Joe Legal works in construction, has a Social Security Number and makes $25.00 per hour with taxes deducted. Jose Illegal also works in construction, has NO Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash "under the table". Ready? Now pay attention... Joe Legal: $25.00 per hour x 40 hours = $1000.00 per week, or $52,000.00 per year. Now take 30% away for state and federal tax; Joe Legal now has $31,231.00. Jose Illegal: $15.00 per hour x 40 hours = $600.00 per week, $31,200.00 per year. Jose Illegal pays no taxes. Jose Illegal now has $31,200.00. Joe Legal pays medical and dental insurance with limited coverage for his family at $600.00 per month, or $7,200.00 per year. Joe Legal now has $24,031.00. Jose Illegal has full medical and dental coverage through the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00. Joe Legal makes too much money and is not eligible for food stamps or welfare. Joe Legal pays $500.00 per month for food, or $6,000.00 per year.. Joe Legal now has $18,031.00. Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for food stamps and welfare. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00. Joe Legal pays rent of $1,200.00 per month, or $14,400.00 per year. Joe Legal now has $9,631 .00. Jose Illegal receives a $500.00 per month federal rent subsidy. Jose Illegal pays out that $500.00 per month, or $6,000.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $ 31,200.00. Jose Illegal receives a $280.00 per family member/ month federal CASHAID for four family members . Jose Illegal has $ 43,200.00. Joe Legal pays $200.00 per month, or $2,400.00 for insurance. Joe Legal now has $7,231.00. Jose Illegal says, "We don't need no stinkin' insurance!" and still has $ 43,200.00. Joe Legal has to make his $7,231.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, etc. Jose Illegal has to make his $ 43,200.00. stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, and what he sends out of the country every month.."actually Jose illegal doesn't pay for most utilities in many states as he gets county assistance to pay the bills and his late fees" Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work. "and pays a higher tax rate if he earns above a certain amount" Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family. Joe Legal's and Jose Illegal's children both attend the same school. Joe Legal pays for his children's lunches while Jose Illegal's children get a government sponsored lunch. Jose Illegal's children have an after school ESL program. Joe Legal's children go home. Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same police and fire services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay. Do you get it, now?
On 7/26/10, Great Example wrote: > I recently recieved this e-mail and thought the intelligent > teachers of WV should read this and see exactly > how "undocumented"/ ILLEGAL aliens are destroying us > financially. > Check it out: > > Joe Legal works in construction, has a Social Security > Number and makes $25.00 per hour with taxes deducted. > Jose Illegal also works in construction, has NO Social > Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash "under the > table". > Ready? Now pay attention... > Joe Legal: $25.00 per hour x 40 hours = $1000.00 per week, > or $52,000.00 per year. Now take 30% away for state and > federal tax; Joe Legal now has $31,231.00. > Jose Illegal: $15.00 per hour x 40 hours = $600.00 per > week, $31,200.00 per year. Jose Illegal pays no taxes. Jose > Illegal now has $31,200.00. > Joe Legal pays medical and dental insurance with limited > coverage for his family at $600.00 per month, or $7,200.00 > per year. Joe Legal now has $24,031.00. > Jose Illegal has full medical and dental coverage through > the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year. > Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00. > Joe Legal makes too much money and is not eligible for food > stamps or welfare. Joe Legal pays $500.00 per month for > food, or $6,000.00 per year.. Joe Legal now has $18,031.00. > Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for > food stamps and welfare. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00. > Joe Legal pays rent of $1,200.00 per month, or $14,400.00 > per year. Joe Legal now has $9,631 .00. > Jose Illegal receives a $500.00 per month federal rent > subsidy. Jose Illegal pays out that $500.00 per month, or > $6,000.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $ 31,200.00. > Jose Illegal receives a $280.00 per family member/ month > federal CASHAID for four family members . Jose Illegal has > $ 43,200.00. > Joe Legal pays $200.00 per month, or $2,400.00 for > insurance. Joe Legal now has $7,231.00. > Jose Illegal says, "We don't need no stinkin' insurance!" > and still has $ 43,200.00. > Joe Legal has to make his $7,231.00 stretch to pay > utilities, gasoline, etc. > Jose Illegal has to make his $ 43,200.00. stretch to pay > utilities, gasoline, and what he sends out of the country > every month.."actually Jose illegal doesn't pay for most > utilities in many states as he gets county assistance to > pay the bills and his late fees" > Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part > time job after work. "and pays a higher tax rate if he > earns above a certain amount" > Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his > family. > Joe Legal's and Jose Illegal's children both attend the > same school. Joe Legal pays for his children's lunches > while Jose Illegal's children get a government sponsored > lunch. Jose Illegal's children have an after school ESL > program. Joe Legal's children go home. > Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same police and > fire services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay. > Do you get it, now?
On 7/26/10, So . . wrote: > And the point of all this in reference to education is . . . > what? > > On 7/26/10, Great Example wrote: >> I recently recieved this e-mail and thought the intelligent >> teachers of WV should read this and see exactly >> how "undocumented"/ ILLEGAL aliens are destroying us >> financially. >> Check it out: >> >> Joe Legal works in construction, has a Social Security >> Number and makes $25.00 per hour with taxes deducted. >> Jose Illegal also works in construction, has NO Social >> Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash "under the >> table". >> Ready? Now pay attention... >> Joe Legal: $25.00 per hour x 40 hours = $1000.00 per week, >> or $52,000.00 per year. Now take 30% away for state and >> federal tax; Joe Legal now has $31,231.00. >> Jose Illegal: $15.00 per hour x 40 hours = $600.00 per >> week, $31,200.00 per year. Jose Illegal pays no taxes. Jose >> Illegal now has $31,200.00. >> Joe Legal pays medical and dental insurance with limited >> coverage for his family at $600.00 per month, or $7,200.00 >> per year. Joe Legal now has $24,031.00. >> Jose Illegal has full medical and dental coverage through >> the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year. >> Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00. >> Joe Legal makes too much money and is not eligible for food >> stamps or welfare. Joe Legal pays $500.00 per month for >> food, or $6,000.00 per year.. Joe Legal now has $18,031.00. >> Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for >> food stamps and welfare. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00. >> Joe Legal pays rent of $1,200.00 per month, or $14,400.00 >> per year. Joe Legal now has $9,631 .00. >> Jose Illegal receives a $500.00 per month federal rent >> subsidy. Jose Illegal pays out that $500.00 per month, or >> $6,000.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $ 31,200.00. >> Jose Illegal receives a $280.00 per family member/ month >> federal CASHAID for four family members . Jose Illegal has >> $ 43,200.00. >> Joe Legal pays $200.00 per month, or $2,400.00 for >> insurance. Joe Legal now has $7,231.00. >> Jose Illegal says, "We don't need no stinkin' insurance!" >> and still has $ 43,200.00. >> Joe Legal has to make his $7,231.00 stretch to pay >> utilities, gasoline, etc. >> Jose Illegal has to make his $ 43,200.00. stretch to pay >> utilities, gasoline, and what he sends out of the country >> every month.."actually Jose illegal doesn't pay for most >> utilities in many states as he gets county assistance to >> pay the bills and his late fees" >> Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part >> time job after work. "and pays a higher tax rate if he >> earns above a certain amount" >> Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his >> family. >> Joe Legal's and Jose Illegal's children both attend the >> same school. Joe Legal pays for his children's lunches >> while Jose Illegal's children get a government sponsored >> lunch. Jose Illegal's children have an after school ESL >> program. Joe Legal's children go home. >> Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same police and >> fire services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay. >> Do you get it, now?
On 7/28/10, Master's + 45 = Worthless according to Manchin wrote: > Usually the local counties will reimburse tuition with funds > provided by the state. Check with your central office > regarding its procedure for reimbursement. > > On 7/28/10, JS wrote: >> Does anyone know of free teacher certification credits? I >> have paid for 3 hrs but need 3 more hours. Any guidance is >> appreciated. (state of WV)
Doubting ThomasIf you are still looking for credit opportunities, you can check with the center for professional development sometimes they have free or low cost credit opportunities. I would also chech with your local board of ed. they may know of something to help you get the 3 credits you need. Good luck!
The way we figure is this upcoming year's 24 paychecks are scheduled to begin and end on certain dates in order that there aren't gaps. With a new calendar beginning significantly earlier for the next school year ('11-'12), those 24 paychecks will be distributed beginning earlier thus the possibility of overlapping the last check from '10-'11 year and the beginning check for '11-'12 year.
Looking for someone in your state of WV to do a postcard exchange. If interested please emal your name, school, address and grade level. ty [email removed]
It's about time the fed's took notice of the smoke that has surrounded Joe Manchin since he took office. Who would expect otherwise since Manchin's uncle A.J. taught him everything he knew about getting around the law?
On 8/06/10, kate wrote: > On 8/06/10, aRLO wrote: >> On 8/06/10, hmmmm wrote: >>> This is the same issue that brought down Arch...How will >>> this impact the Senate race? >>> >>> [link removed]?
We need Delaware and...See MoreLooking for a successful postcard exchange? Look no further. Most of the teachers in our exchange continue year after year because we have such a huge response rate. You will receive a postcard from each state, Canada, and Washington, D.C.!
We only need the following states, as we take one teacher per state:
We need Delaware and West Virginia.
Email me if you are interested. We use commercial postcards from your state. If you have young students, you can just cut and paste information about your state. Older students can write their own postcards (I have them type and cut and paste.)
I provide labels for you to address all the postcards. We will mail in late October.
If you follow the recent news about education, you might think providing children with a quality education is all about money. There are stories about massive budget cuts and teachers' salaries, studies about the efficacy of charter schools and per-student-spending, and revolts over the increasing amount of private dollars that are supporting education.
But in the midst of number-crunching, everyone has forgotten about one of the most cost-effective resources available: parents.
Engaging parents in schools is free; it just requires a receptive environment and structures in place to support the partnerships. And as any teacher will tell you, it works.
To cite just one example from my own experience, I had a student who was perpetually tardy. After talking to the mother, she decided to spend a day escorting him from class to class, making sure he got to each on time. He was rarely late after that because he knew his mom and I were on the same page and that what happened at school was relevant to his home life as well.
Study after study has shown that when parents are actively engaged in their children's education, students are more positive about learning, graduate from high school and enroll in college at higher rates, and are less likely to use alcohol and drugs.
Involved parents can add needed resources to improve education. They can help make sure internship programs are available in the local business community. They can lobby states or districts for funds to buy new textbooks. They can help mentor or tutor struggling students or initiate community-based after-school programs.
So why aren't more parents involved in schools, especially in the schools that are struggling the most?
Many principals and district leaders, faced with the task of improving test scores, feel inhibited from focusing energy on anything other than academic achievement, and may be too near-sighted to predict or prioritize the long-term benefits of such partnerships. As a result, there's usually no structure or precedent for parent involvement, and many parents feel unwelcome or unhelpful at their child's school.
More Opinion on AOL News Gibbs' Comments Rankle Left Wing Opinion: Howard Beale Without the Raincoat Opinion: Time for Tea Party Leaders to Act on Racism Opinion: The Universe Is Shrinking -- Call It Cosmozation More Stories » Feedback Send letters to the editor to [email removed].
Not once did I call a parent who was uninterested in hearing about what was going on at the school, and most wanted to help. Schools can be intimidating, especially to parents whose culture includes deference to schools or who had negative schooling experiences in their own lives. As layoffs require teachers, frequently the first or only point of contact parents have with the school, to add lunch duties or administrative roles to their workload, they are left with less time to reach out to parents. But parents need schools to take the lead in initiating partnerships.
Parental engagement should be better supported by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, commonly known as No Child Left Behind. ESEA is supposed to be reauthorized at the end of the year. While many schools and districts formally comply with Section 1118 on parental involvement, few of those plans ever leave the paper; there is very little impetus to actually engage parents.
Congress should convey the expectation that schools actually make an effort to engage parents. The Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice has proposed specific language to make this expectation clear to schools and districts and to give states more power to enforce Section 1118.
Many schools are struggling with limited resources these days. But every school can afford to get parents more involved in their children's education.
Briana Sprick is a former high school teacher in Chicago Public Schools. She is currently a second year student at Harvard Law School and is working with Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice on parent engagement matters this summer.
This speech from a student gives a viewpoint about what education is and how students view school. Watch the video and what do you think about this video?
On 8/12/10, Marlene wrote: > This speech from a student gives a viewpoint about what > education is and how students view school. Watch the video > and what do you think about this video?
I heard today that the state is working on requiring schools over the next couple of years to phase out block scheduling and back towards traditional 7-8 period days or modified schedules.
On 8/18/10, Like to Discuss wrote: > > This one's for you, CabCoTeach. > > I went and re-read the original post. Here it is: > > "I heard today that the state is working on requiring > schools over the next couple of years to phase out block > scheduling and back towards traditional 7-8 period days or > modified schedules. > > Anyone else heard of this?" > > Your reply, after the assault, was, "It asked WHY,... did it not??? > Where does it ask opinion as to whether one is better than the other??" > > So, answer me. Does the original post contain the word "why"? I do not > see it. But you call me reading impaired. > > And no, I wasn't referring to you as a political troll, but those > people who come on here adn post about Obama and Manchin, et al. I was > trying to start a discussion based on the topic, which is more than > fitting. If we are moving away from block and many people like block, > then the pros and cons of it would fit into this thread more than > appropriately. > > So why did you attack me? Totally unwarranted. Have a bad day? > > It is NO WONDER whatsoever that people don't like teachers. I know too > too many of us who are like you in attitude and arrogance, and to be > truthful, it hurts our profession. > > Thank you for making me feel like a piece of garbage when all I am > trying to do is facilitate discussion. Bravo. > > On 8/18/10, CabCoTeach wrote: >> On 8/16/10, Like to Discuss wrote: >>> Why don't we have a discussion on the pros and cons of block >>> scheduling? Let's get back to discussing educational issues >>> andstart ignorning the political trolls. Game? >> >> >> If YOU were refering to ME "discuss"; I take issue with your >> comment and "could" call YOU a MORON for not actually reading the >> original post. >> >> It asked WHY,... did it not??? Where does it ask opinion as to >> whether one is better than the other?? >> >> >> First - I've been teaching in WV for over twenty-three years. >> >> Secondly - I've posted on this forum, off and on, for nearly five >> years. Some of my posts may have had a "political' slant - but I >> have never NOT directly associtated my reasoning/opinion to an >> educatiional issue (as with my post concerning scheduling). >> >> Third - saying I (if indeed you were refering to me) am a "troll" >> generally means an ulterior motive is involved for posting on a >> site. Did I say ANYTHING about a particular party, political >> philosophy, elected offical or candidate specifically? NO >> >> Once again, for the reading "impaired" - Schools are moving away >> from block scheduling because it simply saves money (i.e., shorter >> planning periods). >> If you wish to start a threat as to the merits of either scheduling >> format - fine, we can discuss that as well. >> Dipsh!t >> >>
On 8/20/10, Shame wrote: > Shame on you CabCo. You should learn to read yourself before going on a > tirade against a poster trying to spark an honest discussion. I wonder if > indeed, as Discuss suggests, that your ilk is the reason so many dislike > teachers. > > > > On 8/18/10, Like to Discuss wrote: >> >> This one's for you, CabCoTeach. >> >> I went and re-read the original post. Here it is: >> >> "I heard today that the state is working on requiring >> schools over the next couple of years to phase out block >> scheduling and back towards traditional 7-8 period days or >> modified schedules. >> >> Anyone else heard of this?" >> >> Your reply, after the assault, was, "It asked WHY,... did it not??? >> Where does it ask opinion as to whether one is better than the other??" >> >> So, answer me. Does the original post contain the word "why"? I do not >> see it. But you call me reading impaired. >> >> And no, I wasn't referring to you as a political troll, but those >> people who come on here adn post about Obama and Manchin, et al. I was >> trying to start a discussion based on the topic, which is more than >> fitting. If we are moving away from block and many people like block, >> then the pros and cons of it would fit into this thread more than >> appropriately. >> >> So why did you attack me? Totally unwarranted. Have a bad day? >> >> It is NO WONDER whatsoever that people don't like teachers. I know too >> too many of us who are like you in attitude and arrogance, and to be >> truthful, it hurts our profession. >> >> Thank you for making me feel like a piece of garbage when all I am >> trying to do is facilitate discussion. Bravo. >> >> On 8/18/10, CabCoTeach wrote: >>> On 8/16/10, Like to Discuss wrote: >>>> Why don't we have a discussion on the pros and cons of block >>>> scheduling? Let's get back to discussing educational issues >>>> andstart ignorning the political trolls. Game? >>> >>> >>> If YOU were refering to ME "discuss"; I take issue with your >>> comment and "could" call YOU a MORON for not actually reading the >>> original post. >>> >>> It asked WHY,... did it not??? Where does it ask opinion as to >>> whether one is better than the other?? >>> >>> >>> First - I've been teaching in WV for over twenty-three years. >>> >>> Secondly - I've posted on this forum, off and on, for nearly five >>> years. Some of my posts may have had a "political' slant - but I >>> have never NOT directly associtated my reasoning/opinion to an >>> educatiional issue (as with my post concerning scheduling). >>> >>> Third - saying I (if indeed you were refering to me) am a "troll" >>> generally means an ulterior motive is involved for posting on a >>> site. Did I say ANYTHING about a particular party, political >>> philosophy, elected offical or candidate specifically? NO >>> >>> Once again, for the reading "impaired" - Schools are moving away >>> from block scheduling because it simply saves money (i.e., shorter >>> planning periods). >>> If you wish to start a threat as to the merits of either scheduling >>> format - fine, we can discuss that as well. >>> Dipsh!t >>> >>>
Joe Manchin has still, to my knowledge, not made a comment on the improvement of test scores. Could this be due to the taste of the sour grapes that stuff his mouth?
On 7/26/10, Great Example wrote: > I recently recieved this e-mail and thought the intelligent > teachers of WV should read this and see exactly > how "undocumented"/ ILLEGAL aliens are destroying us > financially. > Check it out: > > Joe Legal works in...See More