At 07:00 PM 6/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
>This week's 'Corporate Citizen of the Week Award' goes to Gabor D. Farkas
>for the following example of the politics of simplicity.
>
>>To this I can add: God save the education from teachers' unions that
>>continuously preach about the level of education but only care about their
>>members' level of compensation.
>
>Go for it Gabor!  Perhaps with divine intervention all those nasty teachers'
>unions will finally be brought to heel.  And, God willing, maybe you can
>tell us the next sector of society you'd like to impoverish.
>
>Joe Szalai
>
>
Joe, I have to agree with Gabor on this one.

Quality of education, just like quality of manufacturing or services, has
precious little to do with labor unions.  The purpose of "collective
bargaining" is to get the most compensation, benefits and job security for
the members of a union.  If anything, a strong union is able to win
concessions from the employer that makes it difficult to make a decent
return on investment.  Often, this drives the employer out of business, out
of the geographic area or out of the country.  Only recently have some
unions began to get smart and realize that they are killing off their cash
cows and began some profit sharing programs.  Teachers Unions, on the other
hand, are not doing this since they have an even more enviable position as
their "employers", the school districts or states have taxing powers and
borrowing powers.  And, most parents do not look closely at what their
education dollars are spent on and generally vote "yes" on school budgets,
since they believe that more money will buy better education.

Perhaps things are different in Canada, Joe, but this is one taxpayer's view
of things in New York State.

regards,


Charlie Vamossy

At 05:17 PM 6/24/96 -0400, Peter Hidas wrote in "The Hungarian Refugees of
1956: Who Were They?"

>Consequently Hungary lost three
>percent of its 15 to 39 years old population, 4.1% of the 15 to 19 group.
>Persons of military age left in high number. Men in their twenties who
>defected constituted 10.3% of their cohorts, the 19 years old group, 9.3%.
>The youth of Budapest departed in large number. Fifteen out of every
>hundred left from the 15-24 group. The highest proportion of refugees came
>from the 5th, 6th and 7th districts of the capital where most of the
>white-collar workers, intellectuals and Jews lived.

        These are staggering numbers and I wonder whether anyone has studied
the demographic and intellectual consequences of this massive emigration
after the 1956 revolution.

>        Two-thirds of the refugees were formerly employed, while 1/3 of
>them were supported. White-collar workers constituted 25% of the refugee
>population, 3.3% of their cohorts. One half of the blue-collar workers were
>skilled industrial labourers, 4.2% of their cohorts.

        Although Peter doesn't give the percentage of blue-collar workers
(skilled) in the total numbers, the percentages compared to the cohorts
indicate to me that relatively speaking at least skilled workers emigrated
in even greater numbers than white-collar workers.

>College and university
>students numbered 3,200, 11.2% of the Hungarian total.

        Again, the numbers are staggering and at least from my university
the most outstanding students left in the greatest numbers.


>        By the end of May 1957, 11,447 Hungarians had returned to Hungary,
>nearly six per cent of the total of 193,885.

        I am a bit confused here. Earlier you mentioned a total of 151,000
but this time the figure is higher: 193,000.

>The refugees returned in the highest
>proportion from Belgium.

        Just curious. Why? Was the situation that bad in Belgium?

>More men returned than did women, more from the 15
>to 19 and the over 60 groups.

        It just shows that we women are more resilient *;)).


>         According to Canada's Statistics Section of the Department of
>Citizenship and Immigration by May 1, 1958, the number of Hungarian
>refugees who were granted Canadian landing right was 35,914, one out of
>every five who had left Hungary.

        Again, surprisingly high percentage who went to Canada. In my
opinion, based on my personal observation on the spot, there were a lot of
people among the refugees who felt that once they made the giant step of
crossing the border they should go as far as possible. One mustn't forget
that the cold war was still raging; Europe was still quite poor; there was a
certain fear of a new war. For all these reasons, some people felt saver on
the North American continent. Most people opted for Canada because the
American Congress was dragging its heels concerning the admittance of the
Hungarian refugees. After months in refugee camps, bored stiff, ready to go
and start a new life, Canada seemed the ideal place. They were ready to
admit the Hungarians and they even took people who were affected by TB. (I
know because I was working in a TB hospital in Ottawa, where a whole floor
was set aside for Hungarian refugees. I served them food and was "the
translator," with my rather pitiful English.)

>In the college age category,
>20-24, females constituted only 29% (1,310) of the refugee-immigrants.

        Does this mean that a third of the Hungarian student emigres
one-third ended up in Canada?

>The religious affiliation of the population of Hungary was not accounted
>for by the censuses during the Communist regime. The division of the
>Hungarians into 2/3 Catholics and 1/3 Protestants is generally accepted. As
>a result of the Holocaust the Jewish population dropped from close to five
>per cent to less than one after 1945. There is no direct source concerning
>the religion of the Hungarian refugees of 1956.

        I am surprised about that because our first--let me add,
negative--surprise when we arrived in Austria was that almost everything was
divided into religious categories. If you were a Protestant you had to go to
such and such office to get a free ticket from Villach to Vienna; if you
were a Catholic, you had to get your ticket elsewhere. If you were Jewish,
you went to a thrid place. I remember that we found this distasteful since
we all considered ourselves simply Hungarian refugees. Eventually everybody
took advantage of the situation. If you heard that the Lutherans are giving
away soap, you became a Lutheran. A remember distinctly of people going to
the Jewish Agencies who were not Jewish at all.

>In the opinion of the Canadian ambassador in
>Vienna,  J.S.Macdonald, however, the great bulk of the refugees had no
>desire to go so far away as America or Australia. "Our experience so far,"
>he reported to Ottawa, " is that most of them are thinking in terms of
>returning to their homes as soon as the fighting is over." It is thought
>that perhaps fifty percent will wish to return to their homes when
>conditions settle down. Macdonald believed that most of the refugees were
>apolitical working people with a sprinkling of ex-industrialists and
>professional men.  Macdonald rejected the generally accepted view that the
>Hungarians were fleeing Soviet terror.

        What can I say? Mc. Macdonald was either not a very astute man or
was simply antagonistic toward the Hungarian refugees.

>He had a discussion with an Austrian official representing the
>Burgermeister in Wiener Neustadt: "...with migration cut off for the last
>sixteen or seventeen years, there is a great pressure to get out, quite
>apart from the form of government or living conditions in Hungary.

        Sure, we were all dying to get to know the rest of the world but one
doesn't take such a momentous and dangerous step just for a little sightseeing.

>In January 1957 the Vienna Visa Section informed Ottawa
>that in their view half of the Hungarians were politically unreliable and
>many were in ill health. These falsification aimed at the slowing down of
>the refugee flow to Canada.

        Very interesting. By the way, the medical examination given to us at
the embassy was most rudimentary. For some strange reason, they gave you an
eye exam, as if this was terribly important.

>There were one thousand students among the refugees. In 1957/58
>one sixteenth of the increase in the student population of Canada was due
>to the presence of the Hungarian refugee students. By the end of the summer
>of 1957 hardly any of refugees received state support or welfare - they
>were hard at work building their personal career, building Canada.

        Correct. By September 1957 I was a clerk with the Canadian Library
Association and was making 150 dollars a month.

        Eva Balogh

Because we have had so an interesting exchange on early Hungarian
history, people might be interested in two new books by Gyula Kristo.

        Gyula Kristo'. *Honfoglala's e's ta'rsadalom." Budapest: Magyar
Tudoma'nyos Akade'mia To:rte'nettudoma'nyi Inte'zete, 1996.

        Gyula Kristo'. *Magyar honfoglala's. Honfoglalo' magyarok. Budapest:
Kossuth, 1996.

        Eva Balogh

At 12:45 AM 6/26/96 GMT, you wrote:
>In article >,
 says...
>>
>>This week's 'Corporate Citizen of the Week Award' goes to Gabor D. Farkas
>>for the following example of the politics of simplicity.
>>
>>>To this I can add: God save the education from teachers' unions that
>>>continuously preach about the level of education but only care about their
>>>members' level of compensation.
>>
>>Go for it Gabor!  Perhaps with divine intervention all those nasty
>>teachers' unions will finally be brought to heel.  And, God willing,
>>maybe you can tell us the next sector of society you'd like to impoverish.
>
>I, too, was somewhat taken aback by Gabor's ejaculation! Clearly, it was
>made in complete ignorance of what is involved in serious and dedicated
>teaching.
>
>George

George -- it just so happens that in Westchester County, New York, this is
the week that General Motors is manufacturing Chevy vans.  After sixty years
in the county, they are shutting down their factory.  Guess what drove them
away?  High taxes and high wages.  With half of their property taxes going
to the local school district which in turn has a powerful teachers union,
that guarantees retirement benefits such as very few private industries
provide, the negaitve role of the union is clear.

They also have a strong employee union, that threatens strikes, etc. for
higher wages.  Any wonder then, that they are transfering the manufacturing
operation to states that have the right to work laws on their books?

In the meanwhile, we are stuck with a lower tax base and powerful teachers
union that wants more and more and more....  Maybe it's time for my family
to move also to a state that is not chocked by unions.


regards,



Charlie Vamossy

>George -- it just so happens that in Westchester County, New York, this is
>the week that General Motors is manufacturing Chevy vans.  After sixty years
>in the county, they are shutting down their factory.  Guess what drove them
>away?  High taxes and high wages.  With half of their property taxes going
>to the local school district which in turn has a powerful teachers union,
>that guarantees retirement benefits such as very few private industries
>provide, the negaitve role of the union is clear.
>
>They also have a strong employee union, that threatens strikes, etc. for
>higher wages.  Any wonder then, that they are transfering the manufacturing
>operation to states that have the right to work laws on their books?
>
>In the meanwhile, we are stuck with a lower tax base and powerful teachers
>union that wants more and more and more....  Maybe it's time for my family
>to move also to a state that is not chocked by unions.
>
>
>regards,
>
>
>
>Charlie Vamossy

Thanks to the unions protecting the interest of teachers in Canada,
Canadian teachers are making
a much better living than the ones in the USA. When I started to teach in
rural Ontario I made $3000
per year. Once I moved to unionized Montreal my income more than doubled.
My job was protected by my union and so was my income and eventually my
pension too. The union did not
create unemployment in my field but safeguarded the quality of education
even when the student population went into decline.

Peter I. Hidas

Hungarian Studies
Department Of Russian and Slavic Studies
McGill University
Montreal, Quebec, Canada

At 8:04 AM 6/26/96, Eva S. Balogh wrote:
>At 05:17 PM 6/24/96 -0400, Peter Hidas wrote in "The Hungarian Refugees of
>1956: Who Were They?"

>>College and university
>>students numbered 3,200, 11.2% of the Hungarian total.
>
>        Again, the numbers are staggering and at least from my university
>the most outstanding students left in the greatest numbers.

In my earlier posting on the Hungarian students I indicated that the number
of students who left
Hungary was around 7,000, that is about 20% of the university population in
Hungary in 1956/57.
>
>>        By the end of May 1957, 11,447 Hungarians had returned to Hungary,
>>nearly six per cent of the total of 193,885.
>
>        I am a bit confused here. Earlier you mentioned a total of 151,000
>but this time the figure is higher: 193,000.

The larger figure was issued by the UN, the smaller one by KSH which bassed
its numbers on police registration.

>>The refugees returned in the highest
>>proportion from Belgium.
>
>        Just curious. Why? Was the situation that bad in Belgium?
Unemployment, poor conditions in the mines.



>        Does this mean that a third of the Hungarian student emigres
>one-third ended up in Canada?

No. Only 1,000, that is 1/7 of the total. The ratio was higher in Germany
for example.
>


Peter I. Hidas

Hungarian Studies
Department Of Russian and Slavic Studies
McGill University
Montreal, Quebec, Canada

At 8:57 AM 6/26/96, Eva S. Balogh wrote:
>        Because we have had so an interesting exchange on early Hungarian
>history, people might be interested in two new books by Gyula Kristo.
>
>        Gyula Kristo'. *Honfoglala's e's ta'rsadalom." Budapest: Magyar
>Tudoma'nyos Akade'mia To:rte'nettudoma'nyi Inte'zete, 1996.
>
>        Gyula Kristo'. *Magyar honfoglala's. Honfoglalo' magyarok. Budapest:
>Kossuth, 1996.
>
>        Eva Balogh

The 1996/2 issue of HISTORIA is also dedicated to the Conquest.

Peter I. Hidas

Hungarian Studies
Department Of Russian and Slavic Studies
McGill University
Montreal, Quebec, Canada

At 07:19 AM 6/26/96 -0700, Charlie Vamossy wrote:

>Joe, I have to agree with Gabor on this one.
>
>Quality of education, just like quality of manufacturing or services, has
>precious little to do with labor unions.  The purpose of "collective
>bargaining" is to get the most compensation, benefits and job security for
>the members of a union.  If anything, a strong union is able to win
>concessions from the employer that makes it difficult to make a decent
>return on investment.  Often, this drives the employer out of business, out
>of the geographic area or out of the country.  Only recently have some
>unions began to get smart and realize that they are killing off their cash
>cows and began some profit sharing programs.  Teachers Unions, on the other
>hand, are not doing this since they have an even more enviable position as
>their "employers", the school districts or states have taxing powers and
>borrowing powers.  And, most parents do not look closely at what their
>education dollars are spent on and generally vote "yes" on school budgets,
>since they believe that more money will buy better education.
>
>Perhaps things are different in Canada, Joe, but this is one taxpayer's view
>of things in New York State.

The differences between Canada and the United States are not significant,
but that is not the point.  What I find uncomfortable is your willingness to
be totally beholden to the corporate bosses and their agenda.  You seem to
throw up your hands in defeat and allow the 'employer' to make all the
decisions about wages, benifits, working conditions, etc., etc..  Why?  You
know, if business had it's way, and it does(!), it will impoverish us.  'The
bottom line' is much more important than a fair wage.  Why do you think that
so many profitable companies are downsizing by cutting staff and increasing
their profits even more?  Are they escaping unionized workers?  I don't
think so, since they're all doing it.  Besides, once they've convinced you
that you have to make such and such a concession, in order for them to offer
employment in your area, what's to stop them from asking more?  Nothing!
You've chosen to give up already!

Joe Szalai

Joe Szalai will surely tell himself that all those "reactionaries"
in the tri-state area are heartless creatures who don't appreciate the
efforts of teachers and are against paying them a fair salary.

        I'm afraid I also have a rather negative opinion about the teachers'
unions. Also, based on personal experience, I find the professional
competence of teachers extremely low. I meet elementary school teachers who
are unable to spell, who are unable to construct a half-decent English
sentence and these are the people who are supposed to teach reading,
writing, and arithmetic to our children.

        For decades now the state of education has been the matter of
concern practically everywhere in the United States. Ten or so years ago it
was felt that the reason for poor teaching is low salaries. If the teachers
were paid better, if teaching was considered to be a prestige
occupation--the argument went--the professional level would be higher. In
Connecticut, for example, salaries are very high now but I don't see any
change in the level of competence. And why should we? Teachers in this
country have tenure and therefore all the deadwood remains within schools
for decades to come. Another reason for poor teacher performance, in my
opinion, is the existence of teachers' colleges, where the students must
learn an awful lot of useless subjects pertaining to the art of teaching
while their background in the actual subjects they are supposed to teach
remain very poor. Unfortunately, the Hungarian system also introduced
institutes of higher education specifically for teachers.

        But let's turn to the Hungarian situation. Hungarian schools used to
be of very high standards especially on the high-school level. The reason
for that, let's say 30-40 years ago, was that relatively few people went to
gymnasium. Therefore, the student body was self-selective. Even a mediocre
student in a Hungarian gymnasium was way above the average student, let's
say, in the United States. However, more and more Hungarian children go to
gymnasiums or their equivalents and therefore the pool is not as good as it
was a few decades ago. Second, as I mentioned, the Hungarians also adopted
the practice of separate institutions for future teachers.

        Prestige of teachers also dropped considerably in the last forty
years or so. When I entered fifth grade, most of my teachers had doctorates
in their fields. They belonged to a very small, highly educated elite. Today
this isn't the case. They are also very badly paid and some of them, just
like in the United States, are not up to snuff. They are too many of them
while the number of school-age children are dropping. In the last twenty
years or so, the teachers managed to reduce their teaching load to eighteen
hours a week--way below the European or American average. (I asked here a
teacher acquaintance of mine: their load is 22 hours.) What happened as a
result is a real sham: most teachers teach more than 18 hours a week: 20
percent of their total load is over and above these eighteen hours for which
they get overtime--paid on a higher rate, of course. Now that the ministry
of education wants to increase the teaching load and offers correspondingly
higher salaries, the teachers refuse to consider the offer: they would make
more money if everything remained unchanged because due to the overtime rate
of 20 percent of their teaching load.

        Another reason that I have a rather negative attitude to the
Hungarian Teachers' Union is the person who is heading it. Mrs. Szollosi is
not an attractive human being. Loud, somewhat coarse, and politically very
far to the left. Absolutely incapable of compromise. Add to this the
incredible anomaly that she is also an MSZP member of parliament while she
is heading the bargaining unit facing a government formed by the MSZP. Only
in Hungary!

        Eva Balogh

Eva Balogh wrote in Hungary#710:

>>I find it strange that in one issue of Hungary I got two responses not from
>>the addressees of my comments, but by self-appointed proxies.  Since
>>reference was made (by Aniko' and Martha) to a Hungarian saying, may I
offer
>>one of my own here?  It begins: "Fogadatlan prokatornak...
>
>        Martha already answered this paragraph. Anyone on the list has the
>right to answer your letter, especially since it seems that Andras hasn't
>been around the computer for the last few days.
>
Andras is probably quite capable to answer for himself.  Did he ask you to be
his secretary or "fogadatlan prokator"?  (Sorry, that means unsolicited
advocate;-) )

>        Your second, Hungarian-language note was obviously misaddressed. You
>were actually planning to send it to the FORUM.

Bingo!

> But what I don't understand
>is the following: why do you think that Gyorgy Ilsovszky actually talked
>about you. Perhaps Hosszu's first name is Ferenc.
>
>        Eva Balogh

There you go again, f.p. What business is it of yours?  Gyorgy Jalsovszky
(not Ilsovszky) and I have already cleared it up via private correspondence.
 He attempted to write to this list also, but was prevented access.  (I
advised him to write to Hugh Agnew to fix this.)

Ferenc

Ference Novak wrote:

>  He attempted to write to this list also, but was prevented access.  (I
> advised him to write to Hugh Agnew to fix this.)

Wrong advice.  He should have simply subscribed to this list and have no
more problems.  For, to reduce unsolicited advertising, this list only
accepts contributions from subscribers, a change that was apparently made
before you joined.

George Antony

 wrote Tue Jun 25 01:24:27 EDT 1996 HUNGARY #710:

>When we write anything in Hungarian, we provide a translation.  It is
>common courtesy to an English-language list.  Kindly follow that
>unwritten rule.

Martha,

It may not have occurred to you that I posted the Hungarian text here by
mistake.  Please refer to my post on the subject in the same issue (710) of
Hungary.

>I know that you wanted to make a strong statement, but it was quite
>unnecessary to post the same thing TWICE.

Did I?  I re-read it and saw it only once.  Are you sure?

>Have a good day - and get a life, before it is too late.

Thank you so much for your caring remarks.  It is good to know that somebody
is concerned about one's welfare ;-).  Thanks, I do have a life.  Wish you
did, too; then you might not be quite so stern in your capacity as
schoolmarm/thought policeperson.

>The people on this list ARE civilized.

Then please behave accordingly.

Have a good day, unless it's too late.  If so, have a good night.

Ferenc

PS.  It just occurre to me that you may have referred to the partial
Hungarian idiom I quoted when you asked for a translation.  Sorry, here it
is: "Unsolicited advocates..."