I have not had a raise since 1994, should I blame Clinton or Bush? At any rate, see inside...
Posted By: anon on 2005-09-23
In Reply to: Thank U... - My2Cents
Musky Income Myths
by Alan Reynolds
Alan Reynolds is a senior fellow with the Cato Institute and a nationally syndicated columnist.
Democratic presidential candidates advocating really humungous tax increases -- Howard Dean and Wesley Clark (until he withdrew on Feb. 11) -- appear to have lost ground to two favoring merely enormous tax increases, John Kerry and John Edwards. It would seem to follow the latter two should rethink their plans before challenging the only candidate who thinks tax rates are plenty high enough, George W. Bush. Amazingly, however, the Democrats are pulling out the old "income inequality" card. It worked so well for George McGovern and Walter Mondale.
Business Week says Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards "believe a Democrat can repeal top-tier Bush tax cuts with impunity because income inequality has widened under Bush." Taking a less partisan and more statistically defensible line, the Socialist Equality Party says, "Until the Bush administration, the Clinton years saw the greatest growth in social inequality in American history."
Such claims suggest the top 20 percent, or 5 percent of families, have been collecting a rising share of "our" personal income -- hence "income inequality has widened under Bush." Any candidate who says that has to be lying. The latest available data on income shares is for 2001, and they show no increase in inequality.
The recession was no picnic for top earners: There were 690,000 fewer managerial jobs in 2002 than in 2000. If these cash income figures included capital losses, they would reveal ample pain among "the rich" in 2001-2002. The poverty rate did rise from 9.2 percent to 9.6 percent in 2002, but that was still lower than the poverty rate in any year from 1980 to 1998.
To defend President Clinton from socialist egalitarians, prolonged increases in real output per worker (like 1996-2000) translate into increases in real income per worker. Since there are typically two workers in top income groups and less than one full-time worker in the bottom income group, it is mathematically unavoidable that the gap between two-earner families and no-earner families must grow wider whenever the economy is doing well. Real median income among families with two full-time workers was 43.6 percent higher in 2001 than it had been in 1991 -- an annual increase of nearly 4.4 percent a year. Families with no full-time workers did not do that well.
Most important, it is simply a statistical hoax to make long-term comparisons between the average (mean) income in any top income group with averages in lower groups. That is partly because the upper threshold on the group just below the top rises over time whenever real incomes in general are rising. As a result, increases in general prosperity mean incomes that once would have been large enough to make it into the top 5 percent no longer qualify.
Census figures say the top 5 percent collected 21 percent of all personal income in 2001, up from 20.3 percent in 1993. Measured in constant 2001 dollars, however, a family needed more than $164,104 to be counted among the top 5 percent in 2001, while anything above $136,539 would have qualified in 1993.
So long as that threshold kept rising, the share at the top was almost certain to rise, too. After all, an average of all income above $164,104 is almost certain to be larger than an average of all income above $136,539 simply because all incomes between those two figures were included in the top average in 1993 but excluded in 2001.
For the same reason, it makes no sense to compare long-term growth of average income in any top income group with growth below. Only the top group has no income ceiling, and the lower threshold defining membership in that top group rises whenever incomes in general are rising.
Because only the top group has no ceiling, increases in a small number of very high incomes (e.g., trial lawyers) can make the mean average in the top group rise much more than the incomes of typical members of that group. This is why it is considered misleading to refer to mean rather than median income as "average" in every other case, and why it is particularly misleading in this case.
Rising real income also raised the definition of the "middle class." The lower and upper limits defining the middle three-fifths were $20,262 to $64,241 in 1975 (in 2001 dollars) and $24,000 to $94,150 in 2001. Periodic fables about the "vanishing middle class" miss the obvious: Those who "vanished" moved up.
The main reasons some families earn more than others are not as shocking as politicians would have you believe. Consider these horribly shocking Census Bureau facts about inequality:
Families with two people have incomes at least 3 times larger than families in which nobody works. Median family income in 2001 was $51,407. But that figure combines median income of $21,958 among families with no workers and $66,151 among families with two earners. Among married couples where both work full-time, median income was even higher -- $76,150.
Mature, experienced employees earn at least 3 times as much as they did when they were young apprentices and trainees. Average family income was $16,014 among families in which the household head was younger than 24, but $45,978 when the household head was 45 to 54.
College grads earn at least 3 times as much as middle-school dropouts. For family heads with a bachelor's degree, median income was $78,518; for those with less than a ninth-grade education, median income was $25,077.
If all this rampant inequality strikes you as grossly unfair, you should indeed consider electing politicians promising to do something about it. But they can't really do much unless they promise to take money from two-earner families and give it to no-earner families, to take money from those who go to college and give it to those who didn't bother attending a free high school, and to take money from those who are at an age where they're trying to put the kids through college and give it to those in their early 20s.
The taking half of that policy is a reasonably precise description of who indeed would have their pockets picked under the tax plans of Messrs. Kerry, Edwards (and Clark). In whose pockets the expected booty would actually end up, however, is apt to prove as mysterious as figuring out what Mr. Dean did with all those millions he collected with Internet spam
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
Love Clinton, hate Bush
Rather have a lover of women in the WH than a lover of war, death, dividing the country, alienating the world, destroying the environment, allowing gases to rise, water to be polluted as he cuts back regulations for businesses, cutting the rights and protections for the middle class, on and on and on and on and on....Bush is a disaster..a freak..a sociopath..check it out on the internet..doctors have posted articles that Bush is a sociopath..and I agree, my four years of psychology in college lead me to this conclusion, never said anything but now Ph.D.s are saying it too.., LOLOLOLOLOL 
Seems likely it is fashionable to blame Bush for everything now. nm
xxx
It's been all over the news about Bush being to blame for this natural disaster. Anyone sitting i
would have been blamed, too. It really doesn't matter what political affiliation they would be. People HAVE to put the blame somewhere and why not right at the very top? What this really comes down to is that PEOPLE, not VOTERS must come together and work in harmony for the common good of our fellow man. If we leave all the political baloney out of the equation, something good can be done.
Rate raise
I am going to do mine. Have not done so for the past 3 - 4 years and so going to try to do 1 cent raise per mine. Hopefully they won't complain too much but I still pick up and deliver and so it hits me hard as my paper has also gone up. So we will see. Usually when I do this they back off a little and don't dictate so much for a month or so but then it goes back to normal. Let me know what you are doing. I am in Oregon. Been doing this for 16 years and I think I started out at 8 and now at 11 to 12.
Patti
RATE RAISE
Since you are working for him as an IC and have informed him of the rate increase, just bill him for it. That is what I do. If they didn't accept it they probably would have spoken to you by now. Smile!
Hey! For all you who blame MQ for lowering the bar in the industry, driving the cpl rate SOOOOOO low
How do you fathom that one?? The small MTSOs are charging peanuts, while MQ is charging 20 cpl. And these companies are SMALL - I know. So, hmmmmmm...maybe big bad MQ isn't to blame for that condition in the industry? Interesting, very interesting...sounds more like the small MTSOs have plummeted our salaries into the dirt, if this is supposed to be an example!
As IC, dont ask for raise. Tell him what your new rate
2
Easy. Raise your rate.
x
If IC - just raise your line rate
I have been around a while and have never heard of a small MTSO making that much off of an IC -- larger companies that have to pay benefits, for computers, QA and so on, perhaps but not a small MTSO Sounds like one I did work for a little while and then decided I was doing everything and being paid nothing, but she only got 4 cpl off of me. When she decided not to invoice out on time and I did not get my checks, that is when I left. But again, you are the boss. Also if you have no contract you can contact them directly -- after you quit -- and see if they wish to have you continue with the work or stay with her and start over with someone new. Also you must either be getting paid next to nothing or she is charging an arm and a leg and either way, whatever you bid on the account you will be making a profit.
Glad it works for you... but I think you need to raise your rate and at least do a dime! nm
nm
Millions others wish Bush would be outsourced too, as evidenced by the poll. Bush = 1st Class moron
It's the only place I have ever lived.. Great place to retire or raise a family. Low crime rate e
living is pretty easy here. Low stress..
This has not always been the case, hence it hurts more. Merit raise/cost of living raise
dd
The raise you're describing is a merit-raise, - (SM)
and I agree that a worker has to go above and beyond in order to get them. But what doesn't seem to happen in this industry is COST-OF-LIVING raises, which should automatically come to workers either in small increments yearly, or in larger increments every 2-3 years. Without wages that are at least somewhat *realistic* (and modern-day MT wages are a pathetic joke), it's no wonder quality workers are harder and harder to come by, and much harder to retain. An MT should not have to work sweatshop hours for 7 days a week just to keep their head above water financially.
Since about 1994 off and on and about 15 minutes
I've been a transcriptionist off and on for years, probably 5-6 years FTE. I've always thought about getting the certification, but it used to be somewhat involved to do the testing. Of course, it's always been expensive with limited payoff.
I was applying for jobs about a month ago, and all the potential employers asked if I had my CMT. That tells me they think it is worth something even if we, the workerbees, don't.
I didn't really study for it. I opened my notebook and looked at Latin/Greek pluralizaiton rules, and then put the book down. I figured if I didn't know it yet from my day to day work and from college, I wasn't going to be able to learn it in time. Really, I don't know how a person could study for it. The questions came from such a broad area. I really think AAMT has come up with a good test.
I'm glad I took it, and I will do the CEs to keep the designation and to make me better at what I do.
Hospital account since 1994
nn
1994 Jaguar -- love it.
Oldie but goodie.
Hey FC girl--I graduated in 1994 at FCHS
/
Camaros..three 1994, 1998, and 1999 and a truck,
Chevy truck 2005
in 1994 I typed IME reports and was paid $5.00 per page, wish I had that now!
nm
Isn't Clinton one who cut our
n
Clinton
Hey, NOBODY DIED WHEN CLINTON LIED....
Clinton fan, are you serious? sm
I'm sorry, but there is a difference in being a "fool" and "acting a fool", that's just the way it is. However, I will retract that offensive word and replace it with something along the lines of childish, teenagerish, 8th gradish, etc. Is that better? And please, do not every accuse me of being a Clinton fan! That just turns my stomach! 
I'm serious about you and Clinton and BTW
I did not have sexual relationship with that man, Frank MQ.
Clinton (nm)
/
and we all know what Clinton was busy doing!
Your guy didn't win... don't blame everything in the world on Bush because of it!
182 William J. Clinton (D)
I did not have sex with that woman. (can't remember the exact quote)
Then how smart was that! LOL
bill clinton nm
x
Clinton observations
“Yep, that’s right - I miss Bill Clinton! He was the closest thing we ever got to having a black man as President.
Number 1 - He played the sax.
Number 2 - He smoked weed.
Number 3 - He had his way with ugly white women Even now? Look at him… His wife works, and he don’t! And, he gets a check from the government every month.
Manufacturers announced today that they will be stocking America’s shelves this week with “Clinton Soup,” in honor of one of the nations’ most distinguished men. It consists primarily of a weenie in hot water.
Chrysler Corporation is adding a new car to its line to honor Bill Clinton. The Dodge Drafter will be built in Canada. When asked what he thought about foreign affairs, Clinton replied, “I don’t know, I never had one.”
American Indians nicknamed Bill Clinton “Walking Eagle” because he is so full of crap he can’t fly.
Clinton lacked only three things to become one of America’s finest leaders: Integrity, vision, wisdom.
Clinton did the work of three men: Larry, Curly and Moe.
The Clinton revised judicial oath: “I solemnly swear to tell the truth as I know it, the whole truth as I believe it to be, and nothing but what I think you need to know.
Clinton will be recorded in history as the only President to do Hanky Panky between Bushes.”
Not OP, but Bill Clinton is STILL sexy,
and unlike Bush, very intelligent!!
As might Hillary Clinton, who is also concerned. (nm)
.
Yes, Clinton wanted to make sure Hussein
didn't have weapons of mass destruction, that's why we had inspectors, etc., and guess what it was working because everything we were told before going in there were lies....he didn't have any and Bush has admitted that fact.
WTF? You are from the Clinton school of spin. I have no idea what you are talking about
and I doubt anyone else does either. Who is US? You and your alter egos?
Clinton never shot anyone and didn't start a mess like Iraq.
Charge him an hourly rate. The current rate is
between $15-21/hr. according to your location. If he had to use an independent secretarial service, he would be charged much more. You can look in the Yellow Pages in your area under Secretarial Service and ask them what they charge, then charge accordingly knowing you can back it up.
Bush did nothing
and Bush did nothing, nada..zilch..he was too busy vacationing at his ranch or taking half a day off each day or sleeping, LOL. I have a friend who lives in Texas and she said Bushs nickname was the half day governor, they all knew he left by noon and went to sleep by 6pm..The guy is an idiot, warmonger, war dodger..Had to get his poppy to get him out of the Vietnam War and when he was in the National Guard could not even finish that obligation, had to get his poppy to get him out and falsify the records to make it look like he was in for his whole enlistment..I just love how Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield and Rice never went to war yet they are so quick to send our sons and daughters to an immoral, illegal, wrong war..they should all be tarred and feathered..better yet, they will be impeached.
Bush said he was getting rid of IRS.sm
Keep your fingers crossed that we go to a consumption tax (flat tax). According to an IRS report a few years back during the IRS abuse hearings, they said there are more than 60 million nonfilers and delinquent taxpayers. They have to do something to change the tax system and the laws.
Not just Bush.........
The problem is we have been selling this country off little by little for decades, so I can blame Bush, Clinton, and Bush, Sr, not to mention Jimmy Carter, who would sell his mother if he thought he could be someone's buddy 'ole pal 'ole chum. We have handed over strategic info to our enemies for years, way before Bush, tried to manipulate countries to do what we wanted, turned on those countries when their leaders got too powerful, etc., etc., and we have accomplished nothing but owing other countries to the tune of trillions of dollars. We are a wasteful country and our leaders are NOT looking out for us. Our congress are wasteful people and Heaven forbid one man with a backbone, Ron Paul comes to mind, says STOP IT, STOP IT, STOP IT!!!!!! He has been waving red flags for years and years, but other congressman are too money greedy to do what they are suppose to do. One way to stop all the crap is stop letting them write their own paychecks....they are a public servant.. We decide their paychecks. Once they are done with public service, they go back to making whatever they can on their own, not the $285K they get yearly for the rest of their lives after leaving, not to mention the wonderful healthcare they sign themselves up for, not to mention once they die, their spouses get all that moolah for the rest of their lives with all the healthcare perks. What's wrong with this picture. This happened way before Bush. We are a country that let our public servants serve themselves and serve us up on a platter for the world to take apart bite by bite.
George Bush
He is an embarrassement to this nation. He makes us all look like floundering idiots and he's the lead idiot.
I bet all the "red state" folks that voted for him are having second thoughts. He could care less. I do believe that he is slow on the response because it was not an area of well to do white people who support him but are poor hardworking mostly minority people. Take a good hard look America; this is what we are stuck with.
Did it occur to anyone that even terrorist groups are laughing at us!!!! UUGGHHH.
I'm ready for the flaming that is sure to come my way but...whatever....I can't stop crying from watching these people trying to survive in conditions that no one should be forced to endure.
George Bush
I'm not slow, just making a comparison to say....Florida last year. Granted the situation is on a much bigger scale but if you think back, most of the people were able to leave the areas hardest hit in Florida, mostly white, with transportation available.
As Katrina was coming up through the Gulf, the people left in New Orleans were the people who had no transportation, who lived in housing projects and/or were unemployed. They had no way to get out. I use the race issue because it is painfully obvious that most of the people waiting at the Superdome, on rooftops and various other locations were mostly black. There is no way to have missed that.
It is also painfully obvious that George Bush has taken a beating over this (and about time too in my opinion) and suddenly trucks, food and water are to be had. I guess he heard enough bull from enough people to finally do something to try and salvage himself politically.
Bush bashing
Administrator-- could we please have all the Bush bashing placed on the political board where it belongs????
Well, Bush DOES consider himself at the right hand of The Man...
I'm sure good ol' Bush will come out
with a lot of encouragement and more words about how "good" the economy is when he gives his state of the union.
I wonder if he has any clue at all that the "union" is falling apart right under his nose. 
What is this with Missy bush
x
re bush and impeachment...sm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movement_to_impeach_George_W._Bush
and a couple of paragraphs from there (it's very lengthy that link but very interesting):
A March 16, 2006 poll[18] by American Research Group showed that 42% of Americans favored impeaching Bush. The same poll showed that a plurality of Americans favored the Senate censuring Bush regarding his authorization of wiretaps without court orders.[19]
An informal website poll MSNBC (April 14, 2006) asked whether there was justification to hold a formal impeachment trial, insufficient justification, nothing done wrong, or don't know. Roughly 250,000 votes were reported, 86% voting yes for impeachment. [20] (note that web polls are not scientifically conducted, and can be criticized on the grounds they may be unrepresentative of popular opinion)
George W. Bush! :) NM
d
Most definitely LAURA BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! nm
.
George W. Bush. nm
Don't turn this into a Bush bashing
nm
under a rock....BUSH is responsible....sm
Your president Bush, whom you *sound* like you voted for...is most definitely responsible for fulfilling his family's nearly 30-year pact with the Saudi's at ALL AMERICAN WORKERS expense. They had a deal from nearly 30 years ago and now the Bush dynasty is paying them (the Saudi's) back by selling ALL OF US OUT, including our PORTS!!! He has jeopardized ALL OF US due to his NEED/WANT for global acceptance of HIM.
If you cannot *see* this - time for you to get some serious help.
I never said I supported Bush...I just said I have nothing to hide.
If it prevents another horrible act like Sept. 11, then I really don't care. I don't have my head in the sand by the way. I keep very current with what is going on. I am totally against Bush and everything he stands for, but I am FOR protecting this country.
|
