jay do you seriously think all not-for-profit businesses rely on charity donations or patronage for their income? you do realise the plethora of legal practices, media sources, publishing houses, thinktanks, cultural foundations, galleries, museums, schools, etc that operate like their private sector counterparts, right? there is no soliciting for donations. they all offer a product or service.
Yes. Most people equate non-profits in America with charities, and those are what I was speaking of.uziq wrote:
jay do you seriously think all not-for-profit businesses rely on charity donations or patronage for their income? you do realise the plethora of legal practices, media sources, publishing houses, thinktanks, cultural foundations, galleries, museums, schools, etc that operate like their private sector counterparts, right? there is no soliciting for donations. they all offer a product or service.
I understand that some hospitals are not-for-profit, insurance companies, universities and the like are nominally not-for-profit, but in these cases I would make the argument that their not-for-profit status actually messes them up in the long run. They have to spend the money they earn, yes? So they've built themselves massive bureaucracies full of people who don't serve the core mission or they invest in massively expensive equipment or facilities, both of which drive up costs. There's no impetus to go lean.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
yes damn a company that spends its profits on a good cause with an actual social utility, or on upgrading equipment rather than sending it to shareholders and the board. terrible idea!
i get free or discounted entry to almost every attraction in my city. museums, galleries, even the zoo and aquarium and local arts cinema. it’s bexause my employer regularly spends money to sponsor schemes at these places — it reinvests some of its profits on the local economy. urgh, gross! bloated operation! sad!
i get free or discounted entry to almost every attraction in my city. museums, galleries, even the zoo and aquarium and local arts cinema. it’s bexause my employer regularly spends money to sponsor schemes at these places — it reinvests some of its profits on the local economy. urgh, gross! bloated operation! sad!
Why doesn't he instead lower the price of the textbooks he's selling at extortionate rates to students and schools?uziq wrote:
yes damn a company that spends its profits on a good cause with an actual social utility, or on upgrading equipment rather than sending it to shareholders and the board. terrible idea!
i get free or discounted entry to almost every attraction in my city. museums, galleries, even the zoo and aquarium and local arts cinema. it’s bexause my employer regularly spends money to sponsor schemes at these places — it reinvests some of its profits on the local economy. urgh, gross! bloated operation! sad!
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
i think the profit model is unsustainable in the long term. shareholders want a growing return on their investment. a business that could happily turn over a modest and sustainable turnover gets hijacked by the profit motive, takes risks, cuts corners. worse, investors don’t want to be told the company is investing a dollar today for a hypothetical payoff in 10-15 years. they want a happy time at their annual shareholders conferences. not good long term!!!
couldnt tell you anything about the textbook trade. can tell you about happy employees though.Jay wrote:
Why doesn't he instead lower the price of the textbooks he's selling at extortionate rates to students and schools?uziq wrote:
yes damn a company that spends its profits on a good cause with an actual social utility, or on upgrading equipment rather than sending it to shareholders and the board. terrible idea!
i get free or discounted entry to almost every attraction in my city. museums, galleries, even the zoo and aquarium and local arts cinema. it’s bexause my employer regularly spends money to sponsor schemes at these places — it reinvests some of its profits on the local economy. urgh, gross! bloated operation! sad!
fyi all the accepted textbook publishers are huge consortia of companies like Elsevier. they are extremely rapacious. they are also for profit companies. ahem.
Last edited by uziq (2018-11-30 09:13:21)
Maybe I'm just idealistic, but the principle of a not-for-profit to me would be a company that sold for a small profit above cost, enough to cover overhead and invest a bit in the business. What we get instead are near-monopolies draping themselves in the flag of non-profit status and charging extortionate rates to their consumers. It's the absolute worst form of cartelism. "But we reinvest or donate all profits!" Great, you fuck over your consumers so you can pay yourselves nice salaries for cushy jobs while gaining cultural cache for your donations.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
how does that make any sense considering all the main industries have private sector equivalents? a not for profit that charges extortionate fees wouldn’t last very long.
ironically you’re using an example from the private sector, of textbook publishers with near-monopolistic control of university course syllabi, to critique your perceived not for profit ethos. very confused thinking. it’s almost like you don’t know what you’re talking about!
ironically you’re using an example from the private sector, of textbook publishers with near-monopolistic control of university course syllabi, to critique your perceived not for profit ethos. very confused thinking. it’s almost like you don’t know what you’re talking about!
You publish physics books, yes?uziq wrote:
how does that make any sense considering all the main industries have private sector equivalents? a not for profit that charges extortionate fees wouldn’t last very long.
ironically you’re using an example from the private sector, of textbook publishers with near-monopolistic control of university course syllabi, to critique your perceived not for profit ethos. very confused thinking. it’s almost like you don’t know what you’re talking about!
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Do you have any first hand experience with a non-profit?Jay wrote:
Most non-profits are bullshit. Most of their effort is expended on fundraising and nearly all of the money they bring in is spent on salaries. It's essentially a form of high class begging, but with attached social status. It's a path for artsy ne'erdowell scions with connections to get off the family dole. Throw a gala a year, sell the wealthy the feeling they are contributing in a positive way, and collect their tax deductible donations. Most NPO's don't pass on more than maybe 15% of donations, and the work they actually attempt to do is ineffectual.SuperJail Warden wrote:
Some people seriously believe that without a profit motive things will just not get done in any field and the people working in not for profit positions are lazy for not trying to better themselves and chase profit. I swear I have seen Jay make that argument here.
Jay doesn't need experience of anything, he's an expert in every field, you can tell by the way he posts on every subject on here...KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Do you have any first hand experience with a non-profit?Jay wrote:
Most non-profits are bullshit. Most of their effort is expended on fundraising and nearly all of the money they bring in is spent on salaries. It's essentially a form of high class begging, but with attached social status. It's a path for artsy ne'erdowell scions with connections to get off the family dole. Throw a gala a year, sell the wealthy the feeling they are contributing in a positive way, and collect their tax deductible donations. Most NPO's don't pass on more than maybe 15% of donations, and the work they actually attempt to do is ineffectual.SuperJail Warden wrote:
Some people seriously believe that without a profit motive things will just not get done in any field and the people working in not for profit positions are lazy for not trying to better themselves and chase profit. I swear I have seen Jay make that argument here.
Do you have any experience with non-profits or corporate America? Working as a waiter for Applebee's doesn't count.Jay wrote:
Ok.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Jay has worked for the government and a small to mid size engineering firm. It's fair to say he has no real world experience (or real world facts) on how non-profits or massive corporations work or the culture within.SuperJail Warden wrote:
Some people seriously believe that without a profit motive things will just not get done in any field and the people working in not for profit positions are lazy for not trying to better themselves and chase profit. I swear I have seen Jay make that argument here.
I have about 3 years experience working with a non-profit and 10+ in Corporate America. I can say I have learned insight enough to be able to critique both. Based on what you say here, you don't know anything about how either of them work beyond how you think they work and what you've read.
no, i don’t. and a textbook isn’t a book. the economics and model of textbook production is very different (not that you’d know anything about it). if you want a discussion about the much-maligned costs of textbooks, i’m all ears. what does that have to do with not for profits? all the giant academic publishers who dictate that market are private companies you moron. they are entirely profit driven.Jay wrote:
You publish physics books, yes?uziq wrote:
how does that make any sense considering all the main industries have private sector equivalents? a not for profit that charges extortionate fees wouldn’t last very long.
ironically you’re using an example from the private sector, of textbook publishers with near-monopolistic control of university course syllabi, to critique your perceived not for profit ethos. very confused thinking. it’s almost like you don’t know what you’re talking about!
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3959
The textbooks schools get sold come with access to lesson plans, media, and a bunch of other stuff. Like binders full of subject material. It isn't like buying a book for your 101 Econ class.
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3959
One reason why schools hold onto old textbooks is because of how much curriculum and support material is tied to them. Get a new book and you also need every teacher to adjust how they teach due to the changes.
I do have first-hand experience of charities, and my sister sits on various boards.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Do you have any first hand experience with a non-profit?Jay wrote:
Most non-profits are bullshit. Most of their effort is expended on fundraising and nearly all of the money they bring in is spent on salaries. It's essentially a form of high class begging, but with attached social status. It's a path for artsy ne'erdowell scions with connections to get off the family dole. Throw a gala a year, sell the wealthy the feeling they are contributing in a positive way, and collect their tax deductible donations. Most NPO's don't pass on more than maybe 15% of donations, and the work they actually attempt to do is ineffectual.SuperJail Warden wrote:
Some people seriously believe that without a profit motive things will just not get done in any field and the people working in not for profit positions are lazy for not trying to better themselves and chase profit. I swear I have seen Jay make that argument here.
There are good charities, there are also charities which exist solely to provide a nice lifestyle for the directors and in some cases allow them access to vulnerable children.
Even if charities are properly set up the funds work as a honeypot which draws in professional milkers.
Anecdotally I used to drive past the office of a charity for disabled children which had nothing but the latest Jaguars outside, I knew a bloke who worked for the WWF on a very nice salary and a fully expensed life for himself and his family in Zurich - who then retired comfortably at 40.
Plus the charities which either imported vulnerable children for paedophiles or funded their trips to third-world countries, some of which are still operating out of the UK.
Fuck Israel
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3959
Teacher party at my old school Friday that I was still invited to. Drank and ate a ton. The restaurant is not going to let us back after the planners argued with the managers. The slutty married and with kids lady teachers made fools of themselves by getting too friendly with us guy teachers. After the party ended at 10, all of the young teachers went out to another bar to drink some more. The vice principal pulled out a joint and we smoked while we waited for the Uber. We met other teachers at the bar who drunkenly argued with one of our teachers.
It's now Monday and I put on my dorky teacher face. I was too hung over Saturday to prepare a lot of work so today I am going to do "homework review" for my first period class and pretend that that is important to get done.
My high school kids probably think I am a nerdy teacher with my purposely dated and dorky jokes. In reality I consumed more drugs and alcohol than any of them did over the weekend.
It's now Monday and I put on my dorky teacher face. I was too hung over Saturday to prepare a lot of work so today I am going to do "homework review" for my first period class and pretend that that is important to get done.
My high school kids probably think I am a nerdy teacher with my purposely dated and dorky jokes. In reality I consumed more drugs and alcohol than any of them did over the weekend.
wow bro nice one you smoked a joint and got inappropriately drunk at a restaurant. truly living the life of a libertine.
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3959
The funny part of it to me is that society puts teachers like me on a pedestal when in reality a lot of us are degenerates in our spare time. I am sure those overworked sad teachers exist but for young teachers in the suburbs it is an easy gig compared to roofing and working on cars.
I have parents who come to me and tell me how much they trust, like, and respect me even though as you all know, I am a pretty awful person inside. I put a lot of effort into seeming sincere, kind, and thoughtful to the outside world even though I don't feel any of that.
I have parents who come to me and tell me how much they trust, like, and respect me even though as you all know, I am a pretty awful person inside. I put a lot of effort into seeming sincere, kind, and thoughtful to the outside world even though I don't feel any of that.
Last edited by SuperJail Warden (2018-12-10 09:12:19)
i’m sorry but i don’t think society puts high-school teachers on a pedestal. you’re not exactly judges or brain surgeons.
What's interesting to me in this entire monologue by macbeth is the idea that people tend to view teachers as unsung heroes for motivating certain students who may or may not have always been cast aside by their school, peers, family, etc. That seems to be the ideology that Macbeth is referencing, but yet he himself admits that he doesn't give a shit about these people. He isn't changing lives in any meaningful way - he's punching in and out and doing what he needs to to move the class along.
No one is putting you on a pedestal, Macbeth - you're just another shit teacher that doesn't care about these students. Maybe they won't respond to normal teaching strategies. Maybe they won't give a fuck if you try to assist them in a different environment than the class room. But you'll never know because you're content with sticking them in the corner instead of trying to impact them in a meaningful way.
Regarding your "omg teachers are looked up to but we are just regular people", that's a sentiment you will realize more and more as you grow older - the reverence built up by parents and children around adults, certain job professions, etc are just that - ideas built up by adults and passed to children. You don't magically become an adult when you turn 18 or 21, you aren't able to miraculously balance a check book or cook a good meal if you didn't know how to before, you don't get bestowed some almighty perspective - people are people, and just because they have a job title or intensive academic achievements doesn't mean they are infallible or inoculated from being exposed to the same thing that everyone else is.
No one is putting you on a pedestal, Macbeth - you're just another shit teacher that doesn't care about these students. Maybe they won't respond to normal teaching strategies. Maybe they won't give a fuck if you try to assist them in a different environment than the class room. But you'll never know because you're content with sticking them in the corner instead of trying to impact them in a meaningful way.
Regarding your "omg teachers are looked up to but we are just regular people", that's a sentiment you will realize more and more as you grow older - the reverence built up by parents and children around adults, certain job professions, etc are just that - ideas built up by adults and passed to children. You don't magically become an adult when you turn 18 or 21, you aren't able to miraculously balance a check book or cook a good meal if you didn't know how to before, you don't get bestowed some almighty perspective - people are people, and just because they have a job title or intensive academic achievements doesn't mean they are infallible or inoculated from being exposed to the same thing that everyone else is.
yeah, i really don't understand where this whole image of the high-school teacher comes from. it's like a bad ryan gosling movie or something. most people i know who became high-school/secondary school teachers were just marked by their ... average-ness, i suppose. they were average graduates with average grades, nice enough people, not especially moral exemplars but not slackers and wasteoids either. just middle-of-the-road decent graduates who wanted to go do a quiet, solid job. i really can't think of a career choice that sums up the 'average nondescript university peer' more than teaching children. maybe it's the way that undergraduate education feeds into teacher training and employment here in the UK with our state education system. it's really one of those after-graduation paths of least resistance.
Last edited by uziq (2018-12-10 13:12:25)
Most of my teacher friends and family fall into one of two categories:1) they wanted to raise a family, have a steady job, and have vacations that matched their kids or 2) they wanted a job with summers off and no drug testing. Only one was an idealist that wanted to inspire kids and change lives in a positive way, and she's amazing at her job, but also a complete failure to launch.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I will echo that the majority of teachers from my grade were very average students who I would be reticent to have be in charge of my childrens education.
I can't really argue with that, but I will say that one of my motivators for wanting to pursue teaching back when that was something I was considering was that it brought me joy to work with someone on subject matter where they were struggling until that expressive moment where it just "clicks." And it was from assisting in grade school and high school where I had the most experience in helping this way.uziq wrote:
i really can't think of a career choice that sums up the 'average nondescript university peer' more than teaching children. maybe it's the way that undergraduate education feeds into teacher training and employment here in the UK with our state education system. it's really one of those after-graduation paths of least resistance.
It was more my figuring it was a place where I could do some real good for people, than the idea that it was a job where I could just coast and mooch off the system, that drove my interest.