First off, good comment. Good unpopular opinion. Good post overall.

I think you should cut the cost of living out of your argument because it's not exclusive to teachers. As an engineer (with a masters degree as well) I've crunched the numbers every way possible. I literally can't make a budget on my salary that would support paying a mortgage and a family with two kids. Now in my personal opinion I think it's healthy when both parents contribute income but that's an entirely different discussion.

In 1990 my qualifications would have paid for all of that and a trip to Disney every year.

In 1960 I would have been able to afford all of that and private school for the kids. As well as tuition.

So cost of living is a fair point but it's not exclusive to teachers and it reflects a failure of the economy to appropriately keep incomes on par with the consumer price index, not to mention other, disparagingly overinflated items such as tuition.

In a supply and demand based economy it's logical to assume that teachers salaries should compare, in growth year over year, to the rest of the workforce. So since living costs are wrecking us all it's not really fair to claim it as a point in a debate specifically about one profession being overpaid.

I will also add that as a quality engineer the debate about measuring what makes a good teacher is fascinating. I'm all about making things measurable (literally part of my job, when a customer doesn't like the look of a product it's on me to quantify as best we can where the line between good and bad lies).

I will also add that I think OPs point is well presented but I agree teachers are paid appropriately overall, with certain states coughOklahomacough failing miserably on that front. I see no issue with a masters degree requiring profession shouldn't pay, on its own, close to the national household median. That would be a slippery slope to saying I don't deserve what I make with my masters in engineering, and frankly, with all the work I put in, fuck that noise.