On 3/28/2011 2:00 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:28:38 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:34:07 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 23:03:24 -0700, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 01:49:47 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 10:37:33 -0700, wrote:


It is a strange comment from a person who believes in the unions and
their policy of paying the oldest and longest serving employees the
most, regardless of performance.

Who believes that? I don't think you'll find anyone who does.

School teachers.

Nonsense. They believe performance does matter, and they're sick of
teaching to tests that don't teach kids anything useful except maybe
how to take tests.

Taking tests is a very important skill but these teachers do not want
their salary tied to any measure of performance. They want to be paid
by credentials and time in grade.
Make that sound reasonable to me..
A totally out of touch teacher with 20 years on the job and a PhD, who
gets horrible results, makes 3 times as much as a new teacher who
connects with the kids and really gets something done in the
classroom. That is ridiculous.

It's just the way of the unions. When I got laid off from Finast I was
number two from the bottom of siniority, so I went second. At the same
time, I was consistently in the top ten percent of production, day after
day. At the same time the union worked very hard to keep guys caught
sleeping in the bathroom or stealing, earning a steady paycheck.

There is something inherently wrong with Unions taking millions from
their employees, handing it to politicians, and then going to those very
same Politicians for negotiations... Period.


We just had an article in the paper about suspended employees who were
still being paid. Their top example was a teacher who was suspended
for sexual assault on a faculty member, off on "suspension" for over a
year and still getting the $61,000 salary. Not bad money for staying
home and watching soaps all day. This person was reinstated, back to
teaching. What do you learn in that class?

So, because there's occasionally abuse of the system, that means the
system is bankrupt and should be discarded? Nonsense.

It happens every day, dear.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 01:48:08 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 12:59:04 -0400, Harryk
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:23:04 -0700, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:51:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 08:47:43 -0400, wrote:

On 3/25/2011 10:25 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:40:23 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:23:02 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:17:34 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:
The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.
Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.
So far the SS/MC recipients have received more than they were promised
but that is going to turn around.
So, you don't mind giving back some of your ill-gotten gains? Cool!
I fully expect to. It is already happening tho. They are taxing the
hell out of my "tax free" social security and when I get to Medicare I
expect the part B and "gap" insurance to be higher than it is now.
I have already been told part D is not as good as buying the
Medco/WalMart plan.
Since I don't really use any drugs, I don't care about that.

$25 a year pretty much covers my fish oil and a multivitamin every
day.
Why do you allow this little girl to suck you into these dumb off topic
discussions?

I enjoy bantering with Plume. The naivete of youth is always
refreshing.
Gee I didn't realize senility was considered an advantage! LOL

I am not the one who has trouble remembering what we were talking
about ;-)

It is a strange comment from a person who believes in the unions and
their policy of paying the oldest and longest serving employees the
most, regardless of performance.



BTW, are you also imposed to military personnel getting paid more the
longer they serve?

Most military people get promoted by performance reports and when they
are passed over too many times they are usually pressured to get out.


Yup, that's the way it's done.

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 01:48:08 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 12:59:04 -0400, Harryk
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:23:04 -0700, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 22:51:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 08:47:43 -0400, wrote:

On 3/25/2011 10:25 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:40:23 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:23:02 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:17:34 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:29:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:03:29 -0700, wrote:
The 2012-2016 president will have to tell 83 million boomers they are
not going to get everything they were promised. That may get ugly.
Nobody ever gets "everything" they're promised. It's the nature of
democracy and compromise to achieve the best for everyone.
So far the SS/MC recipients have received more than they were promised
but that is going to turn around.
So, you don't mind giving back some of your ill-gotten gains? Cool!
I fully expect to. It is already happening tho. They are taxing the
hell out of my "tax free" social security and when I get to Medicare I
expect the part B and "gap" insurance to be higher than it is now.
I have already been told part D is not as good as buying the
Medco/WalMart plan.
Since I don't really use any drugs, I don't care about that.

$25 a year pretty much covers my fish oil and a multivitamin every
day.
Why do you allow this little girl to suck you into these dumb off topic
discussions?

I enjoy bantering with Plume. The naivete of youth is always
refreshing.
Gee I didn't realize senility was considered an advantage! LOL

I am not the one who has trouble remembering what we were talking
about ;-)

It is a strange comment from a person who believes in the unions and
their policy of paying the oldest and longest serving employees the
most, regardless of performance.



BTW, are you also imposed to military personnel getting paid more the
longer they serve?

Most military people get promoted by performance reports and when they
are passed over too many times they are usually pressured to get out.


Yup, that's the way it's done.

And the way it should be.. If there was a union in the service those
"underperformers" would be handed a broom and a raise and be allowed to
work until retirement making more pay than the guys really doing the
work..

I_am_Tosk wrote:


And the way it should be.. If there was a union in the service those
"underperformers" would be handed a broom and a raise and be allowed to
work until retirement making more pay than the guys really doing the
work..

This from a little man whose only real job in life was working as an
unskilled laborer in a food warehouse.

And he couldn't hang onto that job.

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

I_am_Tosk wrote:


And the way it should be.. If there was a union in the service those
"underperformers" would be handed a broom and a raise and be allowed to
work until retirement making more pay than the guys really doing the
work..

This from a little man whose only real job in life was working as an
unskilled laborer in a food warehouse.

And he couldn't hang onto that job.

And as usual, Harry has no intelligent rebuttal, so he calls names and
insults. Gee, I'll be no one seen THAT coming!

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

I_am_Tosk wrote:


And the way it should be.. If there was a union in the service those
"underperformers" would be handed a broom and a raise and be allowed to
work until retirement making more pay than the guys really doing the
work..

This from a little man whose only real job in life was working as an
unskilled laborer in a food warehouse.

And he couldn't hang onto that job.

You make this **** up as you go along. You are one creepy old man for
sure..

I_am_Tosk wrote:
In article0aWdnRwvVv5Wfg3QnZ2dnUVZ_oSdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...
I_am_Tosk wrote:

And the way it should be.. If there was a union in the service those
"underperformers" would be handed a broom and a raise and be allowed to
work until retirement making more pay than the guys really doing the
work..
This from a little man whose only real job in life was working as an
unskilled laborer in a food warehouse.

And he couldn't hang onto that job.

You make this **** up as you go along. You are one creepy old man for
sure..


Well, little man, to the best of my recollection, in all your years
here, you mentioned very little in the way of employment:

1. You said you worked in a food warehouse for, I believe, First
National stores. You lost that job.

2. You said you built small boats, but I suspect that was more of an
avocation than a vocation.

3. You swept out a barn.

4. You claim to be an executive of some sort of a shady sounding company
that allegedly resells some internet services, but your site extolling
same is chock-full of deceptive descriptions of facilities and gear.
Further, your site does not list any actual clients or samples of web
pages you allegedly have designed. This is interesting, because I have
two of my clients hosting their web sites on a legitimate hosting site,
and the host has long lists of clients and examples of its work product.

Now, did I miss an actual job of yours?

I'm not trying to put you down for the kind of work you've done. All
work is worthwhile, after all. I simply believe you are totally,
completely unqualified by way of education or work experience to offer
up judgments on the work or jobs of others.

On Mar 28, 4:36*pm, Harryk wrote:

I can't answer your out of context and made up accusations old man.
You are a creepy old fart that seems to have quite a "selective"
imagination.. Harry Krause, everything you say here is lies, everyone
knows it, who are you trying to fool??

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 21:14:54 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:32:06 -0400, Harryk
wrote:

wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:34:07 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In ,
says...
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 23:03:24 -0700, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 01:49:47 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 10:37:33 -0700, wrote:

It is a strange comment from a person who believes in the unions and
their policy of paying the oldest and longest serving employees the
most, regardless of performance.
Who believes that? I don't think you'll find anyone who does.
School teachers.
Nonsense. They believe performance does matter, and they're sick of
teaching to tests that don't teach kids anything useful except maybe
how to take tests.
Taking tests is a very important skill but these teachers do not want
their salary tied to any measure of performance. They want to be paid
by credentials and time in grade.
Make that sound reasonable to me..
A totally out of touch teacher with 20 years on the job and a PhD, who
gets horrible results, makes 3 times as much as a new teacher who
connects with the kids and really gets something done in the
classroom. That is ridiculous.
It's just the way of the unions. When I got laid off from Finast I was
number two from the bottom of siniority, so I went second. At the same
time, I was consistently in the top ten percent of production, day after
day. At the same time the union worked very hard to keep guys caught
sleeping in the bathroom or stealing, earning a steady paycheck.

There is something inherently wrong with Unions taking millions from
their employees, handing it to politicians, and then going to those very
same Politicians for negotiations... Period.


We just had an article in the paper about suspended employees who were
still being paid. Their top example was a teacher who was suspended
for sexual assault on a faculty member, off on "suspension" for over a
year and still getting the $61,000 salary. Not bad money for staying
home and watching soaps all day. This person was reinstated, back to
teaching. What do you learn in that class?


Hell, man, you guys elected a governor who should be in federal prison.


Right next to Charlie Rangel but evidently crime does pay.

Who was censured and removed from the chairmanship of his committee.
Not much punishment, but certainly more than your governor got.

Oh, don't forget Newt. He was just reprimanded for the use of a
tax-exempt organization for political purposes and providing false
information to the House Ethics Committee.

wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:32:06 -0400,
wrote:

wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:34:07 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In ,
says...
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 23:03:24 -0700, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 01:49:47 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 10:37:33 -0700, wrote:

It is a strange comment from a person who believes in the unions and
their policy of paying the oldest and longest serving employees the
most, regardless of performance.
Who believes that? I don't think you'll find anyone who does.
School teachers.
Nonsense. They believe performance does matter, and they're sick of
teaching to tests that don't teach kids anything useful except maybe
how to take tests.
Taking tests is a very important skill but these teachers do not want
their salary tied to any measure of performance. They want to be paid
by credentials and time in grade.
Make that sound reasonable to me..
A totally out of touch teacher with 20 years on the job and a PhD, who
gets horrible results, makes 3 times as much as a new teacher who
connects with the kids and really gets something done in the
classroom. That is ridiculous.
It's just the way of the unions. When I got laid off from Finast I was
number two from the bottom of siniority, so I went second. At the same
time, I was consistently in the top ten percent of production, day after
day. At the same time the union worked very hard to keep guys caught
sleeping in the bathroom or stealing, earning a steady paycheck.

There is something inherently wrong with Unions taking millions from
their employees, handing it to politicians, and then going to those very
same Politicians for negotiations... Period.

We just had an article in the paper about suspended employees who were
still being paid. Their top example was a teacher who was suspended
for sexual assault on a faculty member, off on "suspension" for over a
year and still getting the $61,000 salary. Not bad money for staying
home and watching soaps all day. This person was reinstated, back to
teaching. What do you learn in that class?

Hell, man, you guys elected a governor who should be in federal prison.


Right next to Charlie Rangel but evidently crime does pay.

Charlie is small potatoes compared to your governor.