Teachers get no respect; students get no education

A reader pointed out an interesting confluence of stories in today’s New York Times.

Story 1 is “Teachers Wonder, Why the Scorn?”, about how it is an unsolvable mystery as to why taxpayers have a low opinion of teachers (a 2nd-year teacher earning $36,000 ($4,000 per month) is the salary poster child; the journalist apparently could not find any $10,000+/month senior teachers to quote.)

Story 2 is about how 75 percent of students delivered by those teachers to City University of New York require remedial instruction. It notes that only 23 percent of students who graduated from New York City public schools, some of the most lavishly funded in the world, were “prepared for college or careers” (just imagine how little the dropouts learned!).

[Speaking of New York City school funding… when Michael Bloomberg was running for elections and to hold onto the Mayoralty for a third term, he dished out future taxpayers’ money at a record pace to unionized city workers. Now that he is a lame duck and doesn’t need their electoral support, he is proposing to scale back pensions for workers yet to be hired (i.e., he will help get the city’s fiscal health in order starting in the year 2040 or 2050).]

[How do the $130,000/year (+ $75,000/year pension starting at age 53) schoolteachers in Rochester perform compared to NYC? Five percent of their students end up being prepared for college (source).]

Full post, including comments

New section on smartphones and tablets

Folks: I’ve drafted a new section, /wireless, covering all things mobile, especially smartphones and tablet computers. I make a prediction about whether iPhone or Android will dominate, wonder why the iPad is so popular, and review the Motorola Droid 2 and Samsung Epic 4G.

Since there does not seem to be any danger of an innovation in desktop computing, I will be adding to this new section of my core site regularly. Comments/corrections are appreciated.

Full post, including comments

Good window into how the cost of government is understated

A reader sent me this article on the impending insolvency of the United States Postal Service. The USPS, which has an operating cost of about $70 billion per year (Wikipedia) pays for its retiree health care obligations on a current basis, unlike other federal agencies. This year, the article says, they have to set aside $5.5 billion, or about 8 percent on top of the operating expenses.

Assuming the actuaries are right about what the retiree health care costs will actually be (historically these have been underestimated since few people expected the inflation in health care costs that the U.S. has had), the average government agency, by incurring but not funding retiree health care, is probably spending about 8 percent more than the official figure on cost. (Of course, there is a much larger hidden cost to running state and local government due to the underfunded pensions.)

[This assumes that other government entities have similar obligations as the USPS regarding retiree health care. My evidence for this being a reasonable assumption is that USPS employees share a retirement policy with standard civilian federal workers.]

Full post, including comments

Americans support public employee unions

It would not have occurred to me that Americans would actually want to pay higher taxes so that the Department of Motor Vehicles clerk could earn more than they do, or to work until age 75 to support a policeman who retired at 42 and moved to the Philippines, telling New York City to send his checks there (one of my helicopter students! He was up from NYC for a year or two while the taxpayers paid him to attend the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard). Yet this is the conclusion of a New York Times poll (story).

I wonder if the methodology of the poll had something to do with the outcome. About 25 percent of those surveyed said that the salaries and benefits of public employees were “too low.” As this is a practical impossibility without indentured servitude (a worker whose salaries and benefits were “too low” would quit and find a better job, something that public employees very seldom do), I think there are two explanations for this answer. One is that citizens are dissatisfied with the quality and energy of public employees and believe that, by raising salaries, better workers would be found and 20-30 years from now, after the current batch of mediocre workers has retired, public services would be improved. The second explanation is that 25 percent of the people surveyed either are public employees or are financially dependent upon public employees (the wife, children, and grandchildren of Robert W. Healy, Jr. probably would not say that his $5 million pension is excessive or that his $336,317 annual salary (84% of President Obama’s!) to manage a small town was excessive).

Now that over 40 percent of the U.S. economy is government spending (chart), I wonder what would happen if one were to conduct a poll of only those who work in private industry and don’t have a spouse, child, or parent who works for the government.

Finally there is the art of question wording (good video example). The New York Times told poll respondents “Collective bargaining refers to negotiations between an employer and a labor union’s members to determine the conditions of employment.” (all questions) The word “conditions” in my mind generates an image in my mind of working hours, task assignments, etc. The word “employer” makes me think of a private tax-paying company. What if the question had started out “Collective bargaining refers to the ability of a labor union to negotiate with politicians the delivery of pension and health care benefits to be paid for by future taxpayers”? I think the answer might have been very different.

Finally, we could apply Occam’s Razor to explain the poll result. We live in a democracy (“rule of the people”). The current system of government, including the fact that public employees are permitted to unionize and then bargain with the politicians whose election they financed and supported, is the result of citizens voting. So if the voting system works, we should expect our government to be exactly what most people want. It may seem alarming that people voted for a system in which the U.S. would owe 500 percent of GDP (see this nytimes article), but on the other hand the voters are also the same folks who refinanced their mortgages every two years and spent all of the (fake) equity in their homes.

What do readers think? Do Americans with private jobs really, as the NY Times poll seems to indicate, want to work until they are elderly and infirm so that public employees can spend their 50s on the golf course?

Full post, including comments

Cirrus airplanes are now 100 percent Chinese

The Cirrus SR20 that I often fly was created by a couple of brothers in the Midwest. When they needed expansion capital about 10 years ago, the company was sold to Arab investors. With the capital in place, Cirrus grew to dominate the market for piston-powered airplanes purchased for personal transportation (leaving Cessna and Piper to sell into the flight school market). When they wanted to improve the avionics, they switched from Avidyne (Massachusetts-based)/Garmin (Kansas-based; Taiwan-owned) to all-Garmin. Last year the company that makes the engine, Continental, was sold to a Chinese firm. Today, Cirrus announced that the entire company has been sold to a Chinese airplane manufacturer (press release). So Cirrus going forward will essentially be an all-Chinese show (counting Taiwan as culturally if not politically “Chinese”).

Full post, including comments

The American Lung Association Calls

Some professional fundraisers who apparently don’t subscribe to the government’s “do not call” registry, called me at home this morning, asking me to help out the American Lung Association. This led to over to guidestar.org to find out how much these particular do-gooders are paid for doing good.

The most recent Form 990 was for the year ended June 30, 2009 and it was a tough year for the enterprise, with revenues down about 10 percent. Fortunately, it wasn’t such a bad year for employees. Bernadette Toomey paid herself $466,000 (a raise of about $75,000 over the previous year; I thought maybe her high salary was because the job required a medical degree (a practicing pulmonologist in NYC would earn about $196,000), but a Google search reveals that Ms. Toomey has a “a Bachelor of Arts in Communications from Marymount Manhattan College and a Masters in Adult Education from American University”). Joseph Bergen clocked in at $357,000 (he left early in the year apparently, and the majority of his cash was $201,000 in severance pay). Charles D. Connor collected $303,000. Kim A. Schwartz raked off $250,000.

I think it would be nice if we could augment the do not call registries with our personal incomes. Then we could check a box “Do not call me if your employees earn more than I do.”

Full post, including comments

Interviewing America’s best and brightest

A friend of mine has been looking to hire smart people from across a range of disciplines. Here are his tales from the trenches:

In theory the economy is horrible and people want jobs. In practice it seems that no one I interview has any real knowledge. I just interviewed a woman getting a PhD in electrical engineering and bioinformatics from [top school, but not quite at the Stanford level] and she couldn’t tell me the probability of flipping heads three times in a row with a fair coin. I just interviewed a 4.0 physics major from [top state school] and he didn’t know how to convert miles to kilometers, and had no idea how to convert cubic kilometers in cubic meters.

For the record this is depressingly common. I’ve probably done ~700 interviews in the last five years of grads from top-notch technical programs. Perhaps ten percent were able to do basic mental math, reason about probability, etc.

Tyler Cowen says that we’ve run out of low-hanging fruit (free land, big technology improvements, uneducated young people). In “Universities and Economic Growth”, I speculated that the lack of improvement in our universities, essentially unchanged since the year 1088, was a drag on economic growth. My friend’s experience with interviewing folks fresh out of 16-22 years of our best schooling, proves, I think, Tyler Cowen wrong on the subject of at least one of his three kinds of fruit tree. It is true that we’ve taken young people and given them high school diplomas and college degrees of various kinds. But that does not mean that we’ve educated them. So there may be room yet for significant economic growth driven by improved education.

Full post, including comments

Government job: “for the first six months, I thought that I had to work”

I asked a friend who’d worked in private industry for more than 10 years how her new federal government job was going. “It’s great,” she said. “I’m non-essential, so I’m looking forward to being furloughed in a couple of weeks and having some time off.” Was the job so demanding? “For the six months, I thought that I had to work. Every time a senior person suggested something, I would scurry back to my office and write up a proposal. Then I’d show it to him and he’d say ‘I think we’re going to do something else.’ So now I just smile. I really hardly have to do anything.” How time-consuming is doing hardly anything? “I go in about 9:30 and leave at 4.”

Her salary for doing a couple of hours of real work daily? Nearly $100,000 per year plus fantastic pension and health care benefits.

Full post, including comments