So here we get a two-fer. Those precious over-paid janitors who have been living high-on-the-hog for too long, lose their jobs. And those lazy 9 year olds who have nothing better to do than go to school get to do hard physical labor for less money.
Increase unemployment by firing workers
Go back over 100 years in child-labor
Profit!!!
I like how it has to start the headline with “Not an Onion Spoof”. I think that right there says a lot.
For an allegedly intelligent man, Gingrich confuses correlation with causation.
It may be true that many (let’s say 50.1%) of successfull people did get their first job between the ages of 9 and 14. The why of this (if it’s even true) we can leave to GD, but if I had to guess, I’d say that they were above-average intelligence (enough to balance school work load and part-time job) and extra motivated (enough to balance school work load and part-time job).
That doesn’t mean we can randomly push 9-14 y/o’s into the job market in job lots and expect them to flourish.
I see nothing wrong with having kids clean the classroom-it teaches them respect for the school. Why do you think we have so much vandalism? Because the kids think school is free. As for the unionized janitors-a local city (Somerville, MA) is wondering why they are paying janitors $85,000/year (and the schools are filthy).
And, kids in Japan have been doing this for years-class ends, and they runa broom throgh the classroom-empty the wastebaskets, etc.
Child labor inded-this sounds like something the Teamster’s Union dreamed up.
I read the link.
And, God help me, I don’t necessarily disagree with Newt.
What is so heinous about asking kids to spend a couple of hours a week, under the tutelage of someone with a clue, to clean up after themselves?
FWIW, back in the 1970s in Europe, it was customary - in schools I attended, anyway - for the students to spend a little time picking up classrooms after class. After all - we made the mess, so we pick it up, and it’s a nice thing to do for the next class. Why is this wrong? Or do we want to delegate the task 100 percent to minimum-wage workers, with our kids having no concept of cleaning up after them selves and also the idea it’s acceptable to make a mess and walk away because Juan or Juanita will clean up?
Yet another perfect example of the “crazy bastard you think is the next Hitler” perhaps having a good idea/point.
Uh…I don’t think we’re talking about tidying up the classroom here, ralph. We’re talking cleaning and mopping every restroom, emptying every trash can into bigger and bigger trash cans until it all goes into the dumpster. Mopping, waxing, and buffing floors. Cleaning windows. General facility maintenance (changing lightbulbs, etc).
Even if we get all the kids in school to clean up just their classroom, there’s a crapload more general facility work that needs to be done as well, and then we’re beyond basic chores like “cleaning a classroom with 20 other kids” and into “real work.”
There’s nothing wrong with kids sweeping up and otherwise tidying a classroom. Throughout my public schooling, we were all made to do this, and I think that if kids have to clean up the room, they don’t mess it up as badly.
However, what if a kid decides not to do this?
And for that matter, it looks like ol’ Newt isn’t just talking about erasing blackboards and sweeping up, he’s talking about more intense cleanups…you know, the kind that require power equipment and nasty chemicals. Even back in the Stone Age when I went to school, the janitors had to use things like floor buffers which were not appropriate for kids to use.
Yeah, it seems like a pat and easy solution to someone who doesn’t really know how much is required to keep a school going. Anyone who has ever worked in a school with more than 100 students can see where this plan would lead. (And most janitors make about $30,000). Really this seems to me like one of those candidate things where they essentially fabricate some “problem” in order to come of with a “solution” that will somehow show that they have “new” ideas. However, I think the idea of responsibility and work experience are good in theory–there just are better ways to address it.
And just to be clear, I agree. Chores for kids, even school chores, aren’t state-sponsored child slavery.
Hoss whuppin’!
This, which was what I was driving at in my post right before yours. I completely left out the exposure to noxious industrial-strength cleaning chemicals, and heavy power tools like a motorized buffer (which is actually a dastardly, subversive, infernal device concocted by the U.S. Armed Forces to covertly foist an upper-body strength-building training regimen onto it’s [del]volunteer slaves[/del] service members).
Although many a boring winter’s day was passed in the barracks playing Buffer Rodeo.
I have 4 kids in school, and they are all required to do basic classroom clean-up before they are allowed to leave. They throw away trash, sweep up dirt, water plants etc. They still need a janitor to clean up the bathroom when the toilet overflows, disinfect the cafeteria tables, get rid of nesting pack rats, etc. There are jobs that just aren’t appropriate for kids.
And in my school district custodians are paid about $32,000 a year.
Your post wasn’t there when I started composing mine, for what it’s worth.
I was thinking specifically about floor buffers because I was remembering one of my old jobs, which required me to clean out grease traps, use harsh chemicals, operate a trash compacter, and otherwise do janitorial jobs. I got to do this shit because most of the other workers were minors, and the company didn’t want to take the risk of having minors do that stuff. I believe that in some cases it was ILLEGAL to allow minors to do some of those things. At any rate, even though I did this sort of thing, I was not required to use a floor buffer. Maybe I didn’t have the upper body strength. I THINK, but I’m not sure, that the floors were buffed by a professional service.
Ralph, I think you’re spewing nonsense as you always do. Here is a link to the proposed 2010 municipal budget for the city of Somerville, Massachusetts. (Note that it’s a two-megabyte PDF document.) Pay particular attention to pages 353-5, which lists the salaries for school custodians. The salaries range from $36,000 to $72,000 (although the largest number is for the facilities supervisor). Most of the salaries are about $40,000 (for junior building custodians) to about $48,000 (for senior custodians 2).
So did you just pull that $85,000/year number out of your ass?
Wait a second, what part of forcing young children to scrub toilets and mop up shit in order to save a few bucks on an already exploited labor force is a good idea/point?
And what are we going to see happen with the formerly employed janitors who the kids are replacing? Are they to go on unemployment? Or just be called lazy for not having a job any more?
And I for on have had a kid barf on the classroom floor. I don’t want the 8th graders having to clean that up. Talk about unsanitary.
Here’s an interesting article from the Somerville Wicked Local site:
Newt is proof of H.L. Mencken’s wonderful claim:
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.”
Why is it everytime a RWinger on this site wants to denegrate union workers by pulling a salary number out of thier butt it is always $85.000. Recently, we had another thread about teachers where they used the same salary figure. Do RWingers assume everyone in a union must make $85,000? Or is that the number in the talking points memo they were handed?
Agreed. He’s talking about having 1 adult janitor to take care of the gymnasium, locker rooms, cafeteria, hallways, bathrooms, offices, along with all of the mechanicals to keep the building running. 1 adult and a crew of children.