of "what's important". I'm not the one running around talking about how "sick" it makes me that someone I've never met DARES to make more money than I think he should. So if someone around here is sitting on an ass that's way too high, I'd say you're the more likely choice.



No, I just made ONE observation of something you DID say: "Makes me sick when sports stars get paid to play a kids' game". Don't blame ME if your words reveal nasty things about your character - or lack thereof - that you want to pretend don't exist.



"Makes me sick when sports stars get paid to play a kids' game". Delude yourself about what that sentence means, but don't demand that I get on the Willfully Blind and Stupid Train with you.



Who asked him to? Believe it or not, not everyone in the world can be a firefighter or other first responder, and not everyone in the world NEEDS to be. It's actually okay for other people to hold other jobs that are appropriate for their personal skill sets. Please remember that YOU are the pompous snob presuming to judge people and their jobs by "importance", not me.



Who asked him to? That's MY job.



I'm curious at this point who elected you Grand High Arbiter of Job Importance and Salary Apportionment. Whoever it was had their heads up their asses, clearly, since you're obviously way too ignorant and childish to have the first clue how salaries are actually decided, and you also clearly have some sort of God complex that makes you assume that you're smarter and more morally aware than other people, AND that you have any goddamned right to decide how employers spend their money.

I'll ask you again: What's it to you how much money anyone else gets paid, if you're not the one doing the paying?



It's interesting how millions of sports fans, spending billions of dollars every year on those sports, disagree with you, and yet YOU are the last word on the reality of the situation.



Well, it's incredibly freaking generous of you to grudgingly allow people you don't employ to make "a little more" of money that isn't yours to begin with. I always like when people like you magnanimously concede people's rights to do things in situations that are NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS. Speaking of fricking ridiculous, your hubris is just breathtaking.



Where do YOU get off deciding that it IS enough, when it's . . . stay with me here . . . NOT YOUR MONEY.



I don't bitch about corporations at all, because . . . once again . . . IT'S NOT MY MONEY. I bitch about politicians, damned right, because that IS my money. None of the money the athletes are getting is mine, or ever was, since I'm not a sports fan. But even if I WAS, I wouldn't bitch, because in that case, I spent it voluntarily, rather than having it taken from me forcibly by the IRS.



Neither did I, except in the sense that if it WAS illegal, you might have some cause to have your bowels all in an uproar about it. Personally, I definitely get sick at the idea of drug dealers, Mafia dons, and other criminals having huge wads of cash and living it up, because they break the law and they hurt people. As long as someone's making their money legally and they're not taking it from me via taxes, I don't consider it my business, and neither should you.



And I'm entitled to tell you that your opinion is that of a halfwit voyeur who should learn to mind his own business instead of sitting around, eating his liver out with impotent rage over the lives of total strangers.

If you're going to insist on slathering your idiot opinions all over the Internet, don't even bother wasting time with a faux-outraged protest of "I'm entitled to have an opinion" when someone tells you how moronic you sound.



You just don't get it, do you, twerp? Just because YOU are so puerile as to run around, spouting off about "important jobs" as though that means something in the real, adult world, that doesn't mean that people who shower you with contempt are ALSO holding that puerile worldview, and just have a different idea of WHICH jobs are important.

My point, which clearly went right over your pinhead, is that "playing a kids' game" isn't actually what athletes get paid for. They get paid for generating income. The more they generate, the more they get paid. And they DO serve a purpose in society, just as any legal job does. Whether or not they're "important" is an erroneous calculation that I'll leave the mentally- and emotionally-stunted people like you to waste time on.

sigh....where do I begin.

First:

First, whenever you think you're man enough to try to make me, bring it on. Until then, I find it telling that I am perfectly happy to let you say whatever you want, and just tell you how moronic I think it is, but YOU feel it necessary to try, however futile it is, to actually make those who disagree with you stop talking. Hmmm.



Also, you can't. You don't have any responses, and besides, it might actually make you think, and your raison d'etre is making sweeping statements based on assumptions, isn't it?



Brevity is no virtue when your posts are short only because you have nothing intelligent to say.



Nope. They're to point out how fucking stupid and baseless your opinion is. If you were bright enough to convince of anything, you wouldn't hold such meaningless opinions based on no thought whatsoever in the first place, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

If your argument is going to be, "No one should ever post if they're just stating their own opinion and not changing other people's minds", then you should never have typed a single word, by the way. I really doubt that "It makes me sick that sports stars get paid to play a kid's game" convinced anyone of anything except that you're a mindless, kneejerk dolt.



I haven't told you what to think, ass hat. I'd have to believe you're capable of thinking to do that. What I've told you is how little thinking you've actually done so far. I've also told you what the facts are.

Again, if you have a problem with someone looking at your opinion and saying, "I think that's a steaming pile of dog shit, and here's WHY I think that", then what the fuck are you doing posting your opinion on a public forum? Did you think USMB was a vanity website, where you post your mindless emotions and everyone pats you on the back and tells you how brilliant and compassionate you are?

Oh, as far as "pompous windbag" goes, at least I make the effort to actually answer your posts, in great detail as a matter of fact. You, on the other hand, are spending a lot of words to tell me how you can't be bothered to respond to anything I've said, and how you don't like me. Let's just stipulate to the fact that I don't WANT you to like me, and perhaps you can move on to debating instead of empty attacks.



My judgement is of actions and their quality, both yours and the teachers and teacher cheerleaders who want everyone to worship at the altar of the selfless sainthood of teachers everywhere. And I am perfectly honest about doing it. The hypocrisy comes when you want to make snap decisions about other people with no facts, and then get your panties in a ruffle that someone DARES to point out that what you're doing is wrong. Feel free to judge something in your purview. My problem with you comes when you want to judge things that are none of your business, like what salaries should be based on "importance" in your eyes.



Nice attempt at topic-hopping, fucktard, but we are NOT talking about the general currency of the United States, nor its devaluation. We are talking specifically about people's salaries, and who pays them. I don't pay the salaries of professional athletes by any stretch of any imagination, not even one as fevered as yours. I DO pay the salaries of the politicians and other public servants whose districts I live in. The first is none of my business. The second is.



What has one to do with the other? If this or that pro athlete suddenly had his salary cut in half, how would that change MY income in any way? Or anyone else's who's living "paycheck to paycheck"? And whether or not he demands more in a contract negotiation with his employer is as irrelevant to my life - and those of every other average everyday citizen - as my husband's contract negotiations with HIS employer are to the athlete.



And I can sure as hell criticize YOU for thinking the system is ass-backwards just because it doesn't fit your simplistic view of how things "should be".



I don't have to explain to him that his job is less important, because once again, that is YOUR ignorant, juvenile schtick. Please try to understand - once again - that just because YOU are so goddamned stupid that you run around, pointing fingers and saying, "This is important. This isn't" does NOT mean that the rest of the world does the same thing. Stop projecting your mental damage onto me.

I don't have to explain to a soldier and his family why he gets paid what he does. If he's got any brains on the ball (which would make him smarter than you automatically), he already knows why: because there's no shortage of people who can and will do his job. It had nothing to do with any arbitrary judgement of "importance" when we started talking, it hasn't had anything to do with an arbitrary judgement of "importance" throughout this conversation, and it's never going to have anything to do with an arbitrary judgement of "importance", no matter how stubbornly you refuse to grow up and think like an adult.

The next time a police-officer dies in the line-of-duty, I'll let you explain why his pension is small and why a sports athlete contributes more to this society because they helped us through the depression. I have not once questioned the legality of the issue...but let's face it, every law is just and every practice we have is morally right...

Same answer, fuckface. You're not representative of the entire world's way of thinking. You're only representative of the mentally-stunted-at-age-twelve section of the world.

I have an opinion, and I am damn well free to voice it. You can kiss my ass if you don't like it. I call it like I see it. You're obviously just a grouchy-ass old woman who watches way too many sports and movies...Wake up and smell your own shit.

For someone who likes to end his posts defending his right to free speech - which has never been questioned by me - you sure are fast to tell other people to shut up. Speaking of hypocrites . . .

It's a coincidence, but I call it like I see it, too, and what I see is someone who needs to pull on his big boy Underoos and move into the world of adult reality. Even Peter Pan had to grow up eventually.

Or at least man up enough to debate, instead of posting long, empty diatribes about "Your points are bullshit, and not worth answering, so I just hate you, hate you, HATE YOU!!!" Tell me, did you stomp your feet while you were typing, little boy?

Ok shit stain. Let's get back to debating. YOU started at devaluing teachers vs. cops and firefighters. Then you responded to my post by somehow claiming that the sports and entertainment industry is more important and that it's none of my business. I guess it's none of my business to support breast-cancer because I've never had it? Or it's none of my business to have any opinion on anything if it doesn't effect me personally. You have failed miserably at proving your point. You stated how the sporting and entertainment people got people through the depression and therefore is SOOOOO important. Big deal. I've told you why I think sports athletes get paid too much money while MORE IMPORTANT public jobs get paid like shit. 1. Sports stars get paid millions. 2. Public employees that provide for the education and safety of said sports stars get paid like shit. Both of these are FACTS no matter how you look at it. It's my rate to not like it, and it's your right to be a bitch about it. You started casting stones about me being judgemental after a long-ass post judging me about my opinion. On top of that, you accuse me me of posting baseless hateful rants while in the same post calling me "fucktard" and "ass hat" among other things.

Until you can prove why teaching is less important than the other jobs, and why the sporting and entertainment industry is better than all three...then everything you post is nothing more than your opinion.

FACT: You have not proven a damn thing you've said. You seem to think that because you can type rhetoric and use a large vocabulary that it somehow makes you right? lol.

By the way, I laughed when I read your posts.

 

[ClosedCaption]

>


Kind of hard to say that teachers are more important than cops or cops more important than teachers...



............................. But I bet without teachers we'd need a lot more cops.



>>>>

I'd like to know exactly WHY it's so hard to say that cops are more important than teachers. It's certainly possible to say that teachers are more important than virtually everyone else, because people say it ad nauseam. So why is it we can't employ that same calculation to teachers and first responders and come to the conclusion that first responders are more important? Is it just because the whole entire calculation was "teachers = most important of all", no thought needed?

Personally I don't buy into the whole "teachers are more important" OR "cops are more important" because so much of such a conversation would be driven by context. To me it's an apples to oranges comparison.

If your context is society and an educated population able to be productive, engaged, self supporting, citizens able to hold down a meaningful job in this modern technologically driven world and to compete in the world market against other educated countries. Than ya, teachers are more important then cops.

On the other hand...

If someone broke into my house and stole everything of value - then I think I'd call a cop and not a teacher. When you need a cop, you usually need them NOW and at that point, cops are more important.

Context matters. Remove education and in the long term our economy would devolve into a feudalistic society similar to medieval Europe were there was a small group of "haves" able to pass on wealth to their children and the rest existing as basically serfs.


>>>>

Every scenario argued in here is "Cops save you, They are brave" and "teachers are dispensible"

It's seems that the conservatives do not see a problem with funding things as long as those things protect them from immediate harm, like the war on terror, police, homeland security or military. But the problem is that, as mentioned before, those same kids that are stripped of an education most will commit some sort of crime. Education makes a more civil society therefore less crimes being committed (in theory) and less cops. But more of a 15-20 year plan and like I said, Repubs only see value in funding agencies / people that will protect them today.

Yanno?

 

[WorldWatcher]

I'd like to know exactly WHY it's so hard to say that cops are more important than teachers. It's certainly possible to say that teachers are more important than virtually everyone else, because people say it ad nauseam. So why is it we can't employ that same calculation to teachers and first responders and come to the conclusion that first responders are more important? Is it just because the whole entire calculation was "teachers = most important of all", no thought needed?

Personally I don't buy into the whole "teachers are more important" OR "cops are more important" because so much of such a conversation would be driven by context. To me it's an apples to oranges comparison.

If your context is society and an educated population able to be productive, engaged, self supporting, citizens able to hold down a meaningful job in this modern technologically driven world and to compete in the world market against other educated countries. Than ya, teachers are more important then cops.

On the other hand...

If someone broke into my house and stole everything of value - then I think I'd call a cop and not a teacher. When you need a cop, you usually need them NOW and at that point, cops are more important.

Context matters. Remove education and in the long term our economy would devolve into a feudalistic society similar to medieval Europe were there was a small group of "haves" able to pass on wealth to their children and the rest existing as basically serfs.


>>>>

Every scenario argued in here is "Cops save you, They are brave" and "teachers are dispensible"

It's seems that the conservatives do not see a problem with funding things as long as those things protect them from immediate harm, like the war on terror, police, homeland security or military. But the problem is that, as mentioned before, those same kids that are stripped of an education most will commit some sort of crime. Education makes a more civil society therefore less crimes being committed (in theory) and less cops. But more of a 15-20 year plan and like I said, Repubs only see value in funding agencies / people that will protect them today.

Yanno?

I've been a registered Republican since 1978.




>>>>