I do find it interesting, however, that the required-salary shop was for a STEAKHOUSE. I would have imagined it would be for bank services or somesuch.

When I taught school I made 50k.

lbw1000 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Market value for most people in the "techie" world
> (some system analysts, project managers, etc.)
> make at $50000 or over. We seem to have a lot of
> techie people on here.


I'm not in the tech field any longer, but my husband still is and he makes above $50,000 a year. Although, I signed up for one MSC and put what our annual household income was and they changed it to $0 because I stated I am a homemaker. :-)

I find it interesting you would think of me as "attacking" them, when I was actually defending myself from their previous comments. I don't want to get into a political debate here either, but I actually do the books and have been the health plan administrator for my aunt and uncle for the last 10 years. Trust me, I know WAY more about this program than the average Joe, and way more than I would ever care to know. When I know more about the program than the dumbasses who passed it (in the famous words of Nancy Pilosi "We have to pass the bill to find out what is in the bill" - wow!) that is a big problem.

In the specific case I mentioned, the economy has nothing to do with them going out of business. As I mentioned, I do the books, and it is solely Obamacare that is going to shut the door and put 15 more people of out of a job next year. Their total insurance fees for these 15 people will come out to $96,000 in 2014 (this is a hard number, not estimation) if they were able to afford that and stay open. That is beyond possible for many small businesses.

It just really irritates me when people make flippant comments about huge issues when they have no first hand experience with it. If you aren't a small business owner or know one, you have no idea how this is affecting many people.

Heaven forbid somebody stand up to the Almighty old timers here. I hope I don't get deactivated!!

LisaSTL wrote: " How does someone lose their job over something that hasn't even started yet?"

Bearclaw responded: "Apparently you don't follow the news very closely, this is nothing new."

techman wrote: "Bearclaw14: stop watching fox news if you really believe that is the reason. It couldn't be farther from the truth. Just using it as a scapegoat."

Bearclaw responded: "You really shouldn't speak on something of such great importance when you don't have a damn clue what you're talking about."

I asked an honest and legitimate question and was met with sarcasm. Techman expressed his opinion and commented on Fox news. You proceeded to tell him he was clueless. Honestly, who attacked who?

That's the message you took away from that entire post?

I don't see how Bearclaw was "attacking", and that first post that accused her (you're a she, right?) was out of line in that regard.

I don't think *anyone* here has been "attacking", though. Have some snide/snarky remarks been made? Maybe even a somewhat insulting one here & there? Sure. On both sides. (Except for Lisa.) But not "attacking". And so what? We're all grown-ups.

That word is *SO* overused it's sickening. Same goes for any form of the words "hate", "abuse", "bully", "harass", and other words of that ilk. *True* attacks, hate, abuse, bullying, and harassment are diminished. People become so incredibly offended and over-reactive over nothing these days, it's ridiculous. I'm not saying that's happened here, yet; because it hasn't. But it happens all over the place out in the world with some regularity.

I've seen/heard/read many more stories that substantiate Bearclaw's experience, than I do Tech's opinion. I wish he'd provide some substantiation to his remark. From everything I've seen/heard/read, Obamacare is going to 'f' a lot of things up really good. It might help a few, but it will hurt more than it helps. But I have no direct experience, just what others report.

And I think Maritz is handling their online presence. Which is why I haven't tried signing up yet. I don't do phone and regular mail. This isn't 1973. It's 2013, and you can't even build and operate a functioning website? Really?!

I think I know what steakhouse the OP was referring to, and their steaks run $30-$60 dollars or so, which may be why they have the income requirement. They are trying to find people who "fit the part", so to speak.

Unfortunately I find that most people get their insight from their friends, the media they listen to and/or the geographical area they live in. I live in a very progressive state among mostly middle class people and it is a state that has its own website for Obamacare. I hear good things from people around here. My daughter's case however is different. She lives in a state that seems to try to refuse people even what the government has provided. It seems difficult there to get services that tax dollars have paid for. I am pretty sure sentiment overall in that state is very different from sentiment here about government programs. In my state I have not heard a peep about businesses going under. In fact smaller businesses are not even required to carry insurance and insurance is required only if the person works more than 39 hours a week. Perhaps the law on that has changed but I have not heard.
And let me clue you in on salary...for those who know people who are rich by earning $50,000 a year. In some coastal cities it would be difficult to live on that amount. You certainly would not be able to afford an expensive dinner more than once or twice a year. In fact even under Obamacare, you are considered low income nationwide if you are single and earn less than $45,000 and are given a subsidy in a state that has expanded medicaid. Other states consider $11,000 to be low income.
As someone mentioned computer people earn $50,000,I just want to mention my 24 year old son has been earning twice that since he got his BA two years ago. He does not feel at all rich living in the Boston area and he is a saver, not a spender. But he could afford a steakhouse every week. I would think they are attempting to find shoppers that have likely experienced this type of service at some regular intervals before so they are making their judgements based on some prior experience. It is not worse than a bar place that caters to 30 somethings to not want the view of a 55 year old shopper. I went on one of those shops before they changed the age requirement and found the music to be way too loud. But that is what they want for their location. So they don't want me as a shopper. Neither do they want a high end restaurant patron who has only shopping experience in high end restaurants. Age and money earned do not make the person but it helps to limit the number of people who do not fit their demographic at all. It seems to me if your household income fits then you fit whether you are the breadwinner or the breadbaker.

Okay, gang. Let's have a little decaf and cake. No one ever got deactivated for merely expressing an opinion here. It is the mode of expression than can get anyone in trouble, in my experience. (For what it's worth, I am not a moderator and do not know who is and who isn't.)

These forums are our professional family. And, as in my family, there are just some issues that it does not pay to try to discuss becasue our views are so diametrically opposed that we cannot disguise our feelings and just end up demonstrating that it is entirely possible to become very, very exasperated with even those that we are close to and love without reservation. The amount of retraint that I exercise with a loved one is beyond me, or most people, when those same views are expressed by anyone less beloved, which is why it seems best to just plain not mention political hot topics here at all.

We have the example of what happens when politics gets injected into a similar forum and many of us would not touch that place again, even those who agree with the opinions favored there. Also, I know quite a number of the most frequent posters, having met them at conferences, when traveling in each other's home areas, or though PMs about topics of mutual interest. Just becasue others have not joined into the political discussion here, it would be a very great mistake to assume that the "regulars" do not have serious differences of opinion on this and related matters. We just do not find the forum the place to discuss our differences.

My hours were also cut to below 30 due to Obamacare. Many companies are doing it. My sister was a teacher, and her school district started making teaching positions slightly below full time due to outrageous insurance costs.

bearclaw, this will be the last time I address your post, since you continue
to post factually inaccurate information and I don't debate people who
don't tell the full truth.

My friend's company(privately held) has near 3,000 employees and he
has not had to pass on any increases to his employees. Why? Because every
year his benefits adminstrator is aggressive and puts out their benefit plans
for bidding. Every single year. In the last 10 years, they changed
insurers 6 times...sometimes going back to one they already had. Sure it may
seem like a pain, but it keeps his costs down. I know very few companies that
are willing to go through the trouble of doing so, and just "bend over" and accept
whatever their current healthcare company tells them. His employees play 48 dollars
every 2 weeks for healthcare plus whatever the copay's are...no deductible.

Now we have the problem of healthcare companies that are not participating in
the exchange....therefore it is in their interest to distort the facts about the law.
First and foremost, if they do not participate in the exchange, and you are entitled
to tax credits, you cannot get them unless they are on the exchange. That's the
biggest issue. If you are single and your income is less than 47,000 a year you
are entitled to a premium credit(which is paid directly to the health insurer) and
if you are a family of 4 and make less than 96,000 a year you are entitled to a credit.
But only if you buy it off the exchange. As someone mentioned above, competition
varies widely by state and how willing a state was to go along with it. In NY where
the exchange is state run...rates down almost 50%....biggest drop in nation.
In Florida, even though it is the federal exchange, there is intense competition
so prices are competitive.

Now, as far as small businesses....if there is less than 50 employees then they
dont have to provide coverage....but if they do there is numerous tax credits
available to help with the cost. As long as they buy the insurance off the exchange.
If they buy it on their own, then you don't get all the credits. So if you are with
a provider that is not participating on the exchange, they will leave that part out.

As someone who has helped people in both state and federal exchange states,
most are shocked(in a good way) at what they can get.

Let's say you are single and make 80,000 a year(no credit) and are self employed..
In Florida, a federal exchange...
you can get top tier insurance...PPO...for around 300 a month that has no deductible...
10/20 dollar doctor copay...2000 out of pocket max(copays/perscriptions).
For the self insured market that would of been considered unheard of a year ago.

And for anyone who thinks insurance rates would not of increased dramatically in
the last 5 years if the law never passed....keep dreaming.....the actual cost
of healthcare has skyrocketed...and im talking about what providers charge
for services....nothing to do with what insurers charge.

Remember, employers are using it as a scapegoat. Why? Because they can
and people will believe it. Think about it. They already cut costs since 2006.
Laid off employees....made starting salaries lower....increased people's workload...
so what's the next step? pass along part of the cost of benefits onto employees...
and look...they have the perfect scapegoat...will just blame it on the new law.

When in actuality....the cost of insurance has been going up slower the last 5
years then the previous 5. The only difference now is the employers are passing
the cost on to the employee instead of absorbing and then choosing to blame
anyone but themselves so to the employee it looks like it is going up....while
the employer continues to pay the same or less per an employee...

Tech, I too will end this conversation as I am sure I have 100% more information than you. Your friend with 3000 is not a small business owner! They don't have the same requirements!

You failed to mention the part where you can't lower your employee contribution more than 5% of what you paid last year, which for us is 100%. So, we can't lower our contribution to less than 95%, which is more than we can afford.

AND WHO THE BLOODY HELL DO YOU THINK PAYS FOR THE TAX CREDIT TO THE EMPLOYEE??? THE EMPLOYER!! So we either pay 95% of the insurance, which we cannot afford, or we pay the fees, which include but are not limited to paying the tax credit for all of our employees.

If you care to debate this further, please PM me, let's not further this debate on the current thread. You know absolutely nothing of the current small business owner insurance laws because you have a "friend" who owns a medium to large business. You are making yourself sound like a total ass debating this with me who is responsible for our insurance plan.

If we want to have some anecdotal evidence here - Obamacare has been a wonderful cost saver in my case, enabling me to start my own business. (OK the business is independent business consultant, aka mystery shopper but still.)
My sister was previously uninsurable due to rheumatoid arthritis and can now get insurance. My friend, a new divorcee can get insurance and work part time. (She makes $50/hr.)

mjt9598 said, "My sister was a teacher, and her school district started making teaching positions slightly below full time due to outrageous insurance costs." Well school districts have been pulling that trick for a while now, well before Obamacare. Schools often haven't done a good job of reining in benefit expenses and are now suffering.

To reiterate what walesmaven said, although I personally love them, we try to avoid hot button political topics on this forum. If you do not want to hear other's opinions, don't bring up the topic. If you choose to mention something, even in passing, don't call other posters names and do not yell at them for their opinions when they choose to respond.

This actually translates to our mystery shopping discussions. If you don't want others to express their opinions, then don't ask and don't rant. If you decide to do either or both, accept the responses and move on.

Okay. Before Jacob feels that this is more politics (not different opinions) than the forum accept,. let's say that we have all had our say and turn our thoughts to the season of peace.

From what I read most of the parties to this thread are also being quite jocular with one another on other threads.

LisaSTL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> although I
> personally love them, we try to avoid hot button
> political topics on this forum.

ME TOO!!!

When I used to schedule shops for an MSC, they had a large pool of shoppers in their database who made over $50,000. Most of them lived in major cities in the US and Canada and were professionals or business owners.

LisaSTL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To reiterate what walesmaven said, although I
> personally love them, we try to avoid hot button
> political topics on this forum. If you do not want
> to hear other's opinions, don't bring up the
> topic. If you choose to mention something, even in
> passing, don't call other posters names and do not
> yell at them for their opinions when they choose
> to respond.
>
> This actually translates to our mystery shopping
> discussions. If you don't want others to express
> their opinions, then don't ask and don't rant. If
> you decide to do either or both, accept the
> responses and move on.


From my vantage point it's you (and a few other's) that didn't like hearing the truth about people losing their jobs due to the so-called 'Affordable Care Act' and started taking the pot-shots.

Excuse me? I asked a question. Would you like to explain how that was taking a "pot-shot?"

Well, I was gonna go to bed but I think I might have some popcorn instead.

walesmaven Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Okay, gang. Let's have a little decaf and cake.

I know this will probably start another debate but doesn't the sugar from the cake defeat the purpose of drinking decaf? :-P

Shawn S. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> From my vantage point it's you (and a few other's)
> that didn't like hearing the truth about people
> losing their jobs due to the so-called 'Affordable
> Care Act' and started taking the pot-shots.

From my vantage point, you are taking a pot-shot even within your accusation above.

People, I get it that this is a polarizing topic but any reasonable person has to realize there is an argument for both sides. Delegitimizing someone else's belief or ideals because they aren't aligned with yours is a rather cold approach to a discussion.

For the most part, I bite my tongue and stay out of it when I read overly harsh or emotional comments and chalk it up to the craziness of mystery shoppers (which we all are a bit crazy to take on), but even an occasional reader of this forum surely knows that Lisa is one of the most intelligent and level-headed posters here. I don't think I've ever seen her take a pot-shot, cheap-shot or any kind kind of shot (though I would gladly buy her a tequila shot) at anyone here.

No, it wasn't Lisa taking the pot-shots.


And, as recently discussed in another thread...

Shawn S. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
> From my vantage point it's you (and a few other's) that didn't like <snipped>

The above sentence *should* read, "From my vantage point, it's you (and a few others) who didn't like... "
Besides the corrected word, also note the correctly added comma and the correctly subtracted apostrophe.

I make a little less than $50,000, as does my husband, so I could qualify for these shops I've never seen (we are actually at the bottom of the salaries being paid in both our offices). We live in CA, though, so our cost of living, I am told, is pretty high in comparison to other states with lower income levels.

If you make $25.00 per hour, times 40 hours a week, times 52 weeks equal $52,000
Most trades persons are making that amount or more!

I have done on one day a shop i had to pretend and look as if i earnt enough for a top of the range soprts car followed by one that i had to look poor to ask about a payday loan i tend to have different shoes and coats int eh car incase it happens. it is fairlye asy to pretend to earn a lot of money.

MM1970 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I make a little less than $50,000, as does my
> husband, so I could qualify for these shops I've
> never seen (we are actually at the bottom of the
> salaries being paid in both our offices). We live
> in CA, though, so our cost of living, I am told,
> is pretty high in comparison to other states with
> lower income levels.


I wish New Jersey would realize that the income here doesn't match the cost of living

I am a single woman and make $53k. I know others who make similar and also are shoppers. I don't think this is odd.

Howsoever, beitpronounced that this forum is all about mystery shopping This forum is not about how much money anyone earns shopping, or otherwise. Nor, is it about political leanings. Those topics are taboo, not only at the dinner table, but here.