Patriotranter's Weblog

So the 2010 congress has failed to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act and of course The Democratic controlled congress and liberal media outlets such as The Nation plus various union groups are placing the blame on Republicans. The question they have to ask themselves is why they would want it passed in the first place.

I ask all women: Do you want equal pay because you earned it or because the government is making it so ? Can you imagine how much worse the derogatory attitude of men towards women would be if they could say "She makes just as much as me due to government regulation". Women are already eligible for the same pay and benefits as men.  So let us omit the health benefits that many women receive that no man ever will receive and offer a quick lesson in compensation negotiation to women, and men too.

Every aspect of a pay raise is a negotiation. First you have to negotiate that a raise is merited and then you have to negotiate how much that will be. If you are in the same job and want a raise you had better come to the meeting with a list of reasons why you have earned what you are asking for. If you are going for a new job you had better have an idea of how much the position should pay and how much you want. Depending on what industry you are in there are varied means of doing this, but I will leave you to suss that out for yourself.

Here’s a tip for when the day comes and you are applying for a new position or contending for a raise. Always ask for way more than you want, expect to get considerably less, but make sure you are clear that salary discussions will be revisited within 6 months of your getting the job. Don’t always ask for money either, snagging an extra week of paid vacation can be a good deal too. If the boss actually comes to you with a promotion opportunity, name an astronomical sum. If there is a higher position available, and you have made it obvious that you are the person they need, you are in a position of power and they will have to negotiate to meet your demands. Be tough, be firm, but don’t overvalue yourself. Everyone is replaceable. the company knows how much it wants to pay you and how much it is willing to pay you, the number you want to get to is somewhere in the middle. If you go too low you are being paid far less than others in the same job. If you go too high it will be more difficult to meet or exceed expectations.

You would not believe some of the things men ask for in reviews. Parking places, greater per diems when on the road, airfare upgrades, rental car upgrades, hotel upgrades, corporate credit cards, when traveling they want extra days off at the destination with pay so they can sight see, souvenir allowances (I kid you not), longer vacations, preferential vacation scheduling, are just some of the things that I myself have asked and been asked for. The uniqueness of requested perks is unending and each generation seems to throw new and interesting ideas into the mix.

It never hurts to ask for something, the worst that will happen is you hear "No!" the best that can happen is your demands are met.

It may sound crazy but I think women are the cause of male negotiating successes. When we are getting intimate for the first time (or trying to at least) the woman says "No" and so the man asks "If not that, how about this?" again "No!" so it goes to "Well then what about this?" again "No!" and men keep asking for different things until you give up a little something. We go for a home run and settle for a kiss and a hug. Most importantly, we always go for the big play first, and companies are more likely to give in to our demands (read: begging) at an earlier stage of the negotiation.

So I say this. Thank you women for teaching we men to negotiate and earn more money due to those skills.

Now get out there and get yourself a raise.

I am sure by now everyone who spends even a little time online has seen  the “Don’t touch my junk” video. This was in reference to airline traveler John Tyner protesting aggressive groping during the new “Enhanced Pat Downs” of the TSA. President Bush used “Enhanced Interrogation” against terrorists whilst trying to defend the U.S. President Obama uses “Enhanced Pat Downs” against U.S. citizens for what reason ?

I began thinking that with all these protests and outrage there must be a better method the TSA can use to guarantee flier safety. To be sure being harassed by TSA and exposed to either backscatter or millimeter wave technology could easily be replaced by a friendly TSA representative using a handheld metal detector and a Beagle trained to sniff out explosives. This is a method that would not cause people to be irradiated or fondled. Some may say that people with dog allergies would be violated. Although you have to admit that a few seconds of sneezing is better than being exposed to a level of radiation that is questionable or to having a complete stranger grope your privates. No a courteous TSA agent and an inquisitive beagle would be far less invasive, stressful and threatening then these new “Enhanced Pat Downs”. So with a smiling face and a small dog air travelers would have no fear, no danger, no threat. Why then are the more aggressive measures being used instead, when there are hundreds of ways to do it that are better, faster and less expensive. Of course after witnessing how the Obama administration reacted to the outrage and protests of his health care program it is easy to see that this administration cares nothing about the opinions of “the people”. They have an agenda and they will stick to it no matter how far they have to raise taxes.

I started asking questions.

Is the US less safe with Obama in charge rather than Bush ? Is there a new threat out there which requires the suddenly enhanced, aggressive and invasive TSA techniques ? The answer is, No. There appears to be no greater threat to America today than there was in 2008.

What then, is the reasoning for the “Enhanced Pat Downs” ? To answer that we have to ask what the gain will be.

What is the benefit of an “Enhanced Pat Down” ? Nothing. The TSA is giving people the option of being irradiated or groped.

What is the negative of new TSA aggression ? People stop flying.

What is the result of people no longer flying ? People drive their own cars take the bus or the train.

Will people used to flying switch to taking the bus ? Not without slitting their wrists.

Will people used to the conveniences of flying drive their own cars ? Not likely, they are too lazy.

Passengers currently have the ready choice to fly or take a train but they choose to fly. If flying suddenly becomes too inconvenient they will fall back on rail. AHA. Obama is currently pushing over $10 billion tax payer dollars to develop high speed rail. A government owned entity that can not succeed if it faces competition from more efficient, faster and privately owned entities like airlines

If people are too angry to fly due to TSA aggressiveness it pushes them off aircraft and onto Obama’s high speed rail scheme.

The “Enhanced Pat Downs” of the TSA (motto:” We put the frisky in frisking”) are nothing more than a scheme by the Obama administration to alienate air travelers and create train riders to justify his high speed rail expenditures.

If this conspiracy succeeds the Obama administration will win two heinous battles against it’s citizens. First, the people who continue to fly and subjugate themselves to these “Enhanced Pat Downs” will become mindless sheep willing to sacrifice all dignity and honor for the illusion of security and as such are easily controlled. They will be mindless automatons who do whatever government agencies tell them to do. Second, we will have high speed rail forced down our throats at grossly inflated government construction costs raising taxes far beyond what most people are willing to pay. Either way the only losers are tax payers. This doesn’t even include the millions of dollars that will be lost by share holders of airline industry stocks.

You heard it here first.

DISCLAIMER: I have written about rail travel previously. I love rail travel. I do believe however, that rail travel should be run, not by the government but by corporations, especially as AMTRAK continuously fails to meet the needs of riders whilst losing about $2.5 billion per year. Plus the cost for needed improvements should be done with the intent to be profitable and not just another drain on US taxpayers wallets. Rail travel should be a competitive alternative to air travel and not enforced due to questionable governmental regulations.