48.9% of Unions members work for the Government

[StLucieBengal]

(02-03-2016, 10:03 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: High level instructors are "high" level for a reason.  It's like a Bell curve.  They are the minority at the far right of the curve.  So the people who you think might get a better deal are few and far between. 





How much smarter would I work?  LMAO!  Incentive pay won't make anyone smarter!  I already have a legal and moral obligation to care of every patient to the best of my ability.  Incentive pay has zero affect on my effort or my intelligence.  One, because if a patient has a bad out come I can be sued for malpractice.  Two, and more importantly, someone might ***** die!

Like I stated previously, I'm not comfortable with incentive programs.  I'm already legally and morally obligated to do the best I can.  How do you think incentive programs work in the medical field?  How might that be abused?

A non-compete clause means you can't do the same job for someone else within a certain radius.  It isn't related to your position, not bonuses.

I am well aware of what non compete means. Usually it was applied when my ex received a signing bonus.

Then you are saying all medical people are the same. Every Nurse is the same.... Every doctor is the same ..... Etc....

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-03-2016, 09:42 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So their salary depends on how much they put into their job.  My employees work on %....  And their are other perks but that's case by case.  

And actually my best employees have a lot of power in negotiation, I am fortunate that they enjoy working for us and we reward that loyalty as much as possible but we know that we could lose our best people if we don't take care of them.    They can certainly get a better % elsewhere.   We just know what we can and can't afford.

Interesting.  Give me some examples of how your employees bent you over the negotiating table and ****** you.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-03-2016, 10:22 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I am well aware of what non compete means.  Usually it was applied when my ex received a signing bonus.    

Then you are saying all medical people are the same.    Every Nurse is the same.... Every doctor is the same .....  Etc....

The same how?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-03-2016, 10:22 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I am well aware of what non compete means.  Usually it was applied when my ex received a signing bonus.    

Did you and your ex have a nasty divorce?

[Belsnickel]

(02-03-2016, 07:51 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: You obviously haven't been in a school. there is a great John Stossel episode on teachers unions. I will have to find it.

My mother was a high school math teacher for many years, and then became a teacher for those looking to become teachers here at the university I am at. I haven't taught myself, but I have some knowledge of how it goes, even in union territory (my mother being a teacher in PA originally).

[fredtoast]

(02-03-2016, 06:58 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The lower workers aren't holding down the top tier workers because as you just stated "of course unions can bargain better than an individual" so individual teachers aren't going to be bargaining "ridiculous" deals on par with the union's ridiculous deals.  The best individual teachers will get less and the worst individual teachers will get less.

This.

wWth no unions the best teachers get paid less and leave the field.  The entire education system suffers with no unions.

[fredtoast]

(02-03-2016, 02:55 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Any teacher on this board will tell you that having a good principle makes a huge difference.    So moving to another building to get that good principle is worth it.    Also makes districts want to ensure they hire good principles to keep top talent in the classroom.

First of all there are lots of people who can not move without a huge sacrifice.  And this still does not answer the question about why the teacher should be punished because of something the principal does wrong.

Second of all there may not be any better positions open.

Third, the school board is not going to remove a principal when all the teachers working under him/her i.e. the brown-nosers give glowing reports of a job well done.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

Guys, principal, please.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-03-2016, 10:26 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Interesting.  Give me some examples of how your employees bent you over the negotiating table and ***** you.

So you can't name one concession?

I've got an idea; pool 35% of your employees earnings and dole it out at your discretion. Just imagine how much "smarter" they would work. 

[Benton]

(02-04-2016, 07:25 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Guys, principal, please.

I was just going to let that one go.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-05-2016, 12:42 AM)Benton Wrote: I was just going to let that one go.

I just couldn't.  It caused me actual pain.

[Benton]

(02-05-2016, 01:56 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I just couldn't.  It caused me actual pain.

A principal did? Or the principle of the misspelling?





That joke was way better in my head.

[BengalChris]

(01-29-2016, 02:35 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Income equality continues to evaporate and private sector union membership declines at the same time.  Must be a coincidence?  Also interesting that you lament the power of the government yet want government employees to be helpless drones for it.

There is no coincidence. Income inequality comes from production inequality. Low production brings low income. No production brings welfare income. High production brings high income. "Ok" average production brings average income. Thieving brings theft income, like banks and governments and monopolies and drug dealers and welfare takers (corporate and personal).

A lot of people tend to lump high producers in with the criminal band and they cannot see the difference. But there is a big difference. The high producer is highly productive and works their asses off. The criminal band doesn't produce anything of value and takes without exchanging back something of comparable worth.

It is truly that simple. The low income person or low producer, however you put it is the same thing. They consume more than they produce and are consequently always broke because they offer society less value than what they themselves need to survive.

A high producer is delivering in higher volume and at a quality at least acceptable to those purchasing what is produced.

You can see the production inequality in the government's unemployment statistics where the "non-participation" rate is at record highs. The non-participants are simply people who choose not to produce and so live off those who do produce. That is why they are in poverty. It's not rocket science.

There is not some grand conspiracy to rob people of their income except those policies pressed upon the population by politicians who handout those welfare checks and bloated contracts in mass quantities as bribes for votes. It is the socialist and corrupt officials who is causing the income inequality by convincing people to not produce and take a handout instead, which is never really quite enough and traps the recipient in a life of poverty. These politicians have robbed these people of their dignity and self worth, and they've done so intentionally.

Look around at the top producers in the world. They are all hard workers.

There are fake producers in the world, like bankers and monopolies and governments, all of whom take and offer substandard or out right harm in return. Take a drug dealer. He's selling harm for money. So is the government and the banks. You are convinced you "need" it, but it harms you to accept it.

You can produce a lot and never sell that work and be broke. You can't build 20 houses just for yourself and call it being productive. You have to exchange what you produce with others who are willing to pay you for it. The bad worker can spend lots of hours on the job and produce little and may even do more harm than good. The unions protect these bad workers.

With the government, however, little actual usable goods or services are produced. And those which are produced are of low quality and cost excessive amounts of money.

Look at the streets where you live. Are they kept up at a high standard or are they a patch work done over patch work? How are the sidewalks? Cracked and buckled or kept in top shape?

Look at public schools. Is every child graduated with the ability to read and write and perform valuable work? I think not, not even close. And why? Because public unions are in way protecting large unearned teacher pensions while the children of the illiterate become more illiterate each generation. Oh, and this is intentional by the way. You have to have stupid people who can vote in bad politicians in volume so that you can have destructive laws and socialism.

The hard worker will never accept socialism because he or she knows full well that he or she doesn't need the government's services to survive. And with 48% of the US households take some form of government handout, no one can argue that there are that many people who are so unable they can't earn a living. Those who cannot work due to real disabilities is actually quite small.

Go ahead and try and understand Medicare, that thing you pay vast amounts of money into each paycheck, if you are even an average producer, and see if you can figure it out. Go ahead and phone the government and see if you get to talk to someone in the next hour or two. Do they actually help you really? I doubt it.

You can tell a higher producer when you see one. They are all about production. They respond to higher taxes by being even more productive and earning more. You charge them an extra percent and they'll figure out how to get that 1%, plus another 2% to boot. These people would rather work than watch TV - I assure that this is true.

You can tell a low producer as well. They'll give you all manner of excuses about how they try or have bad luck or this or that or something else or it's someone else, but never them. No matter what, they never really seem to produce anything valuable.

The high producers make the world go round. The criminals (governments, banks, monopolies and welfare cases) only take and exchange back no valuable production and they are the ones f'ing it all up. Caught in the middle are the mostly "Ok" producers who being oppressed by the criminal band.

How much you produce is 100% under your own control. How good of a job you do is 100% under your own control. There's lots of work to be done out in the world, you only need to find something people will pay you to produce, then produce it and get them to see that it's available for them.

I view myself as an ok producer. I own four businesses and have employees. I don't lavish myself with new cars, expensive vacations or many days off. I choose different uses for my money.

I have several millionaire friends and I can tell you that one for one they all out work me and I out work about 99% of the population.

I also know a banker. He works 9-5 and acts like he's overworked.

It's just a choice. Choose to be highly productive and do the best you can, choose something less or choose to produce nothing. The government is making it easier and easier to choose the latter and that's letting everyone down in a big way.

[Benton]

(02-06-2016, 02:48 AM)BengalChris Wrote: There is no coincidence. Income inequality comes from production inequality. Low production brings low income. No production brings welfare income. High production brings high income. "Ok" average production brings average income. Thieving brings theft income, like banks and governments and monopolies and drug dealers and welfare takers (corporate and personal).

A lot of people tend to lump high producers in with the criminal band and they cannot see the difference. But there is a big difference. The high producer is highly productive and works their asses off. The criminal band doesn't produce anything of value and takes without exchanging back something of comparable worth.

It is truly that simple. The low income person or low producer, however you put it is the same thing. They consume more than they produce and are consequently always broke because they offer society less value than what they themselves need to survive.

A high producer is delivering in higher volume and at a quality at least acceptable to those purchasing what is produced.

You can see the production inequality in the government's unemployment statistics where the "non-participation" rate is at record highs. The non-participants are simply people who choose not to produce and so live off those who do produce. That is why they are in poverty. It's not rocket science.

There is not some grand conspiracy to rob people of their income except those policies pressed upon the population by politicians who handout those welfare checks and bloated contracts in mass quantities as bribes for votes. It is the socialist and corrupt officials who is causing the income inequality by convincing people to not produce and take a handout instead, which is never really quite enough and traps the recipient in a life of poverty. These politicians have robbed these people of their dignity and self worth, and they've done so intentionally.

Look around at the top producers in the world. They are all hard workers.

There are fake producers in the world, like bankers and monopolies and governments, all of whom take and offer substandard or out right harm in return. Take a drug dealer. He's selling harm for money. So is the government and the banks. You are convinced you "need" it, but it harms you to accept it.

You can produce a lot and never sell that work and be broke. You can't build 20 houses just for yourself and call it being productive. You have to exchange what you produce with others who are willing to pay you for it. The bad worker can spend lots of hours on the job and produce little and may even do more harm than good. The unions protect these bad workers.

With the government, however, little actual usable goods or services are produced. And those which are produced are of low quality and cost excessive amounts of money.

Look at the streets where you live. Are they kept up at a high standard or are they a patch work done over patch work? How are the sidewalks? Cracked and buckled or kept in top shape?

Look at public schools. Is every child graduated with the ability to read and write and perform valuable work? I think not, not even close. And why? Because public unions are in way protecting large unearned teacher pensions while the children of the illiterate become more illiterate each generation. Oh, and this is intentional by the way. You have to have stupid people who can vote in bad politicians in volume so that you can have destructive laws and socialism.

The hard worker will never accept socialism because he or she knows full well that he or she doesn't need the government's services to survive. And with 48% of the US households take some form of government handout, no one can argue that there are that many people who are so unable they can't earn a living. Those who cannot work due to real disabilities is actually quite small.

Go ahead and try and understand Medicare, that thing you pay vast amounts of money into each paycheck, if you are even an average producer, and see if you can figure it out. Go ahead and phone the government and see if you get to talk to someone in the next hour or two. Do they actually help you really? I doubt it.

You can tell a higher producer when you see one. They are all about production. They respond to higher taxes by being even more productive and earning more. You charge them an extra percent and they'll figure out how to get that 1%, plus another 2% to boot. These people would rather work than watch TV - I assure that this is true.

You can tell a low producer as well. They'll give you all manner of excuses about how they try or have bad luck or this or that or something else or it's someone else, but never them. No matter what, they never really seem to produce anything valuable.

The high producers make the world go round. The criminals (governments, banks, monopolies and welfare cases) only take and exchange back no valuable production and they are the ones f'ing it all up. Caught in the middle are the mostly "Ok" producers who being oppressed by the criminal band.

How much you produce is 100% under your own control. How good of a job you do is 100% under your own control. There's lots of work to be done out in the world, you only need to find something people will pay you to produce, then produce it and get them to see that it's available for them.

I view myself as an ok producer. I own four businesses and have employees. I don't lavish myself with new cars, expensive vacations or many days off. I choose different uses for my money.

I have several millionaire friends and I can tell you that one for one they all out work me and I out work about 99% of the population.

I also know a banker. He works 9-5 and acts like he's overworked.

It's just a choice. Choose to be highly productive and do the best you can, choose something less or choose to produce nothing. The government is making it easier and easier to choose the latter and that's letting everyone down in a big way.

this is a gross oversimplification working off the assumption the "low producer" and "higher producer" start out with roughly the same resources. If they do, then your theory works. Those who can, rise; those who can't, stay at the bottom.
unfortunately, that's rarely the case during the last half century.