Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

Jim wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
bb wrote:

On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:00:33 GMT, "Jim"
wrote:

That seems to be your only retort when cornered in an debate.

I seem to recall most others bringing something to the debate, other
than you, Jim. Your sole purpose here seems to be personally
attacking anyone you don't agree with. Do you have a position on
anything?

bb


His position is " so he can hide behind his
skirts.


Actually I gave you a clue on where to find my name, phone number and email address. I
do not hide behind any skirts.


I'm not that interested. I do find it of interest, though, that you,
like most of the right-wing rabble hereabouts, hide behind a "skirt."



Only a fool would give a real name and email address in a public internet forum/NG like
this. But I guess you fit that bill.



--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

NOYB wrote:

Actually, Harry, I credit the tax cut for a very recent increase in
patients' disposable income...leading to a sharp increase in spending on
dental care vs. last summer. The increase in productivity is the reason I
needed to expand my staff.

As for me supplying my name and phone number, here are my terms:

1) I get at least 3 paragraphs of space in your article to share my views
(in full, and unedited of course)

Sorry, you'd get the space you deserve, depending on what you say.



2) I get a chance to review the entire article, and *OK* any portion dealing
with me and my practice, prior to publication

I don't give anyone that privilege on my articles.



3) You contact the Collier County Dental Association with a synopsis about
the theme of your article, and they'll pass it along to me. The contact
should be made on official letterhead of the organization that will do the
publishing, and should be signed by you. This would mean you are who you say
you are and you're acting in good faith.

No problem.



--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

"bb" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:06:23 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

Ahhh, it's a *regressive* tax then! How unfair! Perhaps we should
eliminate the phase out, but cut the income tax rate?


Ohhh, touchy. Sorry I pointed that out. What does the income tax
rate have to do with social security?

They're both federally imposed taxes, but one is a progressive tax, and the
other is flat up to a certain ceiling. If it's OK to have a flat rate for
social security, then we should have one for income tax. Did you notice on
your W-2 that pension plan contributions don't lower the amount of income
subject to FICA? Why do we have a progressive rate for Federal income tax,
but a flat tax for FICA?

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

NOYB wrote:

Social security and medicare are the only *fair* taxes...'cause the rate is
the same for all income levels.

Not when considered as a percentage of total income. SS cuts off at $80-some k.
For a lot of people, the SS pain in the butt disappears fairly early in the
year (although the employer's contribution continues). Most of the working poor
will *never* see a paychek without a deduction for SS.

I understand that there is some equity because benefits for higher income wage
earners are also capped, but it is inaccurate to say that the rate is the same
for all workers.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

I have a service company and I recently increased the number of employees by
more than 30%. The average pay for the new hires is $14.

A day? :-) (only joking)

So you added one new employee to your three-person staff?

Didn't you recently post that you keep all of your employees down to 30 hours a
week, or less, to avoid paying certain fringe benefits?

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Actually, Harry, I credit the tax cut for a very recent increase in
patients' disposable income...leading to a sharp increase in spending on
dental care vs. last summer. The increase in productivity is the reason
I
needed to expand my staff.

As for me supplying my name and phone number, here are my terms:

1) I get at least 3 paragraphs of space in your article to share my
views
(in full, and unedited of course)

Sorry, you'd get the space you deserve, depending on what you say.



2) I get a chance to review the entire article, and *OK* any portion
dealing
with me and my practice, prior to publication

I don't give anyone that privilege on my articles.



3) You contact the Collier County Dental Association with a synopsis
about
the theme of your article, and they'll pass it along to me. The contact
should be made on official letterhead of the organization that will do
the
publishing, and should be signed by you. This would mean you are who you
say
you are and you're acting in good faith.

No problem.

Well then send your proposal, and ask that our officers announce the theme
of your article at the next meeting. Perhaps there are other dentists that
would like to share their thoughts on this subject. If you go that far,
I'll email you my name and phone number. Of course, I'll make sure the
other members read some of your less-than-positive posts about dentists and
conservatives. Afterall, it's only fair that they know what kind of person
they are dealing with before providing ammunition for your biased article.

I'll be waiting...

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
I have a service company and I recently increased the number of employees
by
more than 30%. The average pay for the new hires is $14.

A day? :-) (only joking)

So you added one new employee to your three-person staff?

grin The Devil is in the details. ;-)



Didn't you recently post that you keep all of your employees down to 30
hours a
week, or less, to avoid paying certain fringe benefits?

No. All of my employees work less than 40 hours, but I use 32 hours as the
time needed to reach "full time" status...and they all work at least 32
hours per week. In the summer, my hygienist does go down to 24 hours per
week, but still qualifies as "full-time". I only work 4 days per week, so I
didn't think it would be fair to tell the staff that they didn't qualify for
benefits because they didn't work 40 hours.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

Wrong and wrong.


Meager benefits, eh?
Here are the "meager" benefits I offer:
Matching Simple IRA pension plan; 5 paid vacation days in years 1 and 2; 10
days starting in year 3; 4 paid holidays; 2 paid sick days; non-HMO health
insurance; free dental care for staff and immediate family.



"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gould 0738 wrote:

I have a service company and I recently increased the number of
employees by
more than 30%. The average pay for the new hires is $14.

A day? :-) (only joking)

So you added one new employee to your three-person staff?

Didn't you recently post that you keep all of your employees down to 30
hours a
week, or less, to avoid paying certain fringe benefits?


Indeed.

And he also claimed he especially looked for employees who would not
"tax" the meager benefits he offers.



--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

NOYB wrote:

Wrong and wrong.


Meager benefits, eh?
free dental care for staff and immediate family.



Well, I'm glad you provide your workers with a good dental referral.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

Nevertheless, I'll be waiting for your letter of inquiry to the CCDA.


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Actually, Harry, I credit the tax cut for a very recent increase in
patients' disposable income...leading to a sharp increase in spending
on
dental care vs. last summer. The increase in productivity is the
reason
I
needed to expand my staff.

As for me supplying my name and phone number, here are my terms:

1) I get at least 3 paragraphs of space in your article to share my
views
(in full, and unedited of course)

Sorry, you'd get the space you deserve, depending on what you say.



2) I get a chance to review the entire article, and *OK* any portion
dealing
with me and my practice, prior to publication

I don't give anyone that privilege on my articles.



3) You contact the Collier County Dental Association with a synopsis
about
the theme of your article, and they'll pass it along to me. The
contact
should be made on official letterhead of the organization that will
do
the
publishing, and should be signed by you. This would mean you are who
you
say
you are and you're acting in good faith.

No problem.

Well then send your proposal, and ask that our officers announce the
theme
of your article at the next meeting. Perhaps there are other dentists
that
would like to share their thoughts on this subject. If you go that far,
I'll email you my name and phone number. Of course, I'll make sure the
other members read some of your less-than-positive posts about dentists
and
conservatives. Afterall, it's only fair that they know what kind of
person
they are dealing with before providing ammunition for your biased
article.

I'll be waiting...





Oh, I like my dentist just fine. But, then, he's not a horse's ass, as
you are.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

NOYB wrote:

Nevertheless, I'll be waiting for your letter of inquiry to the CCDA.


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Actually, Harry, I credit the tax cut for a very recent increase in
patients' disposable income...leading to a sharp increase in spending
on
dental care vs. last summer. The increase in productivity is the
reason
I
needed to expand my staff.

As for me supplying my name and phone number, here are my terms:

1) I get at least 3 paragraphs of space in your article to share my
views
(in full, and unedited of course)

Sorry, you'd get the space you deserve, depending on what you say.



2) I get a chance to review the entire article, and *OK* any portion
dealing
with me and my practice, prior to publication

I don't give anyone that privilege on my articles.



3) You contact the Collier County Dental Association with a synopsis
about
the theme of your article, and they'll pass it along to me. The
contact
should be made on official letterhead of the organization that will
do
the
publishing, and should be signed by you. This would mean you are who
you
say
you are and you're acting in good faith.

No problem.

Well then send your proposal, and ask that our officers announce the
theme
of your article at the next meeting. Perhaps there are other dentists
that
would like to share their thoughts on this subject. If you go that far,
I'll email you my name and phone number. Of course, I'll make sure the
other members read some of your less-than-positive posts about dentists
and
conservatives. Afterall, it's only fair that they know what kind of
person
they are dealing with before providing ammunition for your biased
article.

I'll be waiting...





Oh, I like my dentist just fine. But, then, he's not a horse's ass, as
you are.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.





Sorry...you changed the terms.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

???
It seems like you were the one that rejected 2 out of the 3 terms I
proposed.


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Nevertheless, I'll be waiting for your letter of inquiry to the CCDA.


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Actually, Harry, I credit the tax cut for a very recent increase
in
patients' disposable income...leading to a sharp increase in
spending
on
dental care vs. last summer. The increase in productivity is the
reason
I
needed to expand my staff.

As for me supplying my name and phone number, here are my terms:

1) I get at least 3 paragraphs of space in your article to share
my
views
(in full, and unedited of course)

Sorry, you'd get the space you deserve, depending on what you say.



2) I get a chance to review the entire article, and *OK* any
portion
dealing
with me and my practice, prior to publication

I don't give anyone that privilege on my articles.



3) You contact the Collier County Dental Association with a
synopsis
about
the theme of your article, and they'll pass it along to me. The
contact
should be made on official letterhead of the organization that
will
do
the
publishing, and should be signed by you. This would mean you are
who
you
say
you are and you're acting in good faith.

No problem.

Well then send your proposal, and ask that our officers announce the
theme
of your article at the next meeting. Perhaps there are other
dentists
that
would like to share their thoughts on this subject. If you go that
far,
I'll email you my name and phone number. Of course, I'll make sure
the
other members read some of your less-than-positive posts about
dentists
and
conservatives. Afterall, it's only fair that they know what kind of
person
they are dealing with before providing ammunition for your biased
article.

I'll be waiting...





Oh, I like my dentist just fine. But, then, he's not a horse's ass, as
you are.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.





Sorry...you changed the terms.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

NOYB wrote:

???
It seems like you were the one that rejected 2 out of the 3 terms I
proposed.



As I have stated from time to time, I'm not that interested in you or
your terms or much else about you. But I do believe you are a typical
right-wing coward, afraid to post with your real name because your
"opinions" are so outrageous.




--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

???
It seems like you were the one that rejected 2 out of the 3 terms I
proposed.



As I have stated from time to time, I'm not that interested in you or
your terms or much else about you. But I do believe you are a typical
right-wing coward, afraid to post with your real name because your
"opinions" are so outrageous.

One of the differences between us is the fact that I interact on a
professional level with people of *diverse* backgrounds every single
day...and you just work with and cozy up to like-minded liberals. You write
for a two-bit union rag because 99% of the respectable publications out
there wouldn't put a single word of yours into print. You can say what you
want in your piece of rubbish mag because you already know your audience.
Try stepping outside your "comfort zone" into an arena where there are
others that don't share your political views. Then let's see if you're
willing to sign your name to the bull**** you write.

BTW--I noticed you backed out of the deal about contacting the CCDA about
your story as soon as I mentioned passing along to them some of your quotes
about dentists and conservatives. So you see? We're not much different.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

You're trying to disprove the theory that the Bush tax cut will create jobs.
That's not political?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:


BTW--I noticed you backed out of the deal about contacting the CCDA
about
your story as soon as I mentioned passing along to them some of your
quotes
about dentists and conservatives. So you see? We're not much
different.

Nope. You turned it into a political tirade..in which I have no
interest. Sorry.








--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

It is funny that while there was some name calling in the last few weeks,
nothing to compare with the tirade that has developed since Harry returned.
Say what you will about the right wing trash or left wing socialist, no one
is more frustrated in his futile efforts to make an impact in the world than
Harry.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Social security and medicare are the only *fair* taxes...'cause the rate
is
the same for all income levels.

Not when considered as a percentage of total income. SS cuts off at
$80-some k.
For a lot of people, the SS pain in the butt disappears fairly early in
the
year (although the employer's contribution continues). Most of the working
poor
will *never* see a paychek without a deduction for SS.

I understand that there is some equity because benefits for higher income
wage
earners are also capped, but it is inaccurate to say that the rate is the
same
for all workers.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

Bill Cole wrote:

It is funny that while there was some name calling in the last few weeks,
nothing to compare with the tirade that has developed since Harry returned.
Say what you will about the right wing trash or left wing socialist, no one
is more frustrated in his futile efforts to make an impact in the world than
Harry.


Unlike you, Bill, I have no delusions about political statements in
rec.boats having any impact on the real world. I just refuse to engage
right-wing trash in debate on issues. There's no reason to do so...if
you mud wrestle with a right-wing pig, you're going to get covered in
garbage and excrement, because that is their only product. It's more fun
to pinprick the little suckers and watch them go ballastic.



--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

LOL. I was expecting a zinger from you on the dental care...and, of
course, your silence about the other benefits.



But you did post that you prefer to hire two part time workers rather than a
full time worker, and thereby avoid paying for fringe benefits. Are you going
to 'fess up or do I have to wade through Google? :-)

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

GDP growth has been increasing every month for almost a year now...long
enough for almost every economist to now declare the recession is officially
over.

Yahoo (Reuters) has a news piece just released that is entitled "Analysts
Say U.S. Economy in Recovery, 2001 Recession Over".

Of course, every economist will also tell you job growth lags GDP growth
almost every time...so your "research" means very little at this early
stage. Hell, paychecks just started reflecting the tax cut a mere 2 months
ago...and Americans received their child tax credit more recently than that.

Here's a very telling quote:
"All the data's saying the same thing: this quarter is going to be a
cracker," said Ram Bhagavatula, chief economist at Royal Bank of Scotland
Financial Markets, predicting gross domestic product growth will hit a 6
percent to 7 percent annual rate this quarter. "

6-7% *annual* growth rate! The last time we had a greater than 7% annual
growth in GDP was 1984...the year Reagan won in a landslide.




"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

You're trying to disprove the theory that the Bush tax cut will create
jobs.
That's not political?




I'm not trying to prove or disprove a thing. I'm merely part of a group
trying to find legitimate evidence that the Bush tax cuts have resulted
in significant job growth among substantial manufacturing or service
employers.


By the middle of last week, some 1,500 employers have been contacted
nationally by our researchers. The data to date indicates no job growth
traceable to Bush's little giveaway.


--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

Go wade through google, Gould. I have never hired a part-time employee to
avoid paying benefits.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
LOL. I was expecting a zinger from you on the dental care...and, of
course, your silence about the other benefits.



But you did post that you prefer to hire two part time workers rather than
a
full time worker, and thereby avoid paying for fringe benefits. Are you
going
to 'fess up or do I have to wade through Google? :-)

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

No. All of my employees work less than 40 hours, but I use 32 hours as the
time needed to reach "full time" status...and they all work at least 32
hours per week. In the summer, my hygienist does go down to 24 hours per
week, but still qualifies as "full-time". I only work 4 days per week, so I
didn't think it would be fair to tell the staff that they didn't qualify for
benefits because they didn't work 40 hours.

That's more information than I remember you providing. Ignore my fess up or
face Google comment.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

Go wade through google, Gould. I have never hired a part-time employee to
avoid paying benefits.

See later comment, same thread.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

Is this like truth or dare? I'll choose "face Google comment". But, I'll
caution you that you're wasting your time.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
No. All of my employees work less than 40 hours, but I use 32 hours as
the
time needed to reach "full time" status...and they all work at least 32
hours per week. In the summer, my hygienist does go down to 24 hours per
week, but still qualifies as "full-time". I only work 4 days per week,
so I
didn't think it would be fair to tell the staff that they didn't qualify
for
benefits because they didn't work 40 hours.

That's more information than I remember you providing. Ignore my fess up
or
face Google comment.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

Still waiting...

You're in for a looooong night if you think you'll find what you're seeking
in google...or anywhere.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Go wade through google, Gould. I have never hired a part-time employee
to
avoid paying benefits.

See later comment, same thread.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

NOYB wrote:

Go wade through google, Gould. I have never hired a part-time employee to
avoid paying benefits.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
LOL. I was expecting a zinger from you on the dental care...and, of
course, your silence about the other benefits.



But you did post that you prefer to hire two part time workers rather than
a
full time worker, and thereby avoid paying for fringe benefits. Are you
going
to 'fess up or do I have to wade through Google? :-)







And you never went into dentistry for the money, or so you claimed, but,
then, you did, or so you claimed. Not that it makes a difference.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Go wade through google, Gould. I have never hired a part-time employee
to
avoid paying benefits.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
LOL. I was expecting a zinger from you on the dental care...and, of
course, your silence about the other benefits.



But you did post that you prefer to hire two part time workers rather
than
a
full time worker, and thereby avoid paying for fringe benefits. Are you
going
to 'fess up or do I have to wade through Google? :-)







And you never went into dentistry for the money, or so you claimed, but,
then, you did, or so you claimed. Not that it makes a difference.

Not that you found that on google, either. Right?

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

Still waiting...

You're in for a looooong night if you think you'll find what you're seeking
in google...or anywhere.

If you're following this thread as it unravels, you are no longer waiting. You
have already read your own words from last June.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

Eisboch wrote:



Socialism in Norway, Sweden or any other of the northern European nations
sucks. Just ask any of the current citizen benefactors. I have.

So have I, and frequently.



Those of you taking any of Harry's political bantering, laced with his
elitists "educational advantage tone" seriously need a head exam. Harry is
a middle class workabee


I've never claimed to be anything other than the product of a
middle-class household that, in fact, was Republican-leaning, when it
wasn't embarrassing to be a Republican. Most of my values are middle-class.


who promotes the policies and politics of those that
spread the butter on his bread, nothing more or less.

I happen to share the values, policies and politics of those for whom I
work. My values became more focused during my tenure with Saul Alinsky.




Otherwise, I think I would probably enjoy a day of fishing with him.

Eisboch

Indeed, but, then, I've never considered you a right-wing lunatic,
Eisbocher.




--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:35:29 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

NOYB wrote:

You're trying to disprove the theory that the Bush tax cut will create jobs.
That's not political?




I'm not trying to prove or disprove a thing. I'm merely part of a group
trying to find legitimate evidence that the Bush tax cuts have resulted
in significant job growth among substantial manufacturing or service
employers.


By the middle of last week, some 1,500 employers have been contacted
nationally by our researchers. The data to date indicates no job growth
traceable to Bush's little giveaway.

Not to get into a discussion, Harry, but it would sure be nice to see the
questionnaire you sent those 1500 employers. Not that a questionnaire could ever
be biased, but who knows?

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Search Result 1
From: NOYB )
Subject: as in Overtime
View: Complete Thread (37 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Date: 2003-06-08 07:17:01 PST


I didn't say "temp" workers. I said "part-time" workers...someone that
may
only work 20 hours per week. A dental hygienist is a good example. That
position is not "unskilled" labor. Yet, many of 'em work less than 30
hours
per week. It's more cost effective to have two hygienists work 25 hours
per
week without benefits and OT, than pay one hygienist OT and benefits.



"noah" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"NOYB" wrote in message
m...
Nonsense. It's cheaper to bring in part-time employees that aren't
entitled
to benefits, and are usually paid less than the *regular* (non-OT) pay
received by the full time people. You obviously have little
experience in
the HR department, eh?

I had offered to let you off the hook, but you wanted to make an issue of
this
so here it is. Read it and weep.

More like "read it and giggle". Where does it say that *I* did such a
thing?

Then figure out who's spoofing your e-mail
address.

Next time, quit while you're (sort of) ahead. :-)

Granted, you stopped short of saying that you *did* what you recommend.

Nice try, Chuck! But here's what *you* asked:
"Didn't you recently post that you keep all of your employees down to 30
hours a week, or less, to avoid paying certain fringe benefits?"


And my answer to that was and is...NOPE!

Since you accused me of stating that *I* hired part-time employees in my
practice to avoid paying benefits, I'd say you owe me an apology.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Still waiting...

You're in for a looooong night if you think you'll find what you're
seeking
in google...or anywhere.

If you're following this thread as it unravels, you are no longer waiting.
You
have already read your own words from last June.

....and nowhere do they support your accusation that *I* hired part-time
employees to avoid paying fringe benefits. All my employees are considered
"full-time"...and have been since I started 4 years ago.

Now I'm just "waiting" for an apology.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

NOYB wrote:
"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Search Result 1
From: NOYB )
Subject: as in Overtime
View: Complete Thread (37 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Date: 2003-06-08 07:17:01 PST


I didn't say "temp" workers. I said "part-time" workers...someone that
may
only work 20 hours per week. A dental hygienist is a good example. That
position is not "unskilled" labor. Yet, many of 'em work less than 30
hours
per week. It's more cost effective to have two hygienists work 25 hours
per
week without benefits and OT, than pay one hygienist OT and benefits.



"noah" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"NOYB" wrote in message
m...
Nonsense. It's cheaper to bring in part-time employees that aren't
entitled
to benefits, and are usually paid less than the *regular* (non-OT) pay
received by the full time people. You obviously have little
experience in
the HR department, eh?

I had offered to let you off the hook, but you wanted to make an issue of
this
so here it is. Read it and weep.

More like "read it and giggle". Where does it say that *I* did such a
thing?

Then figure out who's spoofing your e-mail
address.

Next time, quit while you're (sort of) ahead. :-)

Granted, you stopped short of saying that you *did* what you recommend.

Nice try, Chuck! But here's what *you* asked:
"Didn't you recently post that you keep all of your employees down to 30
hours a week, or less, to avoid paying certain fringe benefits?"


And my answer to that was and is...NOPE!

Since you accused me of stating that *I* hired part-time employees in my
practice to avoid paying benefits, I'd say you owe me an apology.



You owe the civilized world an apology.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Go wade through google, Gould. I have never hired a part-time employee
to
avoid paying benefits.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
LOL. I was expecting a zinger from you on the dental care...and, of
course, your silence about the other benefits.



But you did post that you prefer to hire two part time workers rather
than
a
full time worker, and thereby avoid paying for fringe benefits. Are you
going
to 'fess up or do I have to wade through Google? :-)







And you never went into dentistry for the money, or so you claimed, but,
then, you did, or so you claimed. Not that it makes a difference.

Not that you found that on google, either. Right?



Why would I waste time looking through your excrement on google?

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

It'd be interesting to see the names of the 1500 employers. They probably
got it from the Democratic donors list.

To all Democratic donors:
"Has the Bush Administration's ill-advised tax cut helped you to hire any
new employees? (Remember, it would really help our chances in 2004 if you
answered *no*)."





"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:35:29 -0400, Harry Krause

wrote:

NOYB wrote:

You're trying to disprove the theory that the Bush tax cut will create
jobs.
That's not political?




I'm not trying to prove or disprove a thing. I'm merely part of a group
trying to find legitimate evidence that the Bush tax cuts have resulted
in significant job growth among substantial manufacturing or service
employers.


By the middle of last week, some 1,500 employers have been contacted
nationally by our researchers. The data to date indicates no job growth
traceable to Bush's little giveaway.

Not to get into a discussion, Harry, but it would sure be nice to see the
questionnaire you sent those 1500 employers. Not that a questionnaire
could ever
be biased, but who knows?

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Search Result 1
From: NOYB )
Subject: as in Overtime
View: Complete Thread (37 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Date: 2003-06-08 07:17:01 PST


I didn't say "temp" workers. I said "part-time" workers...someone that
may
only work 20 hours per week. A dental hygienist is a good example.
That
position is not "unskilled" labor. Yet, many of 'em work less than 30
hours
per week. It's more cost effective to have two hygienists work 25
hours
per
week without benefits and OT, than pay one hygienist OT and benefits.



"noah" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"NOYB" wrote in message
m...
Nonsense. It's cheaper to bring in part-time employees that aren't
entitled
to benefits, and are usually paid less than the *regular* (non-OT)
pay
received by the full time people. You obviously have little
experience in
the HR department, eh?

I had offered to let you off the hook, but you wanted to make an issue
of
this
so here it is. Read it and weep.

More like "read it and giggle". Where does it say that *I* did such a
thing?

Then figure out who's spoofing your e-mail
address.

Next time, quit while you're (sort of) ahead. :-)

Granted, you stopped short of saying that you *did* what you recommend.

Nice try, Chuck! But here's what *you* asked:
"Didn't you recently post that you keep all of your employees down to 30
hours a week, or less, to avoid paying certain fringe benefits?"


And my answer to that was and is...NOPE!

Since you accused me of stating that *I* hired part-time employees in my
practice to avoid paying benefits, I'd say you owe me an apology.



You owe the civilized world an apology.


"Civilized" world? So it'd be OK if you didn't get one?

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

Since you accused me of stating that *I* hired part-time employees in my
practice to avoid paying benefits, I'd say you owe me an apology.



By way of apology, I'll avoid googling up the thread where you did specifically
claim to prefer to hire people of a certain age group- too old to take off on
maternity leave and still young enough to raise you health insurance experience
rating.

Since you insist that the best practice is to hire two 25 hour workers to do 50
hours worth of work rather than hire a 40-hour person and pay overtime and
benefits, you ask us to believe that you knowingly follow the less than optimum
financial course for the welfare of your employees. That's very "liberal" of
you, Doc, you should be proud.
:-)

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

...and nowhere do they support your accusation that *I* hired part-time
employees to avoid paying fringe benefits. All my employees are considered
"full-time"...and have been since I started 4 years ago.

Now I'm just "waiting" for an apology.


Already addressed. You claim to follow a personnel policy that differs from
what you have specifically recommended to be the most cost effective, in order
to assure full time benefits for your 32-hour per week employees. Very liberal
of you. You did say, in your reply to NOAH, that anybody who did things
otherwise didn't know much about managing human resources.

As to the hours of your employees vs the employment practices you recommend
that others follow; would have been easy enough to offer that clarification up
front, wouldn't it?

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

No, we are in compete agreement about a few things. I too agree that no
political statements in rec.boats have any impact on the real world. I
agree that rec.boats have become a forum that is used to provoke emotion
with people you disagree.

While rec.boats might have been a good venue for discussing recreational
boats, those days are long gone. At one time the NG had experts who
contributed to the decision concerning using boats recreationally. Today,
this NG is about pinpricking people you disagree with and watching them go
ballistic.

The only thing I disagree with, is the intensity at which you attack those
who disagree with you. They either agree with you or they are right wing
trash/pig. To be honest with you, the only one I see going ballistic in the
forum is you, jps and Jim Dandy. While the right wing are just as guilty of
off topic discussion, they are much more effective at getting you to go
ballistic then you are.


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bill Cole wrote:

It is funny that while there was some name calling in the last few
weeks,
nothing to compare with the tirade that has developed since Harry
returned.
Say what you will about the right wing trash or left wing socialist, no
one
is more frustrated in his futile efforts to make an impact in the world
than
Harry.


Unlike you, Bill, I have no delusions about political statements in
rec.boats having any impact on the real world. I just refuse to engage
right-wing trash in debate on issues. There's no reason to do so...if
you mud wrestle with a right-wing pig, you're going to get covered in
garbage and excrement, because that is their only product. It's more fun
to pinprick the little suckers and watch them go ballastic.



--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

"Jim" wrote in message news:I5d4b.310030$o%2.142074@sccrnsc02...
Find a real boating forum. This NG is a joke and nothing more than cheap
entertainment.

Harry, Gould, bb, jps, Jim Dandy, ignoramus and the group have turned this into nothing
more than a political chat room full of childish name calling and intolerance for
opposing opinions.

Don't blame me for what it is now. I came on board when the NG was already screwed up
thanks to the members I mentioned above. I only joined in the fun.

Email me if you want some serious boating forums.

Hmm, funny, but you don't mention anyone who posts off topic, use
childish name calling, and intolerance for opposing opinions that are
conservative/republican. Would that be YOUR intolerance for opposing
opinions?

Gould, jps, NOYB, Jim, Harry, and a cast of thousands
 

I really do hope the Dems try to make unemployment their sole issue.

No doubt. Bad as the unemployment picture is, there are some much worse
problems with the current administration.

What
will they do at this time next year when we have 12 months of dropping
unemployment rates?

I don't know about the Democrats, but I'll celebrate. (*if*)