Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (587871)	7/5/2004 3:50:36 PM
From: JDN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

They were higher, now they are slacking off, you miss the point entirely, go back and reread. jdn

To: tejek who wrote (587871)	7/5/2004 4:53:11 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"If they were paying overtime, then ave. hourly wages would be higher" I think you are the one that needs to think 1st. Just because you are getting overtime does not mean your hourly wage changed. If you make $10 per hour, that is what you make. If you work a lot of overtime, you are still a $10 per hour worker. You just happen to work a lot of overtime (which you may or may not want to do). Also the wages of new jobs don't go up statistically (as your post suggests) because the people that still have jobs are working more OT. Come on tejek, thhhhinnnnk.