Browsing this Thread:
1 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Charles Epps Jr. calls today's "bad" young girls the community's "worst enemy
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
 
|
Dr. Epps: Another example of the absurdly embarrassing leadership in this city.
The man?s solution to the budget issue challenges: give himself a raise. This ?leadership? is exactly what is wrong with the world today. The hypocritical sense of entitlement of all those in power (both private and public) while pointing the finger at the middle class and saying they feel entitled to a barely comfortable and healthy life. Citizens of the greatest country on earth are entitled to a large accessible middle class. Pay freeze for Wall Street CEO?s and politicians.
Posted on: 2011/4/14 13:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Charles Epps Jr. calls today's "bad" young girls the community's "worst enemy
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
So THATS why. Jeez I never would have guessed it was the girls causing all the trouble. Good thing we have a courageous campaigner like Epps whos not afraid to say it like it is!
Posted on: 2011/4/14 13:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Charles Epps Jr. calls today's "bad" young girls the community's "worst enemy
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Terrible choice of words, but I think if he said that he was "surprised" at the number of girls getting in trouble, his words would have been more acceptable.
Definitely a Senator Kyl moment, but a million dollars worth of security is sad.
Posted on: 2011/4/14 13:11
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Charles Epps Jr. calls today's "bad" young girls the community's "worst enemy
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Is Epps the new Senator Kyl? His statements are not intended to be truthful?
Posted on: 2011/4/14 11:42
|
|||
|
||||
|
Charles Epps Jr. calls today's "bad" young girls the community's "worst enemy
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
Speaking to clergy group, Jersey City Schools Superintendent Charles Epps Jr. calls today's "bad" young girls the community's "worst enemy" in helping drive up district's costs of policing schools; later backtracks to say all children, male and female, are in trouble today
Thursday, April 14, 2011 By TERRENCE T. McDONALD JOURNAL STAFF WRITER "Young ladies" are the community's "worst enemy," Superintendent Charles T. Epps Jr. said yesterday to a group of Jersey City pastors. Discussing the $1 million that the Jersey City school district pays to staff police officers at its facilities, Epps blasted the district's "young girls." "Our worst enemy is the young ladies," Epps said. "The young girls are bad. I don't know what they're drinking today, but they're bad." Epps was speaking to about a dozen members of the Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance of Jersey City & Vicinity meeting in the second floor of the group's Martin Luther King Drive office. A reporter was invited to attend the meeting. Speaking more broadly, Epps also told the ministers he was trying to recruit "mentors" for Jersey City students as part of a collaboration with Big Brother Big Sisters of Essex, Hudson, and Union Counties that he announced on Tuesday. Epps praised staff members of JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs who have volunteered as mentors. "They've signed up to help even the dirty, nasty, bad kids," Epps said. His comments didn't cause much of a stir with the ministers. Pastor Joyce Watterman, of Continuous Flow Christian Center, on Monticello Avenue, said later she was "surprised" by Epps' opinions on young girls, but doesn't necessarily disagree with him. Global oppression of women may cause some females to swing too hard in the wrong direction, Watterman said. "It affects our young girls, too, so that when we rise up, we sometimes overdo it," she said. Watterman added that she doesn't encounter many girls in her community that she believes are violent. But Epps may see some in his community, she said. When later asked to clarify his remarks Epps said he was speaking "metaphorically." All children are in trouble today, females and males, he said. "I think all of our children, we need to support them. We need to make them understand that education is the key," he said. Epps said violent incidents involving students "break down evenly" between male and female students.
Posted on: 2011/4/14 10:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Four challenging Jersey City schools superintendent's contract extension will be heard in court in J
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Was school superintendent vote illegal?
Fulop?s lawsuit to be heard by judge next month by Ricardo Kaulessar Reporter Staff Writer Hudson Reporter Dec 19, 2010 Did the Jersey City Board of Education violate state law last summer when it voted to give Superintendent of Schools Dr. Charles Epps a two-year contract extension? A court will decide next month. On Jan. 25, a hearing will be held in the state?s Office of Administrative Law in Newark about a complaint that the school board gave Epps an extension to his current contract without public notice. Last June 22, the board cast a 6-2 vote with one abstention ? but even the board members themselves seem to differ on what the vote was for. The members who opposed the resolution say the vote was to extend the superintendent?s contract, while the board majority claimed it was simply to authorize negotiations with Epps on a new deal. _____________ ?We just want as much transparency as possible.? ? Steven Fulop ________ Downtown City Councilman Steven Fulop ? along with local residents Anthony Sharperson, Shelley Skinner, and Elvin Dominici ? filed a complaint, known as the Verified Petition of Appeal, in July with the state?s Department of Education. The complaint charges the school board did not follow a state law that requires 30 days of public notice for the resolution. If they were going to have a hearing on the resolution, they?d need 10 days? notice. The board members who voted affirmative on June 22 challenged the assertion that the vote was illegal, and criticized the opposition for their accusations, claiming they were angry at the board for not voting in the spring to authorize a search for a new superintendent. The board eventually held a public hearing on the contract in August, but did not vote because the Hudson County Superintendent of Schools, Timothy Brennan, had to study the contract before sending it back to the board for approval. Brennan has yet to respond to the board about the contract. The school board filed a motion in August to have Fulop?s complaint dismissed, but in November, Administrative Law Judge Margaret Monaco dismissed the board?s motion and allowed the hearing to proceed. Alternatives to Epps Fulop said last week he is ?optimistic? that a judge will rule in favor of him and others contesting the board?s vote and have it overturned. ?If a judge decides in our favor, it is a big win from a legal standpoint and ethical standpoint,? Fulop said. ?We just want as much transparency as possible.? Fulop believes if the complaint convinces a judge the vote was done improperly, then the contract and Epps? performance as a superintendent for the past 10 years should be reexamined. Epps oversees a school district of more than 28,000 students. The district has been under state control since 1989 as the result of poor test scores, although it has been slowly transitioning back to local control. ?We had 35 out of 40 schools [in the past year] fail in terms of test scores, which is unacceptable,? Fulop said. ?I still want to see a nationwide search, including Epps as a candidate, to see how if we could get the best person in there.? Salary Fulop thinks the contract will be subject to change if voted on again, because a superintendent pay cap imposed statewide by Gov. Christopher Christie would reduce the amount of Epps? salary. The contract extension called for Epps to receive a base salary in the 2011-2012 school year of $268,200, plus stipends and other benefits. Epps said after the monthly Board of Education meeting this past Thursday that he had no comment on the upcoming hearing. But Ramon Rivera, special counsel to the school board, said the board?s vote at the June 22 meeting was done properly and believes a judge will see that as well. ?I feel confident that the board was compliant with the law,? Rivera said. Also confident that the board will be cleared of any wrongdoing is board member Sean Connors. ?I don?t think the board will vote any differently, because I think they see the difficult job that Epps has and that he has been doing a pretty good job,? Connors said. Connors was one of six board members who voted affirmative at the June meeting. Also voting in the affirmative were Bill DeRosa, Frances Thompson, Pat Sebron, Angel Valentin and Dr. Peter Donnelly. Voting against was Sterling Waterman and Sue Mack. Carol Lester abstained.
Posted on: 2010/12/20 21:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Four challenging Jersey City schools superintendent's contract extension will be heard in court in J
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
Four challenging Jersey City schools superintendent's contract extension will be heard in court in January
Tuesday, November 23, 2010 By MELISSA HAYES JOURNAL STAFF WRITER Four Jersey City residents who believe that a school board meeting in which Superintendent of Schools Charles T. Epps Jr. was granted a two-year extension of his contract was not properly advertised will get their day in court. "It's a win for the parents and students who just want good schools," Ward E Councilman Steven Fulop said yesterday. "It was said that the politicians who supported the contract put their politics in front of the school kids to try and sneak in a contract extension . to a superintendent with 30 out of 35 failing schools." But Board of Education President William DeRosa said he feels the board is also on the right track. DeRosa said the board still has to consult with its attorney, but he stands by the process followed to extend Epps' contract. "I feel we are on the right side of this," DeRosa said. "I do believe we followed all the due process. We followed all the rules and regulations." Fulop and parent Elvin Dominici, former school board candidate Anthony Sharperson and education activist Shelley Skinner filed a "verified petition of appeal" with the state Department of Education in July in hopes of overturning the two-year contract extension. New Jersey Administrative Law Judge Margaret Monaco yesterday denied the school board's request to dismiss the case through a summary decision, which would have been based on submitted written documents, rather than a full trial. "I conclude that a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding the action taken and/or the resolution voted on by the board at its June 22, 2010 meeting," Monaco wrote in her nine-page decision. "Simply put, the evidence at this juncture is insufficient to properly dispose of the matter by way of summary decision." Monaco ordered a hearing for Jan. 25. At the core of the issue is the June 22 meeting, at which the board voted 6-2-1 to grant Epps an extension on his $268,200-a-year contract, which expires next year. Fulop and his co-petitioners argue that the public should have been notified 30 days in advance. The public notice ran in the Jersey Journal June 18. The school board has responded that the 30-day notice wasn't necessary since the terms of Epps' contract extension had not been negotiated and the board held another meeting and public hearing Aug. 11. Epps' contract is still being reviewed by the state, as is every other superintendent's contract in the state, state Department of Education spokesman Alan Guenther said yesterday.
Posted on: 2010/11/23 10:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
Quote:
Ya think ?! Epps has done a horrible job and has surrounded himself with sycophants who kiss his behind at every opportunity. The one good thing to come out of Christie The Hutts move is that Epps may not get the contract he wants.
Posted on: 2010/11/21 1:45
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I actually know plenty of lawyers who don't make anything near $175K.
And, lawyers who do make a ton of money generate revenue for their law firm. Since they bring in money, they get a cut of it through their high paying salary. This whole argument is ridiculous to me. A 175K salary is A LOT of money! I certainly wouldn't be happy if I was making $265K a year and was told that my salary would be reduced to 175K, but come on, it is still a ton of money to make.
Posted on: 2010/11/21 0:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
How many school districts in New Jersey raced to extend the contracts of their superintendents ahead of the cap because THEY thought their superintendents were worth paying more?
Posted on: 2010/11/20 15:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
 
|
I keep seeing the word "qualified". How many school districts in Jersey City are failing? How many were failing when Epps started?
Posted on: 2010/11/20 15:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
 |
Obviously a good school superintendent adds value. He/she oversees the education of the people who will be workers and leaders in society. An educated child will be more productive in generating both tangible wealth and other intangible value later in his life.
$250,000 does not seem to me to be an exorbitant salary for a superintendent that does a good job overseeing a reasonably large school district. Now obviously here in Jersey City there are critics of how good a job our superintendent has done. And in addition to his salary there is criticism of the amount of deputy superintendents and the salaries that they earn. I don't think anyone is saying that simply because the school board gave the contract, that it should not be criticized or questioned. Now in the smaller districts, one could argue that $250,000 is too much. Maybe it is. But in lots of these districts, particularly the wealthier areas with successful schools, residents are wiling to pay higher property taxes to pay for education. The purportedly conservative governor has basically taken the position that the system is out of whack because school boards don't have adequate bargaining power. There may be some merit to this, but imposing a salary cap statewide seems to be a bit extreme. First of all, for super's salaries, he doesn't even have his bogeyman the NJEA to place the blame on. Second, the superintendent's salary, even if most reasonable people would call it too high, is not a significant portion of the overall education budget. Again, when I think this through I keep coming back to the same point. Most schools in New Jersey are actually pretty good, and if the residents of towns, through their elected school boards, want to pay a superintendent a high salary then let them do so. The real problem is poorer urban areas. But these districts generally have a high enough number of students that they aren't even subject to any hard cap but instead are subject to individual negotiation. So maybe Christie's education department will replace the school boards in haggling with the superintendents of Newark and Jersey City over their salary. Maybe it will save the taxpayers a few bucks. But it's not going to improve education, and may even deter other candidates from applying for the job if they know they have to deal not only with a local school board but a State office set on knocking compensation down.
Posted on: 2010/11/5 17:45
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18 Last Login : 2020/9/25 20:40 From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1609
|
Quote:
+ 1 bajillion! OMG - how come people don't say this more often? This has irked me forever and very few people talk about it. What the "market will bear" has nothing at all to do with CEO pay in many cases. What you can con your friends on the board, using ginned up metrics that make everyone look "above average", often has everything to do with it.
Posted on: 2010/11/5 14:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
What you should earn is what other people are willing to voluntarily pay you for what you produce (obviously how long you spent in school has nothing to do with this). In the case of public school superintendents the customers don't have voluntary choice as one would have in, for example, choosing a doctor or financial adviser. I completely agree that much of financial services is based on skimming and fleecing the clients but there's nobody forcing you to put your money with them, unlike public education.
Also, a good metric would be what leaders of private/parochial K-12 schools make, with adjustments for performance (so to the limited extent that there are free market alternatives, the value is quantifiable). I can't imagine any organization but the government making a product so bad that even when people are forced to pay for it they willingly pay again to get something else to do the same thing. Quote:
Posted on: 2010/11/5 3:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/06/weekinreview/06basicA.html
Check that out. The general managers. The guys who make the team up, make the trades, draft, hire the managers, and players is the LEAST paid. Its the teachers who should be making more, their failure or success has a bigger impact. Seriously a superintendent does about the same thing as a GM
Posted on: 2010/11/5 3:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Actually, such a cap would have little effect on all the folks you mentioned. They're all entrepreneurs, not hired CEO's. Their wealth comes from not from salary, but from equity in the company they started. The real leeches are the "hired managers" who think they're worth tens of millions a year, and convince their buddies on the board to agree. This doesn't happen in any other industrialized economy, worldwide most CEO's don't make more than 40x a worker, where ours push past 400x.
Posted on: 2010/11/5 3:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Quote:
Why in the world would you do that???? You want to limit the budding Gateses, the Buffetts, the Jobses, the Brins, the future of this country (if we even have a future, which I very much doubt), to 2 million/year? Even China, Russia and Vietnam are more capitalist than that....
Posted on: 2010/11/4 21:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
My point is that the value of "non-professional" fields (you know what I mean, lets not argue about it) is non-monetary, in the satisfaction of the person and the benefits gained by those who interact with their work. Few get to "have their cake and eat it too" by getting rich in addition. Despite the obvious celebrities, the odds of getting rich as an actor or artist are of lottery proportion. The odds of doing so as a teacher or social worker are even longer. The "value they generate" of these "educators" is by it's nature unquantifiable, and can't be compared to a bankers. Unfortunately I don't think most of those financial professionals deserve what they get either since the "value THEY generate" is often more ephemeral than the history crammed into a 8th graders head for an exam. Most of them stand in a shower of money, and inevitably get wet even as the rest flows down the drain. But that's a different thread I suppose.
Posted on: 2010/11/4 20:13
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
They literally generate no financial value. So you are suggesting they should be paid nothing. However, since I don't believe you actually believe your own rhetoric, I'll assume you think superintendents should be compensated in some way. I never said that superintendents should be paid millions a year. However, I did say that placing a hard cap-- and one that is rather lower than many superintendents currently make-- will drive out any talent that does exist in the education industry. A highly skilled superintendent could very well demonstrate usefulness with respect to the purpose of many functions, thus demonstrating their value. For instance, a district looking to improve the quality of education might be interested in paying more than the mandated cap to a superintendent with a track record of improving performance. A school district might also be interested in improving the efficiency of a school by hiring a superintendent with a notable record of making a district more efficient. The whole reason New Jersey still has local school districts rather than larger, more efficient, cheaper regional districts is to maintain local control. Hard capping salaries prohibits districts from prioritizing where their money is spent while reducing their ability to attract high quality candidates. If, for example, a place like Saddle River, New Jersey decides they want to have the very best school superintendent in the country and want to pay that person $500,000 a year, they should not face a limit on doing that; the voters in that community will either reject or accept the school's budget. Their school board would see VALUE in hiring someone at a higher rate than the hard cap because they want something specific that their voters are willing to pay for.
Posted on: 2010/11/4 20:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I am certainly not claiming, as a starving artiste myself, that there isn't value to an enriching and ennobling field in pottery. However, Ian is claiming that such ennobling and enriching fields have an equal monetary value as professions like doctor and lawyer - professions WHICH GENERATE ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF MONEY, which in turn used to pay doctors and lawyers their high salaries. Ian seems to think that on the other hand, a school superintendent has some natural, moral right to make an enormous amount of money by virtue of having a longer education than some other professionals, which I believe is flat-out bullshit. Now, I will state that I'd happily support a salary cap on CEOs and industrialists - say, a ceiling of 2 million dollars per year. But to try and say that superintendents should be paid beyond the value they generate because of some moral right disgusts me as much as any other form of robbery.
Posted on: 2010/11/4 19:30
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Most of the time if you want to go into a field OTHER than handling large quantities of money, like the arts, education or social services, it's explained to you that you have a choice of doing what you love or getting rich. This clearly defines that there's non-monetary VALUE to a career in these fields. But somehow certain senior executives in these fields get to justify wresting outsized salaries by comparing their income to that of a banker or CEO (who rarely deserve the ridiculous amounts they get).
Posted on: 2010/11/4 19:13
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
^^^
I realize you're probably knocked senseless by the "shellacking." Would you like to continue this in a few days when the concussion fades?
Posted on: 2010/11/4 19:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Well in that case public education has a negative monetary worth, so I guess superintendents should be paying us to do their jobs.
Posted on: 2010/11/4 18:48
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Posted on: 2010/11/4 18:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
1. You do realize that some definitions for the same word can be mutually exclusive, or have different... values, no? 2. The idea that you deride my public education is just too delicious. Thank you! I, for one, blame my grossly overpaid Superintendent. To your misapprehension of definitions - 3. 1 the regard that something is held to deserve; the importance or preciousness of something In the context of the SALARIES OF SUPERINTENDENTS, we are obviously talking about the MONETARY WORTH OF SOMETHING. In this case, labor vis a vis its effect on generating education that society deems to be worthwhile. In our society, for better or for worse, the typical way we define the success of education is future employment in a high-paying job, or in some capacity that benefits society as a whole. The vast majority of people leaving school will be seeking the former, and not the latter. As such, any fair (or fare, ha!) assessing of a Superintendent of schools job would be their success in fostering a learning environment which results in the most successful placement of graduates in positions that will allow them to earn the most money. 4. ? the usefulness of something considered in respect of a particular purpose In this case, since WE ARE TALKING ABOUT VALUE VIS A VIS IT'S DIRECT MANIFESTATION AS A SALARY, we could rewrite the sentence as "monetary value is the usefulness of a superintendent, considered in respect of its worthwhile superintending." Notice how at no time can the qualifier "monetary" be extricated from the sentence, since we are having the discussion regarding the SALARIES OF SUPERINTENDENTS. Please, if you have some way to define the monetary value of a superintendent independent of the monetary value of a superintendent, please do share.
Posted on: 2010/11/4 18:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Posted on: 2010/11/4 17:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Actually, your built in Mac dictionary said: value |ˈvalyoō| noun 1 the regard that something is held to deserve; the importance or preciousness of something : your support is of great value. ? the material or monetary worth of something : prints seldom rise in value | equipment is included up to a total value of $500. ? the worth of something compared to the price paid or asked for it : at $12.50 the book is a good value. ? the usefulness of something considered in respect of a particular purpose : some new drugs are of great value in treating cancer. ? the relative rank, importance, or power of a playing card, chess piece, etc., according to the rules of the game. I've highlighted the relevant portions.
Posted on: 2010/11/4 17:42
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
noun
1 - the material or monetary worth of something : prints seldom rise in value | equipment is included up to a total value of $500. From my Mac built-in dictionary, you sicko.
Posted on: 2010/11/4 17:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
val?ue [val-yoo] noun, verb, -ued, -u?ing. ?noun 1. relative worth, merit, or importance: the value of a college education; the value of a queen in chess. I'm sorry the educational system has failed you so miserably.
Posted on: 2010/11/4 17:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: 235 earn over $175,000 -- Christie pushes cuts & pay caps for school superintendents
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
^^^
That's the actual literal definition of value - you know, what something is worth monetarily. If you and superintendents would like to somehow extricate yourself from this system, I suggest giving me all your money and material possessions so you can live free from the enslavement of basic, universal economic facts.
Posted on: 2010/11/4 14:34
|
|||
|
||||