Most agency owners and company CEO’s are making at least twice what they would have made in 1975, why can’t the worker bees get paid a little more? I think it’s about time some of these thresholds are brought into the 21st Century.
The sales area isn’t the only way to make more money in the sales arena, Agent. Are your account managers/CSRs/worker beers all license? Every agency I have worked at required all employees be licensed. And you can be licensed and not sell. As a business owner, do you believe in merit increases for the worker bees? Annual cost of living/market adjustment increases? I’m just not seeing a joyful career working in your agency if your attitude is sales is the only important position.
I am in sales… but never disparage the back office. You can’t do much sales if you have to clean the toilets, balance the books, manage HR, service customers.
Insurance sales is a team game.
September 27, 2016 at 10:58 am
Fair Playing Field says:
Like or Dislike:
8
0
LOL. And once again short-sighted Agent is caught with his foot in his mouth. Perhaps you should take courses to learn about concepts such as “policy retention” and “minimizing new business penalty”.
September 27, 2016 at 2:45 pm
Godot says:
Like or Dislike:
5
0
How do you think your employees would feel if they were able to read a print-out of some of your comments, Agent? Specifically those that call them ‘worker bees’ and seem to insinuate that production is the only meaningful position in an agency?
I did have a typo in my first sentence which may have contributed to your snarky comment. My intent was to say that the sales area isn’t the only way to make more money in the insurance arena. I’ve taken more than a few marketing courses – I know the relevance of sales. I also understand how important all the cogs in the wheel are to make an agency successful. You denigrate anyone who isn’t in sales or an agency owner and conclude that they are lazy and know very little. Thank goodness for your ‘worker bees’ though – gives you more time to spend on here and a couple of the other sites you frequent.
October 3, 2016 at 2:36 pm
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Marketing 101 in a community college – Be good to your sales force. Part of that being good is keeping reliable support staff.
So, both of you are correct.
October 3, 2016 at 4:05 pm
Godot says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Not only do you have to have a reliable support staff, but as a business owner, they should be treated well and their contributions acknowledged. That’s how you keep a reliable staff.
September 30, 2016 at 4:06 pm
Deplorables says:
Like or Dislike:
2
4
Cute Godout. The sales area isn’t the only way to make more money in the sales arena, Agent. Are you Planet, UW or Actu in disguise?
Geez, you’re an idiot. I am Godot – I don’t need to change my name or be someone else, Agent/Deplorables. Please see the second paragraph of my post that was written 3 days before you posted your inane response – I corrected my typo. Crap posts like yours of 9-30-16 at 4:06 is just proof positive that you’re an instigator and a pot-stirrer. You don’t have enough sense to have a real conversation, so you just pick and chide. And stop thumbing up your own posts.
October 3, 2016 at 2:34 pm
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
He has been at it for over 20 years. He must be doing something right.
I always get a kick out of former employees say I dont know how to run a biz. Thats why I am in Biz for 25+ years and they work as a clerk in a gas station… Nice use of the degree they went out and got.
Love agent – hate him, what ever. Cant deny his success. Hats off to him and every other principle / business owner taking that chance and making it happen.
I’m sure Agent has been successful, but so have a lot of us that haven’t been in sales. I realize that it takes more than just a salesperson to make an agency a success. Where I take exception is that Agent considers everyone who isn’t in sales an unknowledgeable slacker. And to refer to employees as ‘worker bees’ is really offensive.
Not everyone is cut out for every position or every business – but they don’t all end up as a clerk at a gas station.
October 4, 2016 at 10:08 am
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
I have never heard him disparage his staff. I have heard him say that with out his staff, his job would be much more difficult. The term Worker Bee is a term that was common in years past. May not be PC these days, but so much changes these days, us old folks cant keep up.
September 21, 2016 at 3:54 pm
mr opinion says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
16
1
Carol – I agree that CEO’s bringing in tens of million dollars a year can afford overtime pay to someone bringing in $40k. I couldn’t care less about them. I could be wrong, but I think the problem with this rule is more about state employees and small business. They don’t work for corporations making insane amounts of money. State employees are paid with money from taxpayers. And in some small businesses, the employees can actually make more than the owner. Their hope is that they’ll grow their business enough to reverse that. But that gets harder when they are forced to pay even more. Sounds like they are trying to attack Wall Street and ignoring the collateral damage to main street. That may not be the republican’s main concern, but they may be doing the right thing even if it’s for the wrong reasons.
Or Carol, another alternative is that the worker bees could do what I did 7 years ago prior to opening my own agency. Stop spending like society tells you need to (and no, you don’t need to have a new Iphone every year nor a new BMW every two years), get out debt, save money to open your own agency, then work 14 hours per day in the first few years so THEN you can make the same amount of money an agency owner does.
I have to say I agree with you. As a salaried employee of a small agency sometimes we need to work extra (more than 40 hours) to get caught up because of the nature of how much we have to do. I am compensated I believe fairly for my position and as I put in extra time, I am rewarded in different ways (taken to lunch, etc.). I don’t like the idea of having to clock in after many years of being on salary AND working overtime. I work closely with the owner of the agency and know the time that they put in (12-14 a day, 6 days a weeks) and make less than what a lot of people make for a 40 hours week. This is the sweat equity that they put in. Eventually their pay will increase well beyond all as I would hope and they deserve it to. They are the owners of the business and can/will hire/let go people as the business needs to. Its not unfair, it is business. I understand some might not like what they are paid but it is up to them to find a higher paying job or get educated to get a better job if they don’t like what is available. Not the owner of a company & sure not the government. People need to stop depending on the Government to take care of them…they don’t even know how to handle money themselves with the trillion dollars of debt we have. You make your own destiny!
Einstein, you sound a lot like most agency owners and how they got started in business. Sacrifices, hard work, long hours, getting markets, finding financing to get started etc. Finding the right employees is also somewhat difficult, but if you succeed, it pays off.
Carol,
Before Reagan, a CEO averaged a salary 3X that of the average employee. An average employee could afford to be the bread winner, afford a house, car, and an annual vacation. Oh, and had a pension. That number is now 30X. Trickle down? NOPE! Now, the average worker has to have 2 jobs and struggles to feed his family. No more annual vacations. No pensions. An average worker is hopeful to have a 401K or equivalent. We continue to hand those dollars upwards, buying yachts and car elevators. Now, some companies I have worked for have forbid overtime all together. That was happening back in 2005 and 2006. Can’t blame that one on the current guy in the Oval.
Taxing enough of the wealth away from CEO owners to make the pay inequality go away is unethical, and does not increase the pay of middle class Americans.
If we destroy enough wealth and engage in class warfare of course the gap would be lower. But again, the government cannot lift people out of poverty. We have seen this in nations that try to focus on pay inequality through such measures. Focusing only on the separation of the incomes results in socialism.
And moving forward a bit: The reason we must rely on business and not the government and tax rates is this:
The wealthiest .01% have 999 people for every of them, and it is likely the .001% you are talking about. When they have a corporate revenue, typically let’s say 2 billion, they tend to make only about 1-3 million per year. The corporation is taxed at say 20%, which could go to the workers, and instead goes to the government. Even if you take half of his million, since he is only 1/100 you end up only being able to give people a very minimal amount.
You cannot lift poor people out of poverty, and as we saw with Carter, you can very well make it difficult for them to afford a living even while they have jobs.
“The wealthiest .01% have 999 people for every of them[…]”.
No,.O1%, or .0001 if multiplied, would be 0.1 people per 1,000. However, if I give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant the top 1%, but don’t know how to write it, the figure would be 1%, or.01 if multiplied out, and would be 10 people for every 990, not 1 for every 999.
The rest of you made up figures and fantasies are equally wrong, and have been thoroughly debunked, but you value fantasy over reality so I won’t bother. It’s very unlikely you will even acknowledge getting this wrong, even though you are all about just the math.
You are just doing a different kind of math, based on textbooks in liberal colleges where they bully people for holding different positions like what a percent actually is.
September 30, 2016 at 1:14 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Concept was correct, typos were in the paragraph.
No, they are not equally wrong.
September 30, 2016 at 7:22 pm
actu says:
Like or Dislike:
2
0
Dont generally accept people giving policy advice based on data when they are off by a magnitude of 1,000. Not gonna start when he person is a lunatic.
October 3, 2016 at 2:43 pm
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
Let go of the past Planet. 9/11 changed our world to what it is today. Reagan was long gone out of the white House. 9/11 dragged us into war just like Pearl Harbor dragged us in to WW2.
So much fuss over overtime pay. Are businesses in the US so callous that they would rather work a good exempt employee to death than to pay them the overtime they are worth. I see so many co workers pack up and leave after their 8 hour work day is done. No loyalty from either camp.
Really Anne? Good businesses are not callous and do not work their employees to death. Perhaps you are not with the right one. My employees go home on time every day and they are long term so I guess they like it here. Good working conditions and competitive pay goes a long way to having loyal employees.
Or you are in a crap market where they will take any job they can get. Weird that you say here all your employees are long term, but often also say you send people packing with their belongings in a box for minor problems. In which case are you lying?
You misquote yet again. Only liberal Progressive knumb skulls like you need to be sent packing after lurking on IJ all day blogging your insults. That is a very bad trait to have.
1.You misspelled the word you used to insult my intelligence, of course.
2. I didn’t write any insults, but you did.
3. I didn’t quote you.
4. This isn’t a blog.
5. You post 3x as often as I do. I post on a break, during lunch, or on my way home. You post seemingly nonstop.
So, based on your comments it seems you were lying when you said all your employees were long term.
September 23, 2016 at 1:01 pm
Deplorables says:
Like or Dislike:
3
6
Get back to work employee or you will have to work some more overtime.
September 23, 2016 at 1:05 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
6
2
Devastating rebuttal. Be careful or you will get banned on this account too. Hey a second name, just one you were freaking out claiming other people did. What a hypocrite.
September 23, 2016 at 3:53 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
2
6
“1.You misspelled the word you used to insult my intelligence, of course.
2. I didn’t write any insults, but you did.
3. I didn’t quote you.
4. This isn’t a blog.
5. You post 3x as often as I do. I post on a break, during lunch, or on my way home. You post seemingly nonstop.
So, based on your comments it seems you were lying when you said all your employees were long term.
”
1. Over zealous as usual. People make mistakes. It is worse to lack intelligence in concept than it is in spelling.
2. You called him a liar and went after his character and went after him personally when he made a comment about the entire market, instead of commenting about the entire market with facts. Nice way of making your point eh? This is why no conservatives listen to you. It is not that they are all crazy, you don’t make your points.
3. You did quote him, or you referred to something he had said. Are you playing semantics here? Ok, so you paraphrased something he said. Is that better?
4. Semantics.
5. I know from personal experience debating you this cannot be true.
On your last comment:
No. And he already explained that.
6.
October 3, 2016 at 2:44 pm
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Annie, what do you mean by exempt employee? Exempt from what?
Exempt from overtime, i.e. a salaried employee who is not paid for working outside of their prescribed hours. I’m a little surprised as a long-term business owner that you didn’t know what this meant. Sorry – not trying to pick an argument – am just surprised.
When I did retail, students were exempt from FICA. Wasn’t even thinking about salaried employees as I have never had any. I am not sure if I even know any.
Carol, your point about the worker bees making more is nice and I agree. The usual way for an increase in minimum wage – or to modify the exempt salary minimum – would be for the House & Senate to agree on a bill and then send that to the President for ratification. Obama’s end run is a dramatic overreach of presidential power.
BTW, to anyone who is reading: Chicago sure is a lot better off with Obama in office for the last 8 years, right?
Yes, we have seen that Chicago is a workers paradise, particularly on the south side. Obama is wonderful creating jobs for black workers in this country, right? He has really brought blacks and whites together. Don’t believe me? Look at Charlotte, Baltimore, St Louis, Detroit as well as Chicago.
The unemployment for African Americans has roughly tracked that of the average worker in the US, meaning unemployment, and “real unemployment,” or including discouraged workers, is much, much lower than when he took over after Bush and the Republicans’ economic disaster.
If you want to claim one specific city–Chicago–which has had an increase in crime is indicative of Obama’s policies, you have to show that nationwide. New York, a bigger city, has had a decrease, as have other large cities. Those must not be due to Obama though. Much of the problem is gangs (like in Chicago where the rise is almost exclusively gangs) and funding. Crime was sky high after Reagan left office, and then dropped significantly under Clinton, largely due to expanded funding at the local level by the federal government. This does not, and cannot happen now due to Republican obstructionism. Much of the money that does go there is spent on pointless, wasteful things like military-grade equipment.
But, in your addled mind literally everything negative is because of Obama.
99% of people with a brain would still rather live in Chicago, NY or another good, big city, than a dump like Longview, TX, where all you can do is sit at home, watch Fox News, and bitch about Obama.
Had Rudi Guliani been in charge of Chicago instead of the Progressive Socialist dufus Rahm Deadfish Emanuel, the gangs would have been cleaned up, the murder rate way down and the plight of blacks would have been much better. He certainly did it in NY.
Emanuel isn’t a progressive, but that’s so far over your head it should be embarrassing. The crime in NY started dropping 4 years before he took office, as it was around most of the country, due in large part to the increased resources provided by Clinton.
During that time the big city with the largest decrease in crime was San Francisco, so you must agree liberals were better, right?
October 3, 2016 at 4:06 pm
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
If Rahm had not taken apart Dailys’ Gang Units, his specialized folks doing what they do best, we would not be where we are.
If Rahm was not been so arrogant, when it became obvious his plan was a complete failure, he could have reconstructed the gang units. But his way is better in his mind.
September 22, 2016 at 5:46 pm
Deplorables says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
This is not directed at anyone in particular, but are employees who have been with an agency or company 15-20 years considered long term or short term? That is what we have in our agency. We treat them right, they are remunerated well, have benefits, flexible working hours, excellent technology to use and they tend to stay for the long haul. By the way, they get to go home at 5:00 every work day. They like that too.
Junior, since Obamas pal Rahm took over on Chicago, its been great. Its been record setting. Citizens asking Rauner for the National Guard, Population Shrink, ect….
Maybe a few statistics about your most stellar agency would be helpful, Agent. How many accounts do your ‘workers’ handle? What’s the average size of an account in your office? Revenue managed per employee? Mostly personal lines or mostly commercial lines? You can’t just all agencies by yours alone.
The proposed threshold increase is too much. I could see increasing it to $35,000 (almost 50% increase) to fairly compensate salaried employees in positions with little advancement potential, but increasing it beyond that diminishes the incentive to work harder to get ahead.
I’m sure my viewpoint won’t be popular, but I haven’t punched a time clock since college and love the autonomy I have with respect to what I work on and when I work on it each day. I’ll gladly trade unpaid overtime hours for that.
How are you getting your work done, Agent? You’re on here more than anyone! Oh wait, it must be your worker bees that’s taking care of the store. How degrading to continue to refer to your employees as such.
As a salaried employee of a small agency sometimes we need to work extra (more than 40 hours) to get caught up because of the nature of how much we have to do. I am compensated I believe fairly for my position and as I put in extra time, I am rewarded in different ways (taken to lunch, etc.). I don’t like the idea of having to clock in after many years of being on salary AND working overtime…I’m ok with the way it is. I work closely with the owner of the agency and know the time that they put in (12-14 a day, 6 days a weeks) and make less than what a lot of people make for a 40 hour week. This is the sweat equity that they put in. Eventually their pay will increase well beyond all as I would hope and they deserve it to. They are the owners of the business and can hire/let go people as the business needs to. Its not unfair, it is business. I understand some might not like what they are paid but it is up to them to find a higher paying job or get educated to get a better job if they don’t like what is available. Not the owner of a company & sure not the government. People need to stop depending on the Government to take care of them…they don’t even know how to handle money themselves with the trillion dollars of debt we have. You make your own destiny!
Employee, I agree with your statement except your statement that the government has a trillion in debt. It is now $20 Trillion of debt with the last 8 years of the current administration adding $10 Trillion in new debt. That is what you get with Progressive Socialist Keynsian spending and is the country better off? Lowest labor participation rate in 40 years, record numbers on food stamps, record numbers on disability and entitlements galore.
I realize you merely parrot what you hear from others, but Keynesian (note correct spelling) economic principles have been employed by both Republican and Democrat administrations several times in this country’s history, with mixed results.
The role of deficit spending is to jump start a sluggish economy that is producing less than its capacity and therefore employing fewer workers than it should be. It’s like squirting starting fluid into a carburetor. The goal is to shorten the pain of the recovery time. That’s it. There’s no promise of increasing capacity.
Another Keynesian principle is that deficits should be paid back during good times, but unfortunately every administration is reluctant to do that for fear of giving the opposing party ammo for the next election.
And speaking of opposing parties, political divisiveness in this country is impeding its ability to move forward, and finger-pointing blowhard clowns like you, on both sides of the fence, are doing it no favors.
What precisely is wrong with Sean Hannity? I have recently seen some of his work, and he often is the only person countering typical liberal talking points.
Is this why you are obsessed with him? He made excellent points recently with regards to black lives matters, Obama comments after shootings, the affect that may have on people who then feel justified, and then said “Why can’t Obama instead of saying he sympathizes with people doing this say it is never justifiable? And why can’t he confirm shootings instead of jumping on band wagon’s like the hands up don’t shoot Michael Brown lie?”
I have definitely heard him make true statements, and have guests on who disagreed with him in the past specifically to go over similar points again.
What is your issue with Hannity?
Why don’t you complain about individual details that are incorrect instead of entire stations and “all” of certain individuals.
Everyone has their points. It is not “all” right or “all wrong”.
I say this as someone who hasn’t really seen him a lot until one of my brothers (unexpectedly) took a liking to him.
I asked why and then started watching it with him at times when he is over.
This should show something else about me as a side comment:
How liberal has society become that people who don’t source quote Fox News, don’t watch Fox News, etc, are accused of spouting Fox News talking points each time they start to bring up topics of debate like:
Whether or not we should consider torture to save lives.
Whether or not we should use government programs to help black poverty rather than social programs to encourage black men to stay with the women they impregnate (this is not racism, it is a major contributor to black poverty because as it turns out white, black, or Mexican, the single motherhood number is the biggest indicator of whether or not you will live in poverty. This happens to be extremely high and has been raising since the civil rights movement from what was an already high rough 20% to in the 70’s now)
Look! Huffington post for a source! And they said something that Fox News has said!
I find that often it is the opinion pieces of these sites that get things messed up (whether on Fox News or Huffington post) and the posts that simply state facts that are interesting. This is an example of a Huffington post article done right.
You will find that saying the below here and other places in public will instantly get you called a racist who loves killing people.
It’s about time to stop that, instead of becoming shut down because the enemies you speak of are so despicable you need to isolate them in a corner for what, 7 years?
That’s been the case in Planet’s case. I still engage with people who are clearly engaging in full out assault type of behavior against me like UW.
Correct moniker is Deplorables dude. Please pay attention. Also, there are two spellings of Keynsian. Look it up on Google. I prefer mine. I realize you merely parrot liberal talking points you hear from others so I will cut you some slack. By the way, have you heard the debt numbers of this country that is due to Keynsian spending? $20 Trillion should give you pause and the interest on the debt caused by this spending continues to mount.
Progressive liberal blowhards like you with no economic sense are doing the country no favors. Progressive Socialism is what Democrats do and it is a huuuuuge failure.
The sometime somewhere is today on Google with about 6 articles with the other spelling. We know you have trouble with Google so don’t even try to pull it up and keep spouting of your leftist agenda.
Here is something to tax your small brain. Have you ever heard of “stagflation”? That is what has been the result of Obama economic policies. Need an explanation? Try Google again if you want the answer.
I’m pretty well versed in Google-searching – just wanted to put that out there before Agent/Deplorable attacked for a lack of skills. I did Google your spelling of Keynesian, went 12 pages into the searches, and didn’t find a single article with the spelling you used. You must have a very special version of Google.
My God Godout, you are no better searching than Confused was some weeks ago. There is an icon on the alternative spelling. Try clicking on it instead of criticizing that it is not there. If you want to be considered good at searching, try to do a search. It is so easy too.
September 23, 2016 at 4:57 pm
Fair Playing Field says:
Like or Dislike:
6
1
Agent,
Scroll down to the “Add a Comment” box, type in “Keynsian” and hit the space bar. See how the red squiggly line appears like magic underneath?
Next, go back and insert an “e” between the “n” and “s”. See how the red squiggly line disappears?
Now go over to the local junior high and ask one of the students what that means.
September 26, 2016 at 10:13 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
4
1
Godot, in all fairness to this genius if you search the undoubtedly incorrect spelling and add “-Keynesian” so it excludes all the entries with the correct spelling you get some returns on forums and little pages where people about as knowledgeable as Agent lurk.
He can’t ever admit he is wrong even when it’s not debatable, which is why there’s no reason to debate him, only to mock him. His entire stupid argument is that if you can find it online and and supports your predetermined belief it is true. Total idiot.
September 26, 2016 at 11:23 am
Godot says:
Like or Dislike:
4
1
Wow, Agent/Deplorable, that stung. Please see UW and Fair Playing Field’s comments on why you were able to find the spelling you chose. If you prefer the incorrect spelling, so be it. If you weren’t such a dolt, no one would care if you spelled it wrong. But, since you are…
September 23, 2016 at 4:22 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
6
1
Agent, just because something is online does not mean it is right. If you are calling people idiots you should know the difference. You don’t. Maybe it’s a small brain thing. Also, if I search Google with the proper spelling excluded no credible sites come up; also, Wikipedia nor The Economists’ dictionary of terms list it. You were wrong.
As for stagflation, you are equally clueless. That requires high unemployment, high inflation, and low demand. We have low demand (which would go against the economic theories you subscribe to, but of course you don’t know that), but unemployment has not been historically high for almost 3 years, we are at almost 3 years of it being below the average for the preceding 4 presidents, and aside from fantasies there has been extremely low inflation during Obama’s presidency. It was almost 0 last year.
You are beyond uninformed on this, it’s truly astounding. I would love to see a test to see if you are close to, if not, functionally illiterate. Since your are undeniably wrong, will you apologize, and/or admit you have a small brain like you accused others of having?
UW – although we agree that stagflation isn’t an accurate description of America, I must correct you.
it’s not “high unemployment” + “high inflation” + “low demand”
it’s “high unemployment” + “persistent high inflation” + “stagnant demand”
those two qualifiers are important when discussing stagflation, IMO
September 23, 2016 at 4:36 pm
Deplorables says:
Like or Dislike:
1
4
And here I thought IJ was monitoring these posts and they are still letting you and your uninformed trolls try to spew your hate and misinformation. By the way, 94.5 million out of the workforce, drawing entitlements, giving up looking for work is high unemployment even though it doesn’t resonate on what you have for a brain. The economy has been stagnant for many years now due to Progressive rule, high taxation, high regulation and that is about to change. You can get a flight to Venezuela any time now and see what Socialism/Communism looks like.
September 23, 2016 at 5:35 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
Confused, true, and good point. For the sake of brevity I left that out since it’s over his head and I was just listing the criteria from my phone, and we haven’t had high inflation for any time he is talking about, much less persistently. But you are 100% right they have to be persistent.
September 24, 2016 at 9:58 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
Hey Agent,
To your point about the 94.5 million people out of the work force. I did a simple google search via politifact.com:
In Agent’s ideal world, and that of people like him, you need to count people aged 16, and 85+ because you either inherit money and position or work from your early teens until the second you die , preferably about 30 seconds after leaving work so they don’t have to deal with your remains.
September 23, 2016 at 4:30 pm
confused says:
Like or Dislike:
4
1
Agent, I know stagflation means “persistent high inflation combined with high unemployment and stagnant demand in a country’s economy.”
inflation has been under 5% since 1991. It was over 10% for many years in the 1970’s. i don’t think you and i agree on what “persistent high inflation” means.
domestic demand has gone from 1.6% in 2016 to 3.0% in 2015. i don’t think you and i agree on what “stagnant demand” means.
i grant you that unemployment is high, but that’s only 1 out of 3 requirements for stagflation. all 3 must be met for stagflation to exist.
care to post any verifiable numbers that you think support your stance, Agent?
Bob, I have cited statistics which I believe proves stagflation is not an accurate term for the current state of our country. Do you agree with me or Agent/Deplorables on this topic?
Your obsession with protecting Agent when he makes idiotic statements is weird. Not only is he ignorant on this, he is doubling-down and lying, pretending to know what he is talking about. He pretends, like you, too be actuality analyzing something but he clearly doesn’t know what it is, and your problem isn’t with that, it is with people pointing out he is wrong and lying. You protect and follow liars and frauds if they believe what you believe, reality is barely considered and definitely not a major concern.
Recent article or editorial in WSJ about what good did this practice do for Wells? Jist is that since most accounts were closed soon after with little or no activity, and may have triggered an employee incentive how did it help (net) sales and profitability? title is “Wells Fargo’s Incentives Go Awry.” interesting read.
Most agency owners and company CEO’s are making at least twice what they would have made in 1975, why can’t the worker bees get paid a little more? I think it’s about time some of these thresholds are brought into the 21st Century.
Worker bees should get licensed and start selling on commission if they want to earn more.
The sales area isn’t the only way to make more money in the sales arena, Agent. Are your account managers/CSRs/worker beers all license? Every agency I have worked at required all employees be licensed. And you can be licensed and not sell. As a business owner, do you believe in merit increases for the worker bees? Annual cost of living/market adjustment increases? I’m just not seeing a joyful career working in your agency if your attitude is sales is the only important position.
Do me a favor and take a marketing course. No sales equals no jobs for the worker bees in the insurance business.
I am in sales… but never disparage the back office. You can’t do much sales if you have to clean the toilets, balance the books, manage HR, service customers.
Insurance sales is a team game.
LOL. And once again short-sighted Agent is caught with his foot in his mouth. Perhaps you should take courses to learn about concepts such as “policy retention” and “minimizing new business penalty”.
How do you think your employees would feel if they were able to read a print-out of some of your comments, Agent? Specifically those that call them ‘worker bees’ and seem to insinuate that production is the only meaningful position in an agency?
I did have a typo in my first sentence which may have contributed to your snarky comment. My intent was to say that the sales area isn’t the only way to make more money in the insurance arena. I’ve taken more than a few marketing courses – I know the relevance of sales. I also understand how important all the cogs in the wheel are to make an agency successful. You denigrate anyone who isn’t in sales or an agency owner and conclude that they are lazy and know very little. Thank goodness for your ‘worker bees’ though – gives you more time to spend on here and a couple of the other sites you frequent.
Marketing 101 in a community college – Be good to your sales force. Part of that being good is keeping reliable support staff.
So, both of you are correct.
Not only do you have to have a reliable support staff, but as a business owner, they should be treated well and their contributions acknowledged. That’s how you keep a reliable staff.
Cute Godout. The sales area isn’t the only way to make more money in the sales arena, Agent. Are you Planet, UW or Actu in disguise?
Geez, you’re an idiot. I am Godot – I don’t need to change my name or be someone else, Agent/Deplorables. Please see the second paragraph of my post that was written 3 days before you posted your inane response – I corrected my typo. Crap posts like yours of 9-30-16 at 4:06 is just proof positive that you’re an instigator and a pot-stirrer. You don’t have enough sense to have a real conversation, so you just pick and chide. And stop thumbing up your own posts.
He has been at it for over 20 years. He must be doing something right.
I always get a kick out of former employees say I dont know how to run a biz. Thats why I am in Biz for 25+ years and they work as a clerk in a gas station… Nice use of the degree they went out and got.
Love agent – hate him, what ever. Cant deny his success. Hats off to him and every other principle / business owner taking that chance and making it happen.
I’m sure Agent has been successful, but so have a lot of us that haven’t been in sales. I realize that it takes more than just a salesperson to make an agency a success. Where I take exception is that Agent considers everyone who isn’t in sales an unknowledgeable slacker. And to refer to employees as ‘worker bees’ is really offensive.
Not everyone is cut out for every position or every business – but they don’t all end up as a clerk at a gas station.
I have never heard him disparage his staff. I have heard him say that with out his staff, his job would be much more difficult. The term Worker Bee is a term that was common in years past. May not be PC these days, but so much changes these days, us old folks cant keep up.
Carol – I agree that CEO’s bringing in tens of million dollars a year can afford overtime pay to someone bringing in $40k. I couldn’t care less about them. I could be wrong, but I think the problem with this rule is more about state employees and small business. They don’t work for corporations making insane amounts of money. State employees are paid with money from taxpayers. And in some small businesses, the employees can actually make more than the owner. Their hope is that they’ll grow their business enough to reverse that. But that gets harder when they are forced to pay even more. Sounds like they are trying to attack Wall Street and ignoring the collateral damage to main street. That may not be the republican’s main concern, but they may be doing the right thing even if it’s for the wrong reasons.
Or Carol, another alternative is that the worker bees could do what I did 7 years ago prior to opening my own agency. Stop spending like society tells you need to (and no, you don’t need to have a new Iphone every year nor a new BMW every two years), get out debt, save money to open your own agency, then work 14 hours per day in the first few years so THEN you can make the same amount of money an agency owner does.
I think I should’ve had a V8!
I have to say I agree with you. As a salaried employee of a small agency sometimes we need to work extra (more than 40 hours) to get caught up because of the nature of how much we have to do. I am compensated I believe fairly for my position and as I put in extra time, I am rewarded in different ways (taken to lunch, etc.). I don’t like the idea of having to clock in after many years of being on salary AND working overtime. I work closely with the owner of the agency and know the time that they put in (12-14 a day, 6 days a weeks) and make less than what a lot of people make for a 40 hours week. This is the sweat equity that they put in. Eventually their pay will increase well beyond all as I would hope and they deserve it to. They are the owners of the business and can/will hire/let go people as the business needs to. Its not unfair, it is business. I understand some might not like what they are paid but it is up to them to find a higher paying job or get educated to get a better job if they don’t like what is available. Not the owner of a company & sure not the government. People need to stop depending on the Government to take care of them…they don’t even know how to handle money themselves with the trillion dollars of debt we have. You make your own destiny!
Einstein, you sound a lot like most agency owners and how they got started in business. Sacrifices, hard work, long hours, getting markets, finding financing to get started etc. Finding the right employees is also somewhat difficult, but if you succeed, it pays off.
Carol,
Before Reagan, a CEO averaged a salary 3X that of the average employee. An average employee could afford to be the bread winner, afford a house, car, and an annual vacation. Oh, and had a pension. That number is now 30X. Trickle down? NOPE! Now, the average worker has to have 2 jobs and struggles to feed his family. No more annual vacations. No pensions. An average worker is hopeful to have a 401K or equivalent. We continue to hand those dollars upwards, buying yachts and car elevators. Now, some companies I have worked for have forbid overtime all together. That was happening back in 2005 and 2006. Can’t blame that one on the current guy in the Oval.
Taxing enough of the wealth away from CEO owners to make the pay inequality go away is unethical, and does not increase the pay of middle class Americans.
If we destroy enough wealth and engage in class warfare of course the gap would be lower. But again, the government cannot lift people out of poverty. We have seen this in nations that try to focus on pay inequality through such measures. Focusing only on the separation of the incomes results in socialism.
And moving forward a bit: The reason we must rely on business and not the government and tax rates is this:
The wealthiest .01% have 999 people for every of them, and it is likely the .001% you are talking about. When they have a corporate revenue, typically let’s say 2 billion, they tend to make only about 1-3 million per year. The corporation is taxed at say 20%, which could go to the workers, and instead goes to the government. Even if you take half of his million, since he is only 1/100 you end up only being able to give people a very minimal amount.
You cannot lift poor people out of poverty, and as we saw with Carter, you can very well make it difficult for them to afford a living even while they have jobs.
More typical Bob “math”.
“The wealthiest .01% have 999 people for every of them[…]”.
No,.O1%, or .0001 if multiplied, would be 0.1 people per 1,000. However, if I give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant the top 1%, but don’t know how to write it, the figure would be 1%, or.01 if multiplied out, and would be 10 people for every 990, not 1 for every 999.
The rest of you made up figures and fantasies are equally wrong, and have been thoroughly debunked, but you value fantasy over reality so I won’t bother. It’s very unlikely you will even acknowledge getting this wrong, even though you are all about just the math.
You are just doing a different kind of math, based on textbooks in liberal colleges where they bully people for holding different positions like what a percent actually is.
Concept was correct, typos were in the paragraph.
No, they are not equally wrong.
Dont generally accept people giving policy advice based on data when they are off by a magnitude of 1,000. Not gonna start when he person is a lunatic.
Let go of the past Planet. 9/11 changed our world to what it is today. Reagan was long gone out of the white House. 9/11 dragged us into war just like Pearl Harbor dragged us in to WW2.
So much fuss over overtime pay. Are businesses in the US so callous that they would rather work a good exempt employee to death than to pay them the overtime they are worth. I see so many co workers pack up and leave after their 8 hour work day is done. No loyalty from either camp.
Really Anne? Good businesses are not callous and do not work their employees to death. Perhaps you are not with the right one. My employees go home on time every day and they are long term so I guess they like it here. Good working conditions and competitive pay goes a long way to having loyal employees.
Or you are in a crap market where they will take any job they can get. Weird that you say here all your employees are long term, but often also say you send people packing with their belongings in a box for minor problems. In which case are you lying?
You misquote yet again. Only liberal Progressive knumb skulls like you need to be sent packing after lurking on IJ all day blogging your insults. That is a very bad trait to have.
1.You misspelled the word you used to insult my intelligence, of course.
2. I didn’t write any insults, but you did.
3. I didn’t quote you.
4. This isn’t a blog.
5. You post 3x as often as I do. I post on a break, during lunch, or on my way home. You post seemingly nonstop.
So, based on your comments it seems you were lying when you said all your employees were long term.
Get back to work employee or you will have to work some more overtime.
Devastating rebuttal. Be careful or you will get banned on this account too. Hey a second name, just one you were freaking out claiming other people did. What a hypocrite.
“1.You misspelled the word you used to insult my intelligence, of course.
2. I didn’t write any insults, but you did.
3. I didn’t quote you.
4. This isn’t a blog.
5. You post 3x as often as I do. I post on a break, during lunch, or on my way home. You post seemingly nonstop.
So, based on your comments it seems you were lying when you said all your employees were long term.
”
1. Over zealous as usual. People make mistakes. It is worse to lack intelligence in concept than it is in spelling.
2. You called him a liar and went after his character and went after him personally when he made a comment about the entire market, instead of commenting about the entire market with facts. Nice way of making your point eh? This is why no conservatives listen to you. It is not that they are all crazy, you don’t make your points.
3. You did quote him, or you referred to something he had said. Are you playing semantics here? Ok, so you paraphrased something he said. Is that better?
4. Semantics.
5. I know from personal experience debating you this cannot be true.
On your last comment:
No. And he already explained that.
6.
Annie, what do you mean by exempt employee? Exempt from what?
Exempt from overtime, i.e. a salaried employee who is not paid for working outside of their prescribed hours. I’m a little surprised as a long-term business owner that you didn’t know what this meant. Sorry – not trying to pick an argument – am just surprised.
When I did retail, students were exempt from FICA. Wasn’t even thinking about salaried employees as I have never had any. I am not sure if I even know any.
Carol, your point about the worker bees making more is nice and I agree. The usual way for an increase in minimum wage – or to modify the exempt salary minimum – would be for the House & Senate to agree on a bill and then send that to the President for ratification. Obama’s end run is a dramatic overreach of presidential power.
BTW, to anyone who is reading: Chicago sure is a lot better off with Obama in office for the last 8 years, right?
Yes, we have seen that Chicago is a workers paradise, particularly on the south side. Obama is wonderful creating jobs for black workers in this country, right? He has really brought blacks and whites together. Don’t believe me? Look at Charlotte, Baltimore, St Louis, Detroit as well as Chicago.
Hi Agent!
The unemployment for African Americans has roughly tracked that of the average worker in the US, meaning unemployment, and “real unemployment,” or including discouraged workers, is much, much lower than when he took over after Bush and the Republicans’ economic disaster.
If you want to claim one specific city–Chicago–which has had an increase in crime is indicative of Obama’s policies, you have to show that nationwide. New York, a bigger city, has had a decrease, as have other large cities. Those must not be due to Obama though. Much of the problem is gangs (like in Chicago where the rise is almost exclusively gangs) and funding. Crime was sky high after Reagan left office, and then dropped significantly under Clinton, largely due to expanded funding at the local level by the federal government. This does not, and cannot happen now due to Republican obstructionism. Much of the money that does go there is spent on pointless, wasteful things like military-grade equipment.
But, in your addled mind literally everything negative is because of Obama.
99% of people with a brain would still rather live in Chicago, NY or another good, big city, than a dump like Longview, TX, where all you can do is sit at home, watch Fox News, and bitch about Obama.
Had Rudi Guliani been in charge of Chicago instead of the Progressive Socialist dufus Rahm Deadfish Emanuel, the gangs would have been cleaned up, the murder rate way down and the plight of blacks would have been much better. He certainly did it in NY.
Emanuel isn’t a progressive, but that’s so far over your head it should be embarrassing. The crime in NY started dropping 4 years before he took office, as it was around most of the country, due in large part to the increased resources provided by Clinton.
During that time the big city with the largest decrease in crime was San Francisco, so you must agree liberals were better, right?
If Rahm had not taken apart Dailys’ Gang Units, his specialized folks doing what they do best, we would not be where we are.
If Rahm was not been so arrogant, when it became obvious his plan was a complete failure, he could have reconstructed the gang units. But his way is better in his mind.
This is not directed at anyone in particular, but are employees who have been with an agency or company 15-20 years considered long term or short term? That is what we have in our agency. We treat them right, they are remunerated well, have benefits, flexible working hours, excellent technology to use and they tend to stay for the long haul. By the way, they get to go home at 5:00 every work day. They like that too.
Junior, since Obamas pal Rahm took over on Chicago, its been great. Its been record setting. Citizens asking Rauner for the National Guard, Population Shrink, ect….
If their business model won’t handle the overtime pay yet demands the overtime work, it’s not a viable business model.
Implement a viable business model and pay people fair wages.
If workers are good at their job, they should be able to get their work done without a lot of overtime hours.
You know absolutely nothing about what is going on in the real world.
That is a perfect rebuttal! I am sure you changed his mind!
I think he made a semi good point in some cases, you could make the counter point in other cases you know.
That’s on you.
Maybe a few statistics about your most stellar agency would be helpful, Agent. How many accounts do your ‘workers’ handle? What’s the average size of an account in your office? Revenue managed per employee? Mostly personal lines or mostly commercial lines? You can’t just all agencies by yours alone.
Gork, you win for the most reasonable and sensible comment on this subject!
The proposed threshold increase is too much. I could see increasing it to $35,000 (almost 50% increase) to fairly compensate salaried employees in positions with little advancement potential, but increasing it beyond that diminishes the incentive to work harder to get ahead.
I’m sure my viewpoint won’t be popular, but I haven’t punched a time clock since college and love the autonomy I have with respect to what I work on and when I work on it each day. I’ll gladly trade unpaid overtime hours for that.
this law is going to make those slow workers work even slower so that their hours will stretch into o/t hours. That’s deplorable.
Liberals still, some of the worker bees that have to blog all day to justify their existence are not exactly getting their work done.
How are you getting your work done, Agent? You’re on here more than anyone! Oh wait, it must be your worker bees that’s taking care of the store. How degrading to continue to refer to your employees as such.
As a salaried employee of a small agency sometimes we need to work extra (more than 40 hours) to get caught up because of the nature of how much we have to do. I am compensated I believe fairly for my position and as I put in extra time, I am rewarded in different ways (taken to lunch, etc.). I don’t like the idea of having to clock in after many years of being on salary AND working overtime…I’m ok with the way it is. I work closely with the owner of the agency and know the time that they put in (12-14 a day, 6 days a weeks) and make less than what a lot of people make for a 40 hour week. This is the sweat equity that they put in. Eventually their pay will increase well beyond all as I would hope and they deserve it to. They are the owners of the business and can hire/let go people as the business needs to. Its not unfair, it is business. I understand some might not like what they are paid but it is up to them to find a higher paying job or get educated to get a better job if they don’t like what is available. Not the owner of a company & sure not the government. People need to stop depending on the Government to take care of them…they don’t even know how to handle money themselves with the trillion dollars of debt we have. You make your own destiny!
Employee, I agree with your statement except your statement that the government has a trillion in debt. It is now $20 Trillion of debt with the last 8 years of the current administration adding $10 Trillion in new debt. That is what you get with Progressive Socialist Keynsian spending and is the country better off? Lowest labor participation rate in 40 years, record numbers on food stamps, record numbers on disability and entitlements galore.
Agent,
I realize you merely parrot what you hear from others, but Keynesian (note correct spelling) economic principles have been employed by both Republican and Democrat administrations several times in this country’s history, with mixed results.
The role of deficit spending is to jump start a sluggish economy that is producing less than its capacity and therefore employing fewer workers than it should be. It’s like squirting starting fluid into a carburetor. The goal is to shorten the pain of the recovery time. That’s it. There’s no promise of increasing capacity.
Another Keynesian principle is that deficits should be paid back during good times, but unfortunately every administration is reluctant to do that for fear of giving the opposing party ammo for the next election.
And speaking of opposing parties, political divisiveness in this country is impeding its ability to move forward, and finger-pointing blowhard clowns like you, on both sides of the fence, are doing it no favors.
I’m beginning to think Sean Hannity sells insurance in the Longview, TX area when he isn’t on TV or radio.
What precisely is wrong with Sean Hannity? I have recently seen some of his work, and he often is the only person countering typical liberal talking points.
Is this why you are obsessed with him? He made excellent points recently with regards to black lives matters, Obama comments after shootings, the affect that may have on people who then feel justified, and then said “Why can’t Obama instead of saying he sympathizes with people doing this say it is never justifiable? And why can’t he confirm shootings instead of jumping on band wagon’s like the hands up don’t shoot Michael Brown lie?”
I have definitely heard him make true statements, and have guests on who disagreed with him in the past specifically to go over similar points again.
What is your issue with Hannity?
Why don’t you complain about individual details that are incorrect instead of entire stations and “all” of certain individuals.
Everyone has their points. It is not “all” right or “all wrong”.
The kids aren’t all right. Ba dum chi.
I say this as someone who hasn’t really seen him a lot until one of my brothers (unexpectedly) took a liking to him.
I asked why and then started watching it with him at times when he is over.
This should show something else about me as a side comment:
How liberal has society become that people who don’t source quote Fox News, don’t watch Fox News, etc, are accused of spouting Fox News talking points each time they start to bring up topics of debate like:
Whether or not we should consider torture to save lives.
Whether or not we should use government programs to help black poverty rather than social programs to encourage black men to stay with the women they impregnate (this is not racism, it is a major contributor to black poverty because as it turns out white, black, or Mexican, the single motherhood number is the biggest indicator of whether or not you will live in poverty. This happens to be extremely high and has been raising since the civil rights movement from what was an already high rough 20% to in the 70’s now)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/26/black-single-mothers-biggest-impediment_n_3818824.html
Look! Huffington post for a source! And they said something that Fox News has said!
I find that often it is the opinion pieces of these sites that get things messed up (whether on Fox News or Huffington post) and the posts that simply state facts that are interesting. This is an example of a Huffington post article done right.
You will find that saying the below here and other places in public will instantly get you called a racist who loves killing people.
It’s about time to stop that, instead of becoming shut down because the enemies you speak of are so despicable you need to isolate them in a corner for what, 7 years?
That’s been the case in Planet’s case. I still engage with people who are clearly engaging in full out assault type of behavior against me like UW.
It shows an engaged mind.
Correct moniker is Deplorables dude. Please pay attention. Also, there are two spellings of Keynsian. Look it up on Google. I prefer mine. I realize you merely parrot liberal talking points you hear from others so I will cut you some slack. By the way, have you heard the debt numbers of this country that is due to Keynsian spending? $20 Trillion should give you pause and the interest on the debt caused by this spending continues to mount.
Progressive liberal blowhards like you with no economic sense are doing the country no favors. Progressive Socialism is what Democrats do and it is a huuuuuge failure.
Agent wrote: “Also, there are two spellings of Keynsian [sic]”.
Yeah, the right spelling and the wrong spelling. Yours is the wrong one. Keynesian economics takes its name from John Maynard Keynes.
And thanks for unwittingly parroting my prior response.
Are you really attempting to convince us that you’re not Agent with the first sentence? Wow.
How about Godout instead of Godot?
That’s such a witty, yet devastating response. It doesn’t even make sense. What a surprise coming from you.
Sorry – forgot to finish the post with the statement: Please read with as much sarcasm as possible.
When it regards Agent it is assumed to be sarcasm.
“Also, there are two spellings of Keynsian.”
No, there aren’t. It is named after a person, Keynes. You are so uninformed on everything, I’ve never seen somebody so consistently wrong.
but agent read something somewhere one time where someone said there were two spellings, so it has to be true!
The sometime somewhere is today on Google with about 6 articles with the other spelling. We know you have trouble with Google so don’t even try to pull it up and keep spouting of your leftist agenda.
Here is something to tax your small brain. Have you ever heard of “stagflation”? That is what has been the result of Obama economic policies. Need an explanation? Try Google again if you want the answer.
I’m pretty well versed in Google-searching – just wanted to put that out there before Agent/Deplorable attacked for a lack of skills. I did Google your spelling of Keynesian, went 12 pages into the searches, and didn’t find a single article with the spelling you used. You must have a very special version of Google.
My God Godout, you are no better searching than Confused was some weeks ago. There is an icon on the alternative spelling. Try clicking on it instead of criticizing that it is not there. If you want to be considered good at searching, try to do a search. It is so easy too.
Agent,
Scroll down to the “Add a Comment” box, type in “Keynsian” and hit the space bar. See how the red squiggly line appears like magic underneath?
Next, go back and insert an “e” between the “n” and “s”. See how the red squiggly line disappears?
Now go over to the local junior high and ask one of the students what that means.
Godot, in all fairness to this genius if you search the undoubtedly incorrect spelling and add “-Keynesian” so it excludes all the entries with the correct spelling you get some returns on forums and little pages where people about as knowledgeable as Agent lurk.
He can’t ever admit he is wrong even when it’s not debatable, which is why there’s no reason to debate him, only to mock him. His entire stupid argument is that if you can find it online and and supports your predetermined belief it is true. Total idiot.
Wow, Agent/Deplorable, that stung. Please see UW and Fair Playing Field’s comments on why you were able to find the spelling you chose. If you prefer the incorrect spelling, so be it. If you weren’t such a dolt, no one would care if you spelled it wrong. But, since you are…
Agent, just because something is online does not mean it is right. If you are calling people idiots you should know the difference. You don’t. Maybe it’s a small brain thing. Also, if I search Google with the proper spelling excluded no credible sites come up; also, Wikipedia nor The Economists’ dictionary of terms list it. You were wrong.
As for stagflation, you are equally clueless. That requires high unemployment, high inflation, and low demand. We have low demand (which would go against the economic theories you subscribe to, but of course you don’t know that), but unemployment has not been historically high for almost 3 years, we are at almost 3 years of it being below the average for the preceding 4 presidents, and aside from fantasies there has been extremely low inflation during Obama’s presidency. It was almost 0 last year.
You are beyond uninformed on this, it’s truly astounding. I would love to see a test to see if you are close to, if not, functionally illiterate. Since your are undeniably wrong, will you apologize, and/or admit you have a small brain like you accused others of having?
UW – although we agree that stagflation isn’t an accurate description of America, I must correct you.
it’s not “high unemployment” + “high inflation” + “low demand”
it’s “high unemployment” + “persistent high inflation” + “stagnant demand”
those two qualifiers are important when discussing stagflation, IMO
And here I thought IJ was monitoring these posts and they are still letting you and your uninformed trolls try to spew your hate and misinformation. By the way, 94.5 million out of the workforce, drawing entitlements, giving up looking for work is high unemployment even though it doesn’t resonate on what you have for a brain. The economy has been stagnant for many years now due to Progressive rule, high taxation, high regulation and that is about to change. You can get a flight to Venezuela any time now and see what Socialism/Communism looks like.
Confused, true, and good point. For the sake of brevity I left that out since it’s over his head and I was just listing the criteria from my phone, and we haven’t had high inflation for any time he is talking about, much less persistently. But you are 100% right they have to be persistent.
Hey Agent,
To your point about the 94.5 million people out of the work force. I did a simple google search via politifact.com:
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/31/donald-trump/donald-trump-says-us-has-93-milion-people-out-work/
In Agent’s ideal world, and that of people like him, you need to count people aged 16, and 85+ because you either inherit money and position or work from your early teens until the second you die , preferably about 30 seconds after leaving work so they don’t have to deal with your remains.
Agent, I know stagflation means “persistent high inflation combined with high unemployment and stagnant demand in a country’s economy.”
inflation has been under 5% since 1991. It was over 10% for many years in the 1970’s. i don’t think you and i agree on what “persistent high inflation” means.
domestic demand has gone from 1.6% in 2016 to 3.0% in 2015. i don’t think you and i agree on what “stagnant demand” means.
i grant you that unemployment is high, but that’s only 1 out of 3 requirements for stagflation. all 3 must be met for stagflation to exist.
care to post any verifiable numbers that you think support your stance, Agent?
This isn’t your topic or your conversation.
Are you specifically coming in to insult agent? You have no place in it.
Moral high ground does not exist in correcting his spelling, so before you say I’m doing and have done the same thing:
I don’t walk in to degrade someone. I walk in to protect people. You need to knock off your constant berating of Agent/Deplorables.
Bob, I have cited statistics which I believe proves stagflation is not an accurate term for the current state of our country. Do you agree with me or Agent/Deplorables on this topic?
These guys think we actually have high inflation, but the BLS is hiding it.
Your obsession with protecting Agent when he makes idiotic statements is weird. Not only is he ignorant on this, he is doubling-down and lying, pretending to know what he is talking about. He pretends, like you, too be actuality analyzing something but he clearly doesn’t know what it is, and your problem isn’t with that, it is with people pointing out he is wrong and lying. You protect and follow liars and frauds if they believe what you believe, reality is barely considered and definitely not a major concern.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Recent article or editorial in WSJ about what good did this practice do for Wells? Jist is that since most accounts were closed soon after with little or no activity, and may have triggered an employee incentive how did it help (net) sales and profitability? title is “Wells Fargo’s Incentives Go Awry.” interesting read.