Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Especially private insurance companies. If any of those disabled children requires an expensive operation his insurance companies will have lawyers pouring over his application looking for any reason, no matter how trivial, to deny the claim.
THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO DO!!!! Insurance companies don't make money paying out money in claims. They are supposed to be protecting their shareholders. Why should they pay for a procedure that the policy holder is not entitled to?
Only a liberal thinks that any wealth created that does not come from a daily job is "unearned". If you discover oil or gold on your land you are not entitled to sell it for a profit I guess.
Only a con-servative thinks that he is entitled to 95% of the profit from that gold or oil while maybe 2% goes to the workers that do all the work to dig it up.
THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO DO!!!! Insurance companies don't make money paying out money in claims. They are supposed to be protecting their shareholders. Why should they pay for a procedure that the policy holder is not entitled to?
Profiting off sick or injured people is the problem.
The conservatives' white hot hatred for union people simply astounds me. Unions are far from perfect, but the hatred is total overkill.
And what followed the roaring twenties, BentBow?
Lets clarify, our "hatred of union people" is centered around a few points.
1. Unions protest and things and people get broken.
2. Unions have gotten themselves in a state that the companies they work for can no longer afford the benefits being given.
3. Public unions are soaking up all the available tax dollars for everything to pay salaries and benefits that far exceed private sector work.
our "hatred" drives us to suggest that
1. union protesters stop breaking people and things.
2. Unions and companies come to some agreement that is workable for both workers and companies to co-exist and both provide good jobs and sustainable businesses that don’t go bankrupt.
3. Public Unions recognize that they need to do things like contribute 1.5% of their salaries to their own benefit packages. Especially seeing how the rest of us contribute vastly more than that and the Public Unions are paid for by our tax dollars.
What our “hatred†does not cause us to do is:
1. Hate any individual
2. Cause any person violent harm
This was not written for unreasonable liberals and union people. It was written for those who may read and who don’t fully understand what the hatred is that is coming from the right (people like me).
You need to understand that the word “hatred†that is used by the left and by unions is hyperbole meant to confuse the undecided and to ratchet up the emotional response in order to get support for things that simply will not be supported by the average American when one takes an unbiased and unemotional look at reality.
Without the union, How many would be willing to do the same job for $40,000 a year + the bennies? Or even $30,000, it is part time.
It would not be very hard to save some cities a hell of a lot on their budgets
As I've mentioned, we have no union and there are many "willing" applicants to drive our school buses for $17-30 an hour+full bennies...the problem is finding QUALIFIED drivers. You can't just put anybody in charge of a 33,000lb vehicle with up to 84 kids aboard...the liability is tremendous. The wrong guy/gal could cost the school system millions of dollars.
The "part-time" aspect of the job is also problematic...that's why we guarantee 35 hours a week even if that means that drivers sometimes sit around waiting. Plus, how many jobs do you have to burn gas commuting to work two or more times PER DAY?
Speaking of budgets, we had a shortfall to close, so we tried eliminating health insurance benefits for new drivers. That lasted like a month....applications all but stopped coming in. We had to reinstate health insurance benefits for new hires. Recruiting has gotten so bad lately that we are trying to lure retired drivers out of retirement. We're offering top of the scale pay and a brand new air conditioned bus...only a few have accepted.
Somebody earlier compared school bus drivers to burger flippers and car wash attendants. No way it's comparable to that. Never mind the ability to drive safely...handling unruly students takes great skill, and there's LOTS of people that just can't do it. Then there's the potential non-custodial parental kidnappers that we have to look out for at bus stops...I have photos of guys on my bus that I have to look out for and NOT let the kid off the bus if I see them.
"Short bus" is even more challenging. A lot of those kids are very fragile and have medical emergencies on the bus all the time. Quick action by the driver and attendant has saved lives countless times. No, not "anybody can do it", not by a long shot!
As I've mentioned, we have no union and there are many "willing" applicants to drive our school buses for $17-30 an hour+full bennies...the problem is finding QUALIFIED drivers. You can't just put anybody in charge of a 33,000lb vehicle with up to 84 kids aboard...the liability is tremendous. The wrong guy/gal could cost the school system millions of dollars.
The "part-time" aspect of the job is also problematic...that's why we guarantee 35 hours a week even if that means that drivers sometimes sit around waiting. Plus, how many jobs do you have to burn gas commuting to work two or more times PER DAY?
Speaking of budgets, we had a shortfall to close, so we tried eliminating health insurance benefits for new drivers. That lasted like a month....applications all but stopped coming in. We had to reinstate health insurance benefits for new hires. Recruiting has gotten so bad lately that we are trying to lure retired drivers out of retirement. We're offering top of the scale pay and a brand new air conditioned bus...only a few have accepted.
Somebody earlier compared school bus drivers to burger flippers and car wash attendants. No way it's comparable to that. Never mind the ability to drive safely...handling unruly students takes great skill, and there's LOTS of people that just can't do it. Then there's the potential non-custodial parental kidnappers that we have to look out for at bus stops...I have photos of guys on my bus that I have to look out for and NOT let the kid off the bus if I see them.
"Short bus" is even more challenging. A lot of those kids are very fragile and have medical emergencies on the bus all the time. Quick action by the driver and attendant has saved lives countless times. No, not "anybody can do it", not by a long shot!
Love me some bus drivers! and you have put it properly in perspective.
The job itslef commands a certain level of pay and repect. the open market makes it so.
While you will see me taking issue with unions and their actions you wont find me taking pot shots at the fine people who drive school busses!
Harding busted the public & private unions back down to size and put them in their place.
The roaring 20's ensued.
Their "place" being under the heel of the millionaires?
Why did Harding have to get involved in the free market? I thought that was supposed to take care of itself
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Insurance companies don't make money paying out money in claims. They are supposed to be protecting their shareholders. Why should they pay for a procedure that the policy holder is not entitled to?
