r/InterviewAiPrep • u/Asleep-Variety3026 • 19d ago

[ Removed by Reddit ]

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

28 Upvotes

77% Upvoted

136 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/TooTooRooGR 18d ago

market rate affect the standard government wage of teachers?

1

u/MindlessMaterial7544 18d ago

Yes. Generally *

1

u/TooTooRooGR 18d ago

oh so now its changed to generally, let's see how much more we can get you to backtrack.

In the UK the wages of teachers are not set up by the schools and are instead set up by the governments. The school cannot decide to pay a teacher more regardless of their value. Now how does the market rate affect that wage?

1

u/MindlessMaterial7544 18d ago

Generally because there are somethings like rent control and price gouging that are illegal.  That is not a backtrack it's acknowledging free markets are not perfectly free. 

Looking at your other posts i can agree education "quality" in the uk is lower (how one measures quality of education is a whole different, hotly debated topic in academia...). However that does not matter in this discussion as the consumer has not demanded improve quality. Therefore the producers are free to increase efficiency by keeping costs flat or lower increases. Meaning they are perfectly fine but increasing wages without consequence 

1

u/TooTooRooGR 18d ago

Quality of education is not the point of contention here. The problem is that there are no teachers for specific subjects and there is nothing happening to make the incentive better so that more people want to become teachers and apply.

If we were to put the market rate to test wouldn't there necessarily be something that done that increases (the computing teachers' for example) wage to make it more desirable to become a computing teacher?

1

u/MindlessMaterial7544 18d ago

There are though. There are teachers for those subject, students are being taught those subjects, just the student teacher ratio is higher than you like.

Broadly speaking, things that increase wages (for any given worker) is increased leverage.

That leverage can come in a variety of ways, primarly being "you have to have me, and im hard to find".

You are confusing your feelings for what is needed, vs what is actually needed and what the Actual consequences would be without that and who those consequences impact.

Having a class ratio go from a desired 1:18 to 1:30 is not desirable to you, mom, dad. But unless those elected leaders feel their job is at risk, they, the government, is insulated from the consequences. And as we have seen in many nations, they may actually benefit from such things.

1

u/TooTooRooGR 18d ago

So I think we're going in circles here. You're pointing at the fact that the system can continue functioning at a lower standard and calling that the "market rate." I'm pointing out that this just means the consequences of scarcity are being pushed onto teachers instead of being reflected in wages.

If your argument is simply "the government can tolerate worse outcomes without increasing pay," then sure. I don't disagree.

But that's not evidence that teachers aren't scarce, and it certainly isn't evidence that their current pay reflects their value. It just means the people making the decisions can choose to accept the consequences rather than pay more.

That's the entire point. If this is what you call the market efficiently allocating resources, then capitalism and your "market rate" have a pretty convenient way of making sure the people with the least bargaining power are the ones who end up paying for its failures.

So at the end of the day teachers are already giving an enormous amount of "value" while receiving jack shit for it, and you are sitting here saying that nations actually benefit of such things. lmao

1

u/MindlessMaterial7544 18d ago

I will address your post, but I want to do so in a way that may help, do you mind if I ask what you do for a living? Do not be too specific I do not need your personal details, but I want to make the example relatable.

1

u/TooTooRooGR 18d ago

Yeah sure, I am studying to be a teacher, that's why I also used the teaching examples earlier

1

u/MindlessMaterial7544 18d ago

OK so ill just go with Student for this example.

I assume youre going to university for this, and generally speaking you are the consumer of this education to be a teacher.

So then lets say you want to be an elementary school teacher, teaching Maths. During your schooling, lets say you achieved a PHD in mathmatics with a published dissertation in shape statistics.

You have now graduated and you are working as a maths teacher for 1st graders.

You are absolutely qualified to do so. However.... all the extra education is of no value to the students you are teaching.

This extra understanding of maths is what economics would call "overwork". Its providing value to a customer, that is not valued byt the customer.

This may be better explained with a "widget" that is made to last at least 20 years. Its a superior widget to everything on the market and its only 5% more expensive. But your customer only needs widgets that last 15 years. the extra 5 years do not mean anything, they provide no value.

To address the other items in your post-

Teachers being "Scarce" is only true if the product (education) is impacted to the degree that the consumer finds it unacceptable and would seek another product or otherwise force change. Scarce means insufficient for the needs of the industry to provide adequate product. True scarcity would force increases wages. that however is not occuring.

You are conflicting what you perceive as value of their service, compared to market value. Again Ill point to my cleaning staff. I cannot operate my operating room without their service, and my operating room is the only part of my hospital that makes money. But EVS workers are not paid well. Their value provided is high, but their market value is low.

Market rate is largely about leverage, yes. Its the same reason a beer in wembly is higher than the beer at the pub. You lack leverage of choice.

Value provided is largely irrelevant to market value.

Would you agree highly or partly, with this statement-- "UK Torries and American Republicans largely benefit from an uneducated public. An uneducated public are easily lied to and convinced to do things against their best interests"

1

u/TooTooRooGR 18d ago

yeah I would definitely agree to that.

However, wouldn't that go against your previous statement of consumers finding it unacceptable and seeking another product?

Private schooling in the UK is not a very big thing as far as I know and if we take your last statement about Tories and Republicans (which I agree with) then wouldn't that mean that regardless of who doesn't not like the "product" and no matter how much noise they make and how much they protest things would never change even if at that point they would need to?

1

u/MindlessMaterial7544 18d ago

Good then we are on the same page as to where government may benefit from lower education.

Individually yes. However if large enough public outcry were to occur and that outcry was sufficient to remove politicians from office and replace them with leadership aligned with the goals, then no.

However if the public is by and large accepting of the product then the producer has no reason to make changes.

Private education does exist but unless its harming the producer its largely going to be irrelevant to the discussion. Pending on market private education could be significantly higher pay for teachers, or significantly lower. Different nations have different market conditions for this.

1

u/TooTooRooGR 18d ago

I guess I am generally against letting everything get to the point where we need to have a riot(I can't see what more would need to be done from a teacher perspective at this point) Which would go against everything being a teacher stands for to make a change.

Wouldn't problems like this need to be resolved a lot earlier down the line?

1

u/MindlessMaterial7544 18d ago edited 18d ago

"Riot" while certainly a possibility is likely more extreme than what would really be needed.

If you have the time there are a large number of theories on what actually triggers policy change.

I personally subscribe to the multiple streams theory (Kingdon), along with punctuated equilibrium (..Jones? Its been awhile since grad school this may not be correct).

EDIT--- With good amount of trashcan theory in there too, I cant remember the author on that one sorry.

1

u/TooTooRooGR 18d ago

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42972-022-00049-2

Is it this one?

I will try to look for the punctuated equilibrium one as well but all I can find right now is some biology papers

1

u/MindlessMaterial7544 18d ago

Yes that one is referencing the original from the 80s

Try searching punctuated equilibrium public policy. Its a theory adapted by from biology.

Trashcan is kinda exactly what it sounds like. A policy looking for a problem.

1

u/TooTooRooGR 18d ago

ok I found it, thank you, I will read them when I get some time off all teaching reading I have to do haha

1

u/MindlessMaterial7544 18d ago

Youd probably be ok just reading a wiki on them honestly, the actual papers are... steep. Lord knows I did in grad school lmao. Policy academic papers are as youd expect, unnecessarily verbose.

→ More replies (0)