$15/hr Min Wage - We told you so

[Littlejoe]

Teal, you really can't just make up rules because that's what you want to believe.

"Entry level" is entry into the workforce. It's a starting job. It's somewhere you can prove your dependability, and build some credibility.

We have what is considered "Entry Level jobs" here. It's a Customer Service Associate position which means, Call Center employee that people call into to ask questions about their coverage. They start at around $14/hour and include benefits as well. There are people who make a career at this job and never move up or on. My son however, spent 4 years doing that, then got promoted to a escalated Claims reviewer, and then was hand picked for the Appeals dept. With raises each time. There are people he hired in with still on the phones taking calls. So, here, Teal's definition works for our business model. And yes, just about everyone starts there or at the other position with contract sales...basically cold calling Dr.'s offices and trying to sign them up to be "In Network".

[Sparko]

We have what is considered "Entry Level jobs" here. It's a Customer Service Associate position which means, Call Center employee that people call into to ask questions about their coverage. They start at around $14/hour and include benefits as well. There are people who make a career at this job and never move up or on. My son however, spent 4 years doing that, then got promoted to a escalated Claims reviewer, and then was hand picked for the Appeals dept. With raises each time. There are people he hired in with still on the phones taking calls. So, here, Teal's definition works for our business model. And yes, just about everyone starts there or at the other position with contract sales...basically cold calling Dr.'s offices and trying to sign them up to be "In Network".

Typically jobs that you can start at the bottom and work your way up are called "Ground floor" jobs.

[Psychic Missile]

Where did I say I was leaving the discussion?

Replies 115 and 121.

You don't know squat about how business really works --- only what you read.

Then you should be able to prove me wrong. You couldn't.

[Sparko]

Replies 115 and 121.



Then you should be able to prove me wrong. You couldn't.

I am sure there is evidence that will prove you wrong, we just have to investigate till we find it. I will appoint a special investigator.

[Psychic Missile]

I am sure there is evidence that will prove you wrong, we just have to investigate till we find it. I will appoint a special investigator.

Bobo might be already booked.

[Sparko]

Bobo might be already booked.

I was thinking maybe Demi Conservative or Mountain Man.

[Cow Poke]

Replies 115 and 121.

Could you PLEASE learn to hyperlink?

Or is that too much work?

[Cow Poke]

Replies 115 and 121.

WOW, you must be running for Pedantic Poster of the Year!

You said....

After I argued against your points you refused to engage and left the discussion. Exactly what you're accusing Teal of doing

First of all, I'm still here, and Teal is not, so it's OBVIOUSLY (except to a moron) not "exactly" or even REMOTELY like Teal.

And my 'damning statements', apparently, are as follows....

Wow.... I was working "somewhere else" when I started my businesses.... it requires a lot of dedication, which, apparently, is why it's not even in your realm of possibility. I'll leave the rest of your negativity and small mindedness....

I will leave you to your gloom and doom, PM. I thank God there weren't people like you around advising me when I was launching out into business.

That does NOT mean I'm leaving the thread..... I'm HERE! But I AM leaving you to your gloom and doom - I can't change that.

(No wonder you didn't 'quote' me)

[Sparko]

WOW, you must be running for Pendantic Poster of the Year!

You said....


First of all, I'm still here, and Teal is not, so it's OBVIOUSLY (except to a moron) not "exactly" or even REMOTELY like Teal.

And my 'damning statements', apparently, are as follows....




That does NOT mean I'm leaving the thread..... I'm HERE! But I AM leaving you to your gloom and doom - I can't change that.

(No wonder you didn't 'quote' me)

There!! There!!! See? You said you were leaving the thread!

[Cow Poke]

There!! There!!! See? You said you were leaving the thread!

Too bad I can't read that cause I am LONG GONE!!!!

[Starlight]

Not McDonald's. They are a business. Sure it is nice if the owner of a business wants to help his employees and pay them more, but they have their own families to take care of too. If they give away all of their profits, they suffer. If they go out of business, everyone suffers.

When we discuss things like minimum wage changes, we are exploring whether as a society we want to change the way that the system (businesses, employment, wages etc) works, to create a situation that works better for our society and the people and businesses in it.

For example, Walmart is the biggest minimum-wage employer in the US. It is an incredibly profitable company, and its owners, the Walton family, are the richest family in the US. A lot of Walmart minimum wage employees are on government assistance programs, because despite working full-time, Walmart doesn't pay them enough for them to be above the poverty line. And there are examples of Walmart and McDonalds having employee-help hotlines that provide advice to employees to apply for those government assistance programs to supplement their wages.

Now, is that a useful or sensible way for the society to operate? No. These ultra-rich business owners are being essentially subsidized by the tax-payer, and get away with paying their employees an incredibly low amount of money, pocketing the profits for themselves, and then the taxpayer has to come to the rescue with hand-outs for the hard-working poor people. That is just a really silly way to have the system operating. It's in almost everyone's interest to change it so that the Walmart has to pay its employees enough for them to live on so that the tax-payer doesn't end up subsidizing the Walmart wages.

A man is responsible for his own family according to the bible:

1 Timothy 5:7-9
8 If anyone does not take care of his own relatives, especially his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

That says a person has a duty to care for relatives if they can. It certainly doesn't deny that society as a whole also has such a duty, especially if the man is unable to do so.

I've noticed religious conservatives in the US seem to be unique internationally in selfishly prioritizing their own rights over their children above the rights of the children themselves to be well-cared-for (this manifests in the US being the only nation in the world not to have ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child). I explored this in another thread a while back where we discussed the fact that some US parents kick kids out of home for being gay, and that this sort of mistreatment of children is tolerated in the US under some sort of insane belief that parents have some sort of right to raise their children however they like with minimal concern for the welfare of the child; whereas here such behavior would be a quick path to having your neighbors call the police on you, being prosecuted for failing to care for your child properly, and having any remaining children removed from your custody due to you being an unfit parent. And that reflects a difference as to whether the rights of the children are prioritized by society or the freedom of the parents to treat their children as they wish is prioritized by society.

[Starlight]

If you want to invoke the Gospels, or even the whole of the New Testament, it's not about the law forcing us to do things

I was referring to the numerous commands given in the NT, where your God makes clear what he thinks you should be doing.

If you still have problems doing the right thing even in spite of your religious book telling you to, I have zero problem with the government helping you to.

It's just not your business to force us to help the people you think we should help.

[Jedidiah]

I was referring to the numerous commands given in the NT, where your God makes clear what he thinks you should be doing.

If you still have problems doing the right thing even in spite of your religious book telling you to, I have zero problem with the government helping you to.

I must have missed the part where we are commanded to force other folks to pay higher wages so people with minimal skills can make more money. The fact is I don't think anyone wants these poor people to suffer. What we have is a difference of opinion as to the best way to help people.

[Psychic Missile]

That does NOT mean I'm leaving the thread..... I'm HERE! But I AM leaving you to your gloom and doom - I can't change that.

(No wonder you didn't 'quote' me)

Leaving the thread =/= leaving the discussion.

[Cow Poke]

Leaving the thread =/= leaving the discussion.

No, I'm still in the thread, Shirlock. It amazes me how hard you work at being wrong.