Thanks, Obamacare
So, last night at the meeting, it was announced that the store was cutting people back to 4 days a week. It was unclear whether this was permanent or a one-time thing. But, when I asked my A.M. how long they'd be doing this, he said they (his bosses) never said. If one time thing, then it's just to recoup the money not-spent in Christmas bonuses because of the ice storm, and the only explanation for a permanent change of this kind is to recoup expenses due to the Obamacare mandate.
So, thank you , Obamacare. not only am I short $45 a month because I now have to buy something I don't want to buy, through my employer, but my next check will be at least $74 short, and maybe $148 short.
This means, between the two actions, my paycheck will be cut by 25%. I can't afford to lose 25% of my check. So now I'm going to have to look for a part-time job in addition to my full-time job... while a lot of other people are now going to be doing the same thing.
So, thank you , Obamacare. not only am I short $45 a month because I now have to buy something I don't want to buy, through my employer, but my next check will be at least $74 short, and maybe $148 short.
This means, between the two actions, my paycheck will be cut by 25%. I can't afford to lose 25% of my check. So now I'm going to have to look for a part-time job in addition to my full-time job... while a lot of other people are now going to be doing the same thing.
Apparently the knockback to 4 days was rescinded, at least for now. Dunno if there was too much uproar, or if it was plans leaked too soon, or what.
But I'm still going to look for that part time job, just in case.
Glad for you...and 'good hunting'!
I'm looking into the possibility of maybe working that day at another Walmart store, a Neighborhood Market.
I'm considering looking into some form of online part-time work, like the medical transcriptionist deal I've heard about from time to time. But, I don't know of any I can be sure isn't just a scam.
You don't just get material and start typing it. To get the job, unless you have an arrangement with a 1- or 2-person office, you have to have enough formal schooling to understand the terms and anatomy. A friend who was studying it also had to take Legal Ethics, and that's not the weirdest course, it's the weirdest one I remember. In all, it was an 18-month process.
Also, most Dr.s offices now use a centralized data bank system - the Dr uploads his notes, a transcriptionist downloads them, types them and sends them back in a very short time. One surgeon we are talking to about the Wizard's shoulder snaps out his notes at the end of your appointment into a pocket recorder; they get downloaded and he has them back in 4 hours.
The real way to ferret out the scams is to not contact anyone who says you'll get a job though them - what if they don't have many reports to do on Monday? Does everybody type? No,, just 5 people.
My friend started studying where she was because she was talking to someone at the Dr.'s office, who told her the service they used, who told her the schools they drew from. Doesn't it all come down to networking?
It can be a real job, but in every sense.
Sorry, and best of luck!
Cannot resist giving the following gratuitous advice-
Be open, do not keep it a secret that you are looking for another part time job.
Ask you present management for a reference and tell them why you want it.
Give some thought to why, and ask for other opinions on, why you are not a supervisor.
When interviewing keep a low profile on certain subjects that you should not be asked about. You know what they are. Questions can be put, not to find out the answer, but to identify candidates who give a lecture. I suspect that usually a candidate with needs and commitments, gets marked down, the interviewer mutters sympathy, but does not want to take on people with problems. The people wanted are the 'heads down, bottoms up' type.
Show loyalty- If the part time job can be full time, express caution, say you like your current work and employer if not the pay rate.
When I was in factory management I found the best workers were those with other jobs. This was a surprise to me, then I was told, these people are hungry. These are not the best for professional work but ideal for factory jobs where they listen, understand, and do what is expected. "Take a message to Garcia'.
I hope you find something rewarding!
Best of luck.
I think we're going to be hearing a lot more of this.
Well, be the smart one --get action oriented. Ask your boss if there is anyway you can have a set schedule ( if you have a flexible one now) in order to have specific hours you know you could offer to another employer. Who knows...maybe this will lead to a career change. Hope you get it straightened out Hiraghm.
Do these people pushing an increase in the minimum wage really think that employers are just going to up their current wage scale proportionally?
If they raise the minimum wage, those of us making a bit more than the minimum won't see a pay increase... but the price of goods will go up to compensate in the increased cost of labor, thus effectively giving us all a pay cut.
And if they double it as they seem to be pushing, then a lot of people will get laid off, and a lot of people formerly making a good wage will suddenly be making minimum wage.
Then in a few years, the economy will have adjusted again, and the push for another minimum wage hike will resume.
Recovery? We don' need no steenkin' recovery!
I didn't work Thursday night. The reason given... I was being "given" a 3-day weekend. So, I was the only one who ended up getting a 4-day week.
My immediate boss did what he could to mitigate the damage. He had me stay an extra two hours Wednesday and Thursday mornings, picking up garbage around the parking lot in the freezing mist so I only lost 4 hours or so. (I was so exhausted I slept 12 hours yesterday).
Lesson (finally) learned; I work for the 20th Century Motor Company.
Thank a woman.
The female vote elected Obama twice. It's also the driving force behind the $17 trillion debt and the $211 trillion in unfunded mandates coming over the next 50 years.
If not for women, only one democrat would have been elected president since 1964.
Think about it.
The mistake isn't Obamacare. The problem goes much deeper. Repeal the 19th Amendment!
but I'll do it if I have to!
Obamacare is a symptom of a much deeper problem. We all love to hate crappy politicians who keep screwing us over… but who elected them? Women vote irresponsibly. They spend tomorrow's money today. And they insist on politicians spending tomorrow's tax money today.
If you don't fix THAT, then Obamacare doesn't matter because it's just a small part of the myriad ways that women will continue to destroy America. In 2013, America spent $415,688,781,248 on debt service… over $1300 for every person in America. That's cash money straight out of your pocket because women voted to spend money we don't have.
This time, it's biting YOU! So, how do you like it? How do you like working two jobs? How do you like getting screwed over by the one-size-fits-all health care plan? How do you like working harder, longer and earning less? Do you enjoy the feeling of insecurity? Do you like knowing that if you get sick, all the money you're wasting on "health care" is money thrown down a rat hole because you probably won't have money for the deductible? Do you like being afraid because you're no longer in control of your own life? If you like it, THANK A WOMAN. If not, try addressing the core problem. It's not Obamacare. It's not even Obama. It's the people who elected Obama.
Women.
See, what I did there? I took your argument circular. If women overwhelmingly vote now for changes in society that cost us more than we have, such as public education, medicine, and social concerns perhaps women’s focus has come from centuries of these being the occupations they were limited to. Your idea to repeal the 19th amendment to prevent women from voting is not going to improve society, but just start the vicious cycle all over again.
Obama was neck and neck with McCain then the market crashed. Blame Wallstreet. Blame the Federal Reserve for trading mortgage-backed securities at the window. Blame mob-rule.
Blame yourself for keeping women beneath you.
It's sort of interesting actually, the parallels with the Randian approach. Women are the leeches who are sucking the life blood out of society so they can feel more "secure". And men are getting tired of it. As the author of the book, "Men on Strike" wrote, men are dropping out of higher education, declining to marry and avoiding future responsibility. In effect, they're going "Gulch". They're exercising their prerogative to stop supporting women and the world women want.
As women make more money - who gets taxed? As women can't find a husband who wants to work - who gets to do all the earning? As men see no reason to marry, who has to do all the "courting"? And when divorce comes around, women will begin to pay more alimony. Oh YEAH! And now that there's no combat-exclusion rule, the Supreme Court will have no choice but to mandate women register for selective service, the draft, and compulsory service when the powers-that-be decide to feed flesh into the military-industrial-complex meat grinder.
See what I did there? Women are finally getting their dream - and it's going to be a nightmare! The $211-trillion in unfunded mandates lthey've voted for works out to be an additional $5,000 a year in taxes for every worker - for life! That's on top of all the current taxes. Pay up gals!
I think I'll go sit on a couch and eat bonbons. Once the TV networks wise up and realize that it's guys sitting at home doing nothing while the wife-unit is out earning the wages, they'll switch the daytime programming from "Maury" to sports and the transition will be complete.
That is what the subject matter of the book “Men On Strike” written by Dr. Helen Smith was about. I haven’t read the book. Here’s a link to an interview with her,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yzUECFwU...
She does mention Obama a couple times briefly, but I’m not seeing her making the kind of connections that you are. Does she in the book? She does encourage men to speak up and get off their chest. In that regard, um...well done, Bambi? Lol
I guess I’m a little confused why you blow your steam off here. Can’t argue with facts. Wouldn’t want to. But here, I don’t think you could find a woman that actually voted for Obama.
Most of us are all about the individual.
“I think I’ll go sit on the couch and eat bonbons”
Keep your feet off the coffee table-and don’t eat to many bonbons or you’ll get fat and your wife will have to divorce you.
From the link you referenced:
>> Dr. Helen Smith joins Steve to discuss her new book, "MEN ON STRIKE WHY MEN ARE BOYCOTTING MARRIAGE, FATHERHOOD, AND THE AMERICAN DREAM - AND WHY IT MATTERS
How did you miss this??? Blindfold and earplugs?
As for voting for Obama - are you saying the women in the Gulch DON'T KNOW ANY WOMEN WHO VOTED FOR OBAMA? Because if you do, it's time to start holding them accountable.
What I was referring to, is that Dr, Smith doesn’t seem to be throwing out figures about how many women voted for Obama and tying the stats to the decline of men’s involvement in society because of new social parameters. If it isn’t in the book...
You leaped to that conclusion, yourself. (A-to-Z)
I
’m not saying your facts are wrong. I see what your saying, but...your flying a lil over the cukoo’s nest about how to go about fixing things. Okay..WAY over the cukoo’s nest.
"As for voting for Obama - are you saying the women in the Gulch DON'T KNOW ANY WOMEN WHO VOTED FOR OBAMA? Because if you do, it's time to start holding them accountable.”
How do I do that exactly? Do I set an example by not voting and staying home to eat bon-bons?
Your loss. March Madness is nearing. Bring home a six-pack.
Take a look at The Tea Party, it has *huge* female input.
Romney - The GOP's Volt.
The gender gap has been a fact since women started voting. Women vote for social welfare programs and irresponsible spending policies to fund them. It's not just Obama. As I said, Obama is a SYMPTOM of the greater problem. My bet is that Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, Schumer, Reid - all would have lost, but for the female vote. And that's just the tip of the ice berg. The gender gap in the last election was on the order of 20%. Most elections have historically been decided by considerably less than that. Look at the Bush/Algore election results. Algore won the popular vote, but through the magic of districting (and about 500 votes in Florida), he lost. We got Bush instead (a horrible, horrible president - but better than Algore). Interestingly, had it not been for senile old jewish women in southeast Florida, Algore would have won. Seems the Demoncrats had gone down to all the rest homes in Palm Beach County, rounded up the old biddies, put them on a bus and told them, "Vote for #2". This was the infamous "butterfly" ballot fiasco (ironically designed to span two pages because it allowed for larger type - to make it easier for the walking dead to vote) where the 1st candidate (Bush) appeared on the left, the second candidate (Buchanan) appeared on the right page, and the THIRD candidate (Algore) appeared on the left. The second hole belonged to Buchanan, but the second name on the left page was Algore.
So the brain dead, putrefying old sacks of grease did as they were told and Buchanan got 3400 votes - something like 6 times Bush's margin of victory.
Which just goes to show that even when women have no clue what they're doing, and they're trying to vote to screw America, they can still screw up the vote and accidentally do something that's not as wrong as what they intended.
Obama's a POS. But the problem is deeper and more widespread than Obama.
http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/...