Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Especially the power workers

Posted By: been there, over it on 2007-08-22
In Reply to: Katrina was - keening

God bless those people who came all the way down there, slept in their trucks in stifiling weather (because the media and gawking politicians hogged all the hotels that were left) and helped string line and get our power back on.  They are heros, as well as all those who donated time and goods.


On the other hand, SHAME on the people from Indiana who printed up a bunch of Katrina T-shirts and had the nerve to come down there to sell them!  Those who survived Katrina need no darn T-shirt proclaiming they did!




Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Yesterday IBM laid off American workers but kept Indian workers, SM
and I'm sure they don't make chump change. Looks like we are becoming Zimbabwe! Thank O for that.
Yeah, 'knowledge IS power". But, the power is
nm
Okay, WORKERS.
30-40% of WORKERS don't pay income taxes. Is that better? And only recently has he started saying workers. No one was ever counting children or people who did not work. Of course, you realize, you are classifed as a "worker" if you work one day a year, right?

The same question...if he is going to give a tax cut or break or whatever he wants to call it for 95% of WORKERS...30-40% of whom do not pay federal income taxes NOW...HOW is he going to do that without cutting someone a check. How else is he going to get the money to them? Please explain.
Instead of cutting the workers' pay, they should
cutting THEIR pay. After all, they're the ones who aren't doing their jobs very well (if at all). Same with AIG - they get the cash, and then give their company *pets* huge *retention* checks. (Yeah, right. Sounds like a big fat bonus, to me.) The big companies' CEOs just don't get it. They want more money, more money, more money, and no matter how you cut it, bailout or no bailout, the one who loses is the little guy. There's no way they're going to completely restructure and retool if they get the money, they'll just keep on doing like they're doing. The Big Three need to die a natural death, no more artificial life support or resuscitation measures - DNR, DNI !!! Then, let a NEW, leaner-meaner-greener American car industry be born in their place. Same goes for the banks. And the insurance companies. And healthcare (mis)management. Let the sick and the weak ones die, and healthier ones grow in their place. Kind of like the forests. If wildfires are prevented for too long a time, the forest gets choked with dead/sick trees and overcrowding, and when a fire finally does roar through (like at Yellowstone in the late 1980's), it's a WHOPPER. Same thing is happening in American business right now.
Union Workers

How does your husband feel about voting out in the open; no more secret ballots?  That's quite audacious!


Todd Palin is a card-carrying union guy, too.


 


And why did the union workers
walk off the job?  That's right.  For better benefits, health care, retirement and working conditions which ALSO benefited non-union workers, even those scabs who went in and did the jobs.  Thanks to Ronald Reagan, the Great (NOT!) the unions have lost their teeth in the ability to even strike and thus to bargain.  Ole Ronnie got employers the "right to permanently replace workers."   Read up on the history of unions.  Ever watch the movie "Jimmy Hoffa?"  Yes he made deals with criminals i.e. the mafia but he did much to help workers too.  Ultimately he paid with his life.  Union/non-union is sort of like arguing democrat/republican.  Those for/against don't want to hear any side other than their own.
What? The workers work for nothing?
That's news to me. I thought the workers got paid.
But you see which auto workers are
handouts, and the workers are not complaining about their jobs. I am talking about the ones mentioned recently in the news here in the Southeastern US. Those workers are making(including all their benefits) around $35 an hour. The unionized big 3 workers making $70+ an hour for the same work. Is that contract worth that much?
I took it as we are unskilled workers
sent overseas and basically there is nothing that can be done about it. This has been going on for years, but to be called unskilled? We need to now be better educated for other work opportunities in the United States. So I might as well pack it in and go back to school to do something else, even though I have an AA degree with Medical Transcription skills and schooling.
Here is an article about the poll workers. sm
It is from the Boston Globe. They only give a brief description. There was more discussion on it in one of the grassroots forums.

Apparently,the poll workers did have permission to be there, and the NH GOP told them to stand their ground.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/politics/primarysource/2008/01/obama_and_paul.html
AAMT is not a workers' union.
x
I might have to if your man gets elected. Maybe we'll be co workers nm
x
Here's hoping Chicago workers' sit-in and

good things to come.  As Bank of America acquires Merrill-Lynch (whose CEO has the utter gall to request a $10 million bonus pay-out after the ML sell-out) they are refusing credit to Republic Windows and Doors out of Chicago after receiving $15 billion in TARP funds.  The workers are fighting back to recover the pay and benefits they have already earned and their governor is backing them up.  Now that's what I'm talkin' about !


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aw5QzWC86Vl8&refer=home


not 95% of Americans - 95% of American WORKERS -
From Barackobama.com/taxes:

Obama’s Comprehensive Tax Policy Plan for America will:
Cut taxes for 95 percent of WORKERS and their families with a tax cut of $500 for WORKERS or $1,000 for WORKING couples.

Provide generous tax cuts for low- and middle-income seniors, homeowners, the uninsured, and families sending a child to college or looking to save and accumulate wealth.

Eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses, cut corporate taxes for firms that invest and create jobs in the United States, and provide tax credits to reduce the cost of healthcare and to reward investments in innovation.

Dramatically simplify taxes by consolidating existing tax credits, eliminating the need for millions of senior citizens to file tax forms, and enabling as many as 40 million middle-class Americans to do their own taxes in less than five minutes without an accountant.

unemployed auto workers' pay
per their contract, if unemployed they receive FULL pay. The loss would be benefits, but they get full pay for not working if they are laid off. That should give them time for re-education.
Most employers are cutting workers because they want
Money-money-money-money-
money-money-money-money-
money-money-money-money-money-money-money-money-
money-money-money-money-money-money-money-money!
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


Maybe they should tax offshore workers doing OUR work.

Right on! If we workers made more money, we'd

I think you misunderstand government workers
The people who are getting the benefits are not really the people with constituents (they're not members of congress). These are the ones who work for the federal government, like people who work for the dept of agriculture, for the VA, for the dept of state, etc.
NYC using fed millions to fight sick WTC workers. sm
Shame on them. Looks like the articles by the Daily News is finally getting them some much needed attention.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/438101p-369136c.html
she said her experience was w/ minimum wage workers
she said it herself what they were paid - minimum wage -duh
then why were you referring to "minimum wage" workers
I never said I'm for giving them a handout...don't know where that's coming from. I was just pointing out the quality of employee you get when you pay minimum wage...why would you refer to minimum wage if you paid them well and didn't pay min wage? I wouldn't expect to get the most reliable people if I were paying minimum.
I said typical minimimum wage workers

I paid well above minimum wage...I guess reading my post it looks like I paid minimum.  That was my mistake.


I refer to minimum wage workers because...
This type of work normally paid minimum wage.  I, however, did not...
Please comment on the OP...about minimum wage workers
x
By all means give the union workers a pay cut S/M

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ocwage_05092008.htm 


Going way down the page you will find the median pay for medical transcriptionists is approximately $15.02 per hour.  This being the case, if you are one of those fortunate enough to be making $20 or more per hour, I assume you will be recommending a pay cut for yourself and all others who are making more than the median in order to bring pay more in line with other workers.  Translated that means leaving more in the coffers for the big CEOs.  I don't know whether some of you are BDD or what.


The practices of healthcare workers do need work - sm

Healthcare workers fail to take the time with patients to discuss disease prevention and health promotion.   


If you are going to give money to re-educate the auto workers....... sm
then it would follow that money should be given to sustain and re-educate the people in other industries (MT comes to mind) that are suffering because of big suit mismanagement and jobs going overseas. What about the thousands upon thousands of other displaced workers in the public sector that have lost their jobs? Will they need to be re-educated as well? Will there be jobs available to them, even if they are re-educated?

Maybe that's what all those re-education centers all over America are for. hmmmmmmm
Workers walk off job rather than read McCain script.
Some three dozen workers at a telemarketing call center in Indiana walked off the job rather than read an incendiary McCain campaign script attacking Barack Obama, according to two workers at the center and one of their parents.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/dozens_of_call_center_workers.php
For crying out loud. His target group IS workers
are so low that they come up not owing tax at the end of the year, then it would not be possible to give them a tax cut or a tax credit, unless it is a refundable tax credit. So far, you have not provided any evidence that Obama is proposing a REFUNDABLE tax credit. As a matter of fact, why do you supposed he call this tax credit "Making WORK pay." The credit will zero out at zero tax liability unless it is a refundable tax credit. Again, it seems like you cannot produce any evidence that this is the case. Or can you? What about the socialist question with regard to progressive tax reform proposals only being socialist at Obama's hands, an no other president in history since 1913, including the 7 republicans who raise the top income bracket rates to as high as 63% to 94%, as opposed to Obama, whose intent is to restore that rate back to 39.6% as it was in 2000 when Bush took office?
More Power To Them!
Makes me want to cry.  They have been there..done that..dont ever want to again..They know the pain they will carry for the rest of their lives..More power to them..May they carry on to government and change this government and country for the better..Chickenhawks they are not..
TAKE away their power!!

There are kinds of folks in this country.  There are right-wing kooks, religious kooks, left-wing kooks, serial killers, child pornographers, bigots/racists, right-wing militia people-whose-exact-names-I-forget and all types worse and better.


The thing is, in this country the decent people are the majority, whether right or left in politics/beliefs.  That's why this country is so great.


When you fixate on folks who are overly negative you give them power.  Please rise above the comments of those who represent a very tiny minority.  I pay no attention to those who voice unreasonable beliefs and I advise you do the same.  Take the power away from those people.


You have no power
run for congress, but spare me the eloquent opinions, gag.
you say that like we have any power now - nm
x
Exactly what power will he take away?
What power is Obama going to take away, eh?

Our right to guns?

Or is it his communist plan or his socialist plan - both of which I posted earlier (as Obama MT) that are already present in our government under both Dem/Rep long before Obama came along?

Or is it that he's a Muslim mole about to take us over?!

Or maybe it's that he will let black people rule over white people?!

Or is it that he will force abortions on us all or make like gay people or let them all get married?

Wait, is it the one where he will force Boy Scouts to have homosexual scout masters and have to sleep in the same tent with them??!! (you've got to be joking)

Or is it he won't let us homeschool our children any more?

Or is it the one where he will actually end this war and let our soldiers come home with dignity without more of them dying?

Which power is it that he will take away?

More than half of this country feels empowered and evidently, the rest don't.

I refer you back to the website to read Homework for the Fearful. I would be doing just that if McCain were my president - and letting go of my fear and hoping for the best of all, for all.

Haven't you all had enough fear mongering from the right to last a lifetime?

Thanks for listening.



the man has only been in power sm
for two months for crying out loud! You wait and see what happens. He sits in the white house throwing money around like he has a "money tree" on the white house lawn, he wants to suddenly remove all military from Iraq (which a lot of the military are against) further exposing this country wide open to attack and you think this is a strong president. The only thing he is "strong" in is trying to promote himself, the Obama AGENDA
Wow - I wish I'd know before that I had so much power! _ SM _
If I'd known that I and others like me had the superpowers to cause the economic crisis, then I'd have also used that power to will myself about $50 million in cash beforehand.
Yes, we have power

Although this story doesn't emphasize the fact, others do.  The outrage that exploded when the conservative teacher in Kansas lost his job has caused school officials to reverse their decision:


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,528484,00.html


Never buy into the lie that demon-crats and the media try to sell you that conservatism is dead.  Not only ain't we dead, we ain't begun to fight!  We're the same handful of colonial militia who defeated the whole durn British army a long time ago.  First they laughed at us...and then they died.


 


proposed tax policies which include granting rebates to most US workers.

That statement jumped out at me.


 


The power structure ,,,,,,, sm
This is an old clip (20 years old), but Ron Paul to goes into who they are a little bit. They do own the media so you won't see this stuff on the TV. Dr. Paul is a congressman so he is in a position to know.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4245169480003136735&hl=en
then again, perhaps it's abuse of power like
nm
So abuse of power is OK by you?
x
Sue does. The power to become more of a liability to McC
nm
Honestly, it's all about power
for the democrats in office, in my opinion. They want people to depend on the government so they have more power. That's what should scare the heck out of all of us much more than if they are helping someone in need or not.
New Bush rule makes it easier to hire foreign workers

Dec 10, 8:43 PM EST


Administration changes to farm worker hiring afoot


By SUZANNE GAMBOA
Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) -- As it prepares to leave office, the Bush administration is moving to make it easier for U.S. farming companies to hire foreign field workers, which farmworker groups say will worsen wages and working conditions.


Farm groups said that changes to the H2A visa program, used by the agriculture industry to hire temporary farm workers, were posted on the Labor Department's Web site at midnight Tuesday but have since been taken down.


Labor Department spokesman Terry Shawn said whatever was posted wasn't the final version of the new rule, which Shawn said would be released Thursday and published in the Federal Register on Dec. 18.


The Bush administration published a proposed version of the new rule last Feb. 13 and received nearly 12,000 public comments, Shawn added. The next version will be a final rule and can take effect 30 days after publication. Some of its provisions would take effect in mid-January and others later in the year, the farmworker groups said.


Farm worker advocates and the United Farm Workers union said the version that appeared on the Web site would lead to a flood of cheaper workers.


"The government has decided to offer agriculture employers really low wages, low benefits, no government oversight to bring in foreign workers on restricted visas and thereby convince them they should do this instead of hiring undocumented workers," said Bruce Goldstein, executive director of Farmworker Justice, a group that advocates for farmworkers.


The changes in the posted version would drop a requirement that an employer get the Labor Department to certify it faces a worker shortage before it can get visas for foreign workers; instead, employers would be allowed to simply attest in writing to a shortage. That version of the new rule also would change the method for calculating wage minimums for workers and relieve employers of a requirement to recruit in states or communities where other employers already are hiring farm workers, Goldstein said.


But Assistant Labor Secretary Leon Sequeira said Wednesday evening the agency is not dropping the obligation to obtain certification, which is required by law.


Paul Schlegel, American Farm Bureau public policy director, said many of the changes will make the program a little less burdensome for employers. He said existing laws prevent employers from hiring foreign workers if the jobs can be filled by U.S. workers.


"My members want to make sure they have a legal supply of labor," said Schlegel, who added that he had not reviewed all the proposed changes.


The rule changes are a part of a pattern of last-minute regulatory changes being rushed into effect by the Bush administration before President-elect Barack Obama's Jan. 20 inauguration.


The effect is to make it harder for Obama to change course on some policies favored by Republicans and the business community.


"We are hopeful that the Obama administration would recognize the utter mistake and unfairness of this proposal," Goldstein said. Congress has a procedure for reversing the rules, he said.


Many of the last-minute changes by the Bush administration have come in the area of public lands and the environment, including easing regulations on mining waste and allowing handguns in national parks. Another pending rule would grant greater leeway to railroads to transport hazardous materials through densely populated areas.


Power not granted to Bush
Power We Didn't Grant

By Tom Daschle
Friday, December 23, 2005; A21


In the face of mounting questions about news stories saying that President Bush approved a program to wiretap American citizens without getting warrants, the White House argues that Congress granted it authority for such surveillance in the 2001 legislation authorizing the use of force against al Qaeda. On Tuesday, Vice President Cheney said the president was granted authority by the Congress to use all means necessary to take on the terrorists, and that's what we've done.


As Senate majority leader at the time, I helped negotiate that law with the White House counsel's office over two harried days. I can state categorically that the subject of warrantless wiretaps of American citizens never came up. I did not and never would have supported giving authority to the president for such wiretaps. I am also confident that the 98 senators who voted in favor of authorization of force against al Qaeda did not believe that they were also voting for warrantless domestic surveillance.


On the evening of Sept. 12, 2001, the White House proposed that Congress authorize the use of military force to deter and pre-empt any future acts of terrorism or aggression against the United States. Believing the scope of this language was too broad and ill defined, Congress chose instead, on Sept. 14, to authorize all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons [the president] determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the attacks of Sept. 11. With this language, Congress denied the president the more expansive authority he sought and insisted that his authority be used specifically against Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda.


Just before the Senate acted on this compromise resolution, the White House sought one last change. Literally minutes before the Senate cast its vote, the administration sought to add the words in the United States and after appropriate force in the agreed-upon text. This last-minute change would have given the president broad authority to exercise expansive powers not just overseas -- where we all understood he wanted authority to act -- but right here in the United States, potentially against American citizens. I could see no justification for Congress to accede to this extraordinary request for additional authority. I refused.


The shock and rage we all felt in the hours after the attack were still fresh. America was reeling from the first attack on our soil since Pearl Harbor. We suspected thousands had been killed, and many who worked in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were not yet accounted for. Even so, a strong bipartisan majority could not agree to the administration's request for an unprecedented grant of


authority.


The Bush administration now argues those powers were inherently contained in the resolution adopted by Congress -- but at the time, the administration clearly felt they weren't or it wouldn't have tried to insert the additional language.


All Americans agree that keeping our nation safe from terrorists demands aggressive and innovative tactics. This unity was reflected in the near-unanimous support for the original resolution and the Patriot Act in those harrowing days after Sept. 11. But there are right and wrong ways to defeat terrorists, and that is a distinction this administration has never seemed to accept. Instead of employing tactics that preserve Americans' freedoms and inspire the faith and confidence of the American people, the White House seems to have chosen methods that can only breed fear and suspicion.


If the stories in the media over the past week are accurate, the president has exercised authority that I do not believe is granted to him in the Constitution, and that I know is not granted to him in the law that I helped negotiate with his counsel and that Congress approved in the days after Sept. 11. For that reason, the president should explain the specific legal justification for his authorization of these actions, Congress should fully investigate these actions and the president's justification for them, and the administration should cooperate fully with that investigation.


In the meantime, if the president believes the current legal architecture of our country is insufficient for the fight against terrorism, he should propose changes to our laws in the light of day.


That is how a great democracy operates. And that is how this great democracy will defeat


terrorism.


The writer, a former Democratic senator from South Dakota, was Senate majority leader in 2001-02. He is now distinguished senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.


© 2005 The Washington Post Company


Why do you give Bush the power

to do this to you?


*I die a little inside each time I see President Bush on TV or read about another dumb thing he said.  It bothers me so much!!!*


Wow, if you give someone that much power over your emotions and life you have to be living a sad existence.


He's really not THAT BAD, but of course you already know that.


Sounds familiar, nut at the top has the power!
Not all socialist states have fallen to such a state, many just fizzled out like lambs. Some countries today still have socialistic parties though have not adopted full-blown socialism as an ideal and have enjoyed economic success while keeping the head dog in check.
Abuse of power/hypocrisy seems to be
What is clear is that, slimy or not, she still used her office in an inappropriate manner to influence the outcome of a family dispute. What's ethical about that? The slimy trooper and the disposition of his divorce/custody case is supposed to be left up to the family courts and it not typically resolved by manipulation and interference by the Governor's office, now is it? Ethically challenged ethics clean-up maiden. Not my idea of a great pick.
sam's right on this one. Mainly the dems in power through the past several...sm
years have abused their power and positions, and taken advantage of the situation.

While I believe a few of the republicans stood by and let it happen, they are not the majority in this.

Rich liberal democrats on Wall street and in Congress/Senate, not to mention Bill Clinton and his cronies, are the ones that bear the most blame.


And some of them are crying the loudest blaming George Bush, when it's their own fault.




Sam has posted the names and dates and all. It is the truth. Research it yourselves. Just because you don't like what she has to say, means that it's wrong.







The power of suggestion I guess...nm
nm