President Trump's pro-life proclamation

[Dan123]

My brother’s company is constantly hiring laborers. The pay is decent for someone just starting out. But the work is very hard physically, and many new hires quit after less than two weeks.

Perhaps the pay isn’t in fact decent then? The company may think it is but clearly the people being hired disagree. The company isn’t entitled to people’s labor.

 

[neophyte]

The issue is if Jan will use that money for charity or for herself.

If she gives only 10% of what otherwise would be going into the government coffers, it’ll still be more effective than letting the state skim off of it.

But ultimately the money belongs to Jan, not to those who think they can spend it better than she can. She can use it as she wishes.

 

[Peeps]

The company isn’t entitled to people’s labor.

I do not understand this.

When I agree to work for a company in any profession, I agree to do the work that they give me for the pay that they offer me.

E.g., I work in a microbiology lab, with human specimens (feces, urine, sputum, tissue, various body fluids, etc.). Many of the specimens are infectious.

The hospital is entitled to my “labor”–i am expected to process these specimens, set them up, and read the results (bacteria, fungus, TB, etc.) I have no right to tell my company that I will not do the work and that I don’t think their salary is enough. If I do tell them these things, they have the right to terminate my employment.

The very idea that these people should not have to do the work that they were hired to do is for the salary that they agreed to, is, to put it bluntly, ridiculous.

 

[Rau]

The hospital is entitled to my “labor”

…until I decide the deal is not a good deal and I sever the relationship according to due process. The employer has no right to expect me to stay because I initially agreed.

 

[Dan123]

The very idea that these people should not have to do the work that they were hired to do is for the salary that they agreed to, is, to put it bluntly, ridiculous.

So once you take a job you can never quit? You said people quit after 2 weeks. That means that the workers, once they’re more aware of what the job entails, do not feel the pay is appropriate compensation for the work, so they quit. You want to label them lazy or unwilling to do the work, but that’s not how it works, if it was you’d eventually find non-lazy people who appreciate the pay. If that doesn’t happen, the company isn’t actually paying a wage people will do the job for.

 

[Poet]

But ultimately the money belongs to Jan , not to those who think they can spend it better than she can. She can use it as she wishes.

Exactly. There is a mistaken notion out there that what we work and earn for is really the government’s to use as they please.

 

[Poet]

Perhaps the pay isn’t in fact decent then? The company may think it is but clearly the people being hired disagree. The company isn’t entitled to people’s labor.

You’re making assumptions. Maybe at some companies people quit because the working conditions and pay are terrible. But it is ALSO true that all too many people have an inflated opinion of what their labor is worth straight out of college or even while still in high school, and little sense that most people start at the bottom, learning the job and trade, and work their way up.

Too many people have no concept of economics and what it costs an employer to pay an employee and how much money has to be brought in in order to pay that, and so unreasonably expect that they can just keep demanding more and more of employers.

Another reason people quit–child support finds them. I have a friend who does all the management for a small company. It’s a constant problem for him. He hires a new guy. Two weeks later he gets orders from the state to garnish wages for past child support due and the next day the guy doesn’t show up.

I offer this as just one example of companies having trouble keeping workers that has NOTHING to do with the evil company not paying enough. My friend has seen it happen repeatedly and the problem is these guys’ life choices. They had children out of wedlock and now don’t want to pay child support.

But let’s go back to the original topic. DONALD TRUMP SPOKE UP FOR DEFENDING THE UNBORN.

Is it a bad thing for a president to stand up for the unborn?

Why are so many people ripping him to shreds for doing the right thing?

Why was it impossible for so many people to say, “I disagree with him on a lot of things, but I’m glad he did something right.” ?

I didn’t care for much of what Obama stood for or believed or his policies. But had he spoken out for the unborn I would have been fully behind that action.

It seems to me that for some people on this Catholic forum, hatred of an individual outweighs any principal or belief or morality. If Donald Trump cured cancer tomorrow, would you attack him for putting oncologists out of work?

 

[Dan123]

But it is ALSO true that all too many people have an inflated opinion of what their labor is worth straight out of college or even while still in high school, and little sense that most people start at the bottom, learning the job and trade, and work their way up.

The thing is it doesn’t matter. The company thinks the position is worth $x, the worker thinks it’s worth $y. There’s no objectively ‘correct’ number so both sides get to be right and wrong at the same time. But that’s why I said you’re not entitled to labor. Just because the company thinks the position is worth $x if they can’t get people to do the job, $x is clearly not the right number. You can blame anything you want such as entitlement or what have you but it’s still not the right number. So you either wait a long time for reliable people who feel they’re only worth $x to come along or you pay more. That’s how economics works. But you don’t just get to say ‘our wages are great’ when evidence is staring you in the face that the people actually seeking employment don’t agree.

 

[Poet]

The thing is it doesn’t matter. The company thinks the position is worth $x, the worker thinks it’s worth $y. There’s no objectively ‘correct’ number so both sides get to be right and wrong at the same time. But that’s why I said you’re not entitled to labor. Just because the company thinks the position is worth $x if they can’t get people to do the job, $x is clearly not the right number. You can blame anything you want such as entitlement or what have you but it’s still not the right number. So you either wait a long time for reliable people who feel they’re only worth $x to come along or you pay more. That’s how economics works. But you don’t just get to say ‘our wages are great’ when evidence is staring you in the face that the people actually seeking employment don’t agree.

It absolutely does matter. If the company brings in $1000 a week and the owner is sleeping on a couch and working 90 hours a week to keep it afloat and each of his 2 employees think unrealistically that they’re worth $550 a week, then the company goes under. Clients lose service, owner goes out of business , and both employees are out of work.

Furthermore, if their expectation of their worth is UNREALISTIC, then they’ll continue to have the same problem of quitting jobs repeatedly while their contemporaries with more realistic expectation and understanding of the actual finances involved in running a business will be working hard, earning money, and moving up in the company.

Now, please tell me what ANY of that has to do with Donald Trump standing up for protecting the lives of the unborn.

Was he right or wrong to stand up for the lives of the unborn?

If he was wrong, why?

If he was right, then why is there a thread with numerous people ripping on him and now discussing why people quit jobs?

 

[pnewton]

Now, please tell me what ANY of that has to do with Donald Trump standing up for protecting the lives of the unborn.

Was he right or wrong to stand up for the lives of the unborn?

If he was wrong, why?

If he was right, then why is there a thread with numerous people ripping on him and now discussing why people quit jobs?

The only thing I can think is that some people simply cannot accept that President Trump did something so classy and morally strong. I do not care if he was pandering or not, and for the purpose of this thread, I do not care about his other short-comings. The man deserves support for making that proclamation.

I can’t stand whataboutism. You guys know I have complained about it enough when used to support President Trump. Well, this is worse to me personally. Please, all those who reflexively slam the man, consider that all you are doing now is show you are reactionary and not reasoning. I wonder if everyone has even read it.

 

[Poet]

Please, all those who reflexively slam the man, consider that all you are doing now is show you are reactionary and not reasoning. I wonder if everyone has even read it.

Well said. I agree. I’m delighted that a President of the United States has taken a stand for the lives of the unborn.

Abortion not only takes the life of a living human being–in most horrendous and cruel ways–but very often ends up causing physical and/or emotional, psychological, and spiritual distress to the mother.

Every moral American should be screaming from the rooftops against abortion. It is a travesty, barbaric, and God will certainly judge our nation for the tens of millions of children killed so horribly.

Thank God an American president spoke against it.

 

[Rau]

There is a mistaken notion out there that what we work and earn for is really the government’s to use as they please.

There is an accurate belief that governments may legislate and raise taxes and introduce spending programs within the constraints of the Constitution and that the people will choose to elect or not representatives who best represent their wishes.

 

[Rau]

It absolutely does matter. If the company brings in $1000 a week and the owner is sleeping on a couch and working 90 hours a week to keep it afloat and each of his 2 employees think unrealistically that they’re worth $550 a week, then the company goes under. Clients lose service, owner goes out of business , and both employees are out of work.

The 2 employees move to a company with a more sustainable business model and which pays $550 per week.

 

[Rau]

The man deserves support for making that proclamation.

Correct. And if it is later discovered he was disingenuous, and failed to progress the cause, then he’ll deserve scorn etc.

 

[MamaJewel]

…until I decide the deal is not a good deal and I sever the relationship according to due process. The employer has no right to expect me to stay because I initially agreed.

So once you take a job you can never quit? You said people quit after 2 weeks. That means that the workers, once they’re more aware of what the job entails, do not feel the pay is appropriate compensation for the work, so they quit. You want to label them lazy or unwilling to do the work, but that’s not how it works, if it was you’d eventually find non-lazy people who appreciate the pay. If that doesn’t happen, the company isn’t actually paying a wage people will do the job for.

So…
What happens to 40 million patients in the US when Anthem decides to cut reimbursements to pathology labs, regardless of location?

“These steep cuts in the professional component for pathology services are a significant concern because they are unsustainable regardless of whether they affect hospital-based services or independent-lab services,” commented Vachette’s Vice President of Client Services Ann Lambrix.

“Hospital-based labs may struggle more because hospital labs typically serve patients who are seriously ill and often have multiple conditions,” she explained. “That is why testing for hospital patients is more complex and comes with higher costs. Payers recognize that fact and have generally reimbursed hospital labs at higher rates for that reason.”

“However, Anthem’s deep price cuts ignore this reality. It is why THE DARK REPORT believes that a growing number of pathology groups are sending termination notices to Anthem. These groups recognize that Anthem’s price cuts—coming on top of Medicare price cuts—will erode the financial stability required for groups to sustain accurate, high-quality services.”

https://www.darkintelligencegroup.com/tdr-insider/anthem-rolling-out-new-pathology-cpt-code-cuts/

Oh dearie, we sit here with a novel virus that is about to become pandemic, and highly trained and skilled pathologists are supposed to work for an unsustainable wage or let patients spread the plague and die.

Not everybody is going to quit their day job and go elsewhere, especially if they have obtained exceptional, expensive training like the expert pathologists in Peeps field.

Or maybe Anthem could just save money and hire high school students part-time to check our lab specimens. Heck, Anthem could even save more money by requiring life sciences college students to do free internships in the path labs instead. No wages… just free labor. Now that is the best value for Anthem’s shareholders.

 

[Peeps]

The thing is it doesn’t matter. The company thinks the position is worth $x, the worker thinks it’s worth $y. There’s no objectively ‘correct’ number so both sides get to be right and wrong at the same time. But that’s why I said you’re not entitled to labor. Just because the company thinks the position is worth $x if they can’t get people to do the job, $x is clearly not the right number. You can blame anything you want such as entitlement or what have you but it’s still not the right number. So you either wait a long time for reliable people who feel they’re only worth $x to come along or you pay more. That’s how economics works. But you don’t just get to say ‘our wages are great’ when evidence is staring you in the face that the people actually seeking employment don’t agree.

Have you ever worked in a metal recycling factory?

The work is hard, physical, and dirty, and much of it is done outside in the weather, which in Northern Illinois at this time of year is cold, icy, snowy, and windy.

The work is also shift work–7 a.m. - 3:30 p.m., 3:30 p.m. -11:00 p.m., and 11:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m.

Although some of the positions are for skilled labor (technical certificate required), many of the positions are for laborers, with no certificate and not even a high school diploma required.

The pay is to scale for these type of positions, and there are benefits like health care, retirement, etc… Workers will not find any wages that are higher for this type of work. No company is going to pay a high school dropout doing heavy lifting in a dirty setting outdoors boku bucks. The pay is fair, and there are people who do these jobs for decades because it’s all they are qualified to do and they enjoy the hard work and camaraderie of working in a factory, and they also appreciate the company owners/managers who make them feel valued and plan various morale-raising activities like donut days, pizza delivered to the shift, tickets to local sporting events, etc.

The founder and retired owner of this company is absolutely BELOVED in our area–he has donated millions to local charities and to beautification of our city. Also, he and his family were early pioneers (back in the 1920s) in fighting racism–the family is Jewish, so they know what it means to be hated. When he sold his company, he made sure to sell it to a family with the same values.

We simply have to get over the notion that there are no lazy, shiftless people. Yes, there are. And they hurt the cause of those who advocate a universal living wage. NO! The Bible says, “If someone doesn’t work, he shall not eat!” That’s the Bible, not Donald Trum,p, not Peeps, and not mean people. It may sound cruel, but it isn’t–there are people who will not be motivated to work unless they are hungry–they don’t like work, but wanting to eat makes them get up and go to work. It’s reality.

 

[Dan123]

It absolutely does matter. If the company brings in $1000 a week and the owner is sleeping on a couch and working 90 hours a week to keep it afloat and each of his 2 employees think unrealistically that they’re worth $550 a week, then the company goes under.

Let’s try this with any other business expense. Company sells cheese, the cheese supplier charges $5 per pound. The company’s revenue only allows them to pay $4 per pound. Does that mean the cheese supplier is wrong about how much the cheese is worth? No, they aren’t wrong, so you either need to pay more or keep shopping for suppliers. And what’s what’s happening with laborers, when they quit that’s them telling you their price on labor is more than you’re paying. So there’s really no issue here unless the company starts claiming they get to dictate what other people should be willing to work for instead of it being a mutual agreement.

And if the company cants find any supplier to sell them cheese for what they can afford then it’s not a viable business model.

The pay is to scale for these type of positions, and there are benefits like health care, retirement, etc… Workers will not find any wages that are higher for this type of work. No company is going to pay a high school dropout doing heavy lifting in a dirty setting outdoors boku bucks.

And that’s fine, my point is when you have trouble finding and retaining people, it means people don’t agree with your assessment that the wage is good.

We simply have to get over the notion that there are no lazy, shiftless people. Yes, there are.

Not saying there aren’t, but if that’s who the company is attracting as applicants look into why.

Now all that said to the folks who seem upset I said a company isn’t entitled to cheap labor, what’s your solution? Company offers $x, company keeps getting applicants who turn out to be uninterested in the reality of that job at that price. Now what?

 

[Peeps]

Oh dearie, we sit here with a novel virus that is about to become pandemic, and highly trained and skilled pathologists are supposed to work for an unsustainable wage or let patients spread the plague and die.

Not everybody is going to quit their day job and go elsewhere, especially if they have obtained exceptional, expensive training like the expert pathologists in Peeps field.

Or maybe Anthem could just save money and hire high school students part-time to check our lab specimens. Heck, Anthem could even save more money by requiring life sciences college students to do free internships in the path labs instead. No wages… just free labor. Now that is the best value for Anthem’s shareholders.

Interestingly enough, I think many med techs and docs would continue to work for peanuts (unless they’re allergic).

Our wages are already lower than the other health care workers. And our hours are pretty awful sometimes–due to shortages, we do a lot of double shifts–I’ve done two doubles in the last week, and I’m 62 years old!

And the work is tough–we can’t slack off, and we try to remember that every specimen belongs to a human being, and that human being is as valuable as our own mother or child.

In fact, in our lab, we don’t refer to patients by their last name or room number or diagnosis–we say, “Mr. So and So”–it helps us to remember the humanity of our patients.

I honestly think that if we were told that there’s not enough money and our wages were cut, many of us would keep working as long as we still got health care benefits (and they’re AWFUL at our hospital!!!).

I think we would keep working because we know that someone has to do the work. If we were having lab testing done, we would want someone who cares to do it.

 

[Poet]

The 2 employees move to a company with a more sustainable business model and which pays $550 per week.

You’re assuming of course that those two employees have a reasonable and fair estimation of their own value. My point and I believe that of others, is that while SOME employers want to get away with unfairly low wages and bad conditions, SOME employees think they’re entitled to walk into their first job out of college with a 6 figure income.

What happens when those two employees, let’s say they were each earning $450 a week, start looking around and find out that the going rate for their job is $400 and nobody will pay them what they think they’re worth?

There are some lousy employers out there. And there are some lousy employees out there. Some people quit for good reasons and some people quit because they have an unrealistic expectation of jobs, work, wages, and life.

I’m surprised this is even a point anyone would argue.

And I’d still like to know what it has to do with Donald Trump defending the unborn, which is a good thing.

 

[Dan123]

What happens when those two employees, let’s say they were each earning $450 a week, start looking around and find out that the going rate for their job is $400 and nobody will pay them what they think they’re worth?

Then they earn less and learn the exact lesson you wanted them to. Or they repeat the cycle, but that’s their problem. The original situation was about this happening numerous times to one company. That’s the company’s problem.