More to the point, how dare teachers expect their contracts to be fulfilled?
This kind of thing always makes me angry. The author may well have a point that we have been promised more than the states can actually afford. However, the implication is that teachers are a luxury that society cannot afford. The whole tone of the article, from the first sentence to the very last self-righteous "Don't say you weren't warned", is one of dire warning and dismissiveness of negotiated contracts. He even takes the requisite left hook at teachers' unions.
There are three reasons this makes me angry. One of them is entirely visceral and gut-driven, and I think the other two probably are as well, but they feel more rational. The visceral reaction is, of course, that my team is being attacked. Nobody likes being referred to as the cause of the next savings-and-loan crisis. And I don't think we're being given anything we haven't earned. Traditionally in this country, civil servants tolerate a comparatively low salary and a heavy work load in exchange for a not miserably poor retirement after many years of dedicated service. Teachers qualify as civil servants.
There. The good news is, I feel better. The bad news is, I've spent so long trying to express emotion without being vituperative that I don't remember what my two actual points were. Well, maybe I'll remember them later, write another blog post.