Posted on 03/14/2006 8:01:09 PM PST by stainlessbanner
Of course I have to misspell stupid while explaining I am not stupid. Perfect.
The whole article actually is so badly written by someone with no understanding of anything they're writing about -- if they stopped to really think about it instead of maxing on the buzzwords -- that has come to be the standard of articles in the mainstream press now. Most people's adjustment for inflation is to shift their buying patterns rather than, as the cost of living adjustments assume, they make no such adjustments.
Everything the writer knows, is what some totally self-serving, vested interest told them is the truth.
Seriously, who thinks in terms of weekly wages?
Unions?
I am rather stumped and do not know personally of anyone that thinks in those terms. I am admitting my ignorance on this subject.
You're saying you quit on Tuesday and showed up the following Monday like nothing ever happened? Your name's not Costanza, is it? :-)
That's why we're not relying on the mainstream press to filter our information for us. It's like relying on the accomplices of con-artists who are setting us up for the scam.
I agree with you. I never hear this method of measurement used. That's why I converted the lawyer figure to annual.
Obviously John has no idea what chiropractors do. He believes the propaganda from the drug industry.
Fortunately, a lot of MDs are now using chiropractors and sending their patients because they are becoming more open to integrative medicine. They are not as close minded as they used to be.
Actually, I thought it was a FReeper inside joke...kinda like "Hugh" and "Series".
Gotta love the timing though... :)
Nope, and what I posted was the honest truth.
What happens in the next few weeks, will be interesting.
However, since Monday, I have achieved more than has been possible over the last three years!
Why?
Because everyone is walking on egg-shells and they finally allowed me to take photographs myself this week
Such a novel concept!
This Software Engineer responsible for photo analysis, is actually allowed to calibrate the camera with his software?
"Lawyers can double up their billable hours - wait in court with one client, work on a document for another - bill both."
Sure they can - its called fraud. Anyone can do it.
They could also rob banks and make a heck of a lot more money.
"I suspect some of them have a researcher working for $30 an hour, and they bill the client as if they were doing the work, for $200."
Hmm. Once again, certainly could happen, also called fraud. (And if you know of someone who would be willing to perform legal research for only $30 and hour, please let me know.)
Actually, in most cases, the researchers (often called "associates"), do the work at a lower hourly rate than the partner in order to save the client money. Funny how that works.
Bump
"Actors: $481 a week?
You ought to be kidding me...$481 a week for actors?!...me thinks it is more like $481 a minute."
In addition to the Tom Cruises and Cameron Diaz's this figure probably also includes the many "actors" serving you drinks and bringing you food at restaurants throughout NYC and LA.
As Ronald Reagan said one time, while he was the President of the Actor Guild, an actor's Union, the actors actoress, that make a million or more annually are less than 1%. Most are charactor actors, supporting actors, and the like make far, far less.
This means capital is becoming more scarce, while labor is at least relativele becoming less scarce. So what's the proper response from the average person?
In 2005, for the first time since the Great Depression, Americans borrowed more than they earned.
Given the trend described above, borrowing is the worst thing someone can do. If it continues, their work is only going ro become less valuable, while their debt is going to become more expensive. The smart thing to do would be to save and invest as much as possible--and I guarantee pretty much anyone could save if it were made a priority.
Amen brother!
Sure they can - its called fraud. Anyone can do it.
If the first client has agreed to pay the lawyer for time spent waiting in court, and the second client has agreed to pay the lawyer for time spent working on the document, how is it fraud? Both clients get exactly what they paid for. Neither is overcharged. The lawyer is compensated well.
Efficiency is not fraud.
Or looking at it a little differently, accepting your premise, which client should get the free legal work?
If I have room in my airplane for two passengers and each is willing to pay me $1,000 to fly him to Los Angeles, must I only charge $500 a piece if I take both?
"Chiropracty, Reflexology, Phrenology, and Psychology are all sham sciences that far too many people pay far too much money to believe in."
It sure would be nice if you would not post about something that apparently you know nothing about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.