Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

50k entry level pay

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
As usual with the darwinists, you haven't answered the man's question. Where did matter come from? If not from God, then how did basic matter itself come into existence to eventually "evolve?"


Actually, you might find that many (if not most) scientists -- even "evoluntion"/biological/genetic/etc. scientists -- believe in a higher power. They are smart enough to realize that the two are not mutually exclusive; that, in fact, the "theory" of evolution (for the record: no more a "theory" than is gravity) suggests an elegance beyond human reach. And many have addressed this issue of the origin of matter as the "starting point" where spirituality must play some role (Einstien among them).

I suspect your problem is that these scientists do not happen to believe exactly as you do. That is the problem with fundamentalism (of any flavor): it discounts other viewpoints automatically and without reason. Fundamentalists are dangerous, regardless of which "religion" they represent.
 
Actually, you might find that many (if not most) scientists -- even "evoluntion"/biological/genetic/etc. scientists -- believe in a higher power. They are smart enough to realize that the two are not mutually exclusive; that, in fact, the "theory" of evolution (for the record: no more a "theory" than is gravity) suggests an elegance beyond human reach. And many have addressed this issue of the origin of matter as the "starting point" where spirituality must play some role (Einstien among them).

I suspect your problem is that these scientists do not happen to believe exactly as you do. That is the problem with fundamentalism (of any flavor): it discounts other viewpoints automatically and without reason. Fundamentalists are dangerous, regardless of which "religion" they represent.

Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project is a believer. I find that interesting, since that is the science of defining the basis for human (indeed all) life.

Isn't NOT believing in God a religion in and of itself. People who ardently believe in only in science in a basis for life are scientific fundementalists, aren't they?
 
Care to make your response public, YIP?

500TT mins allows you the privledge of calling USA Jet an "entry level" pilot job? I might agree with you calling it an "entry level airline job," but not entry level to this profession.

Again Yip, you don't hire people without previous on the job flying experience (at least not yet), and your minimums are still double the legal amount required for the position.

Not only that, but your buddy Cliff is bragging about all the Mesa F/O's you're getting, are they "entry level" too? I know you've responded to the contrary to me personally, but I'd like you to clarify the picture of the kind of people you're hiring. To paint the picture of an uneducated blue collar worker getting their dream shot at a shiny DC9, I feel is a little over the top.

You're a smart guy YIP, don't let me sound like I'm doubting that, but I think your previous post was arrogant and hypocritical to "wave the BS flag" on an article like this, and then turn around and use the same tactics to promote your own airline.

USA jet looks like a sweet gig, going from 500TT into a jet and eventually into a DC9 is enough to spark the SJS in plenty of people. You don't have to imbellish the truth, or manipulate people into thinking they're worth less to sell an opportunity like that.

If anything, I think your arguments that people should accept what they're paid (and not overinflate their self worth) are repulsive to applicants in the current hiring market, and you should stick to your argument of paying more than your competitors.
 
starting pay?

Care to make your response public, YIP?

You're a smart guy YIP, don't let me sound like I'm doubting that, but I think your previous post was arrogant and hypocritical to "wave the BS flag" on an article like this, and then turn around and use the same tactics to promote your own airline.
BS flag was for teacher's starting pay. I worked as a school teacher while between jobs, I shopped for teacher's jobs, I know what starting pay for teachers is all about. Some teachers may start at 50k+, but I don't know where. BTW USA Jet starting pay on the DC-9 F/O off the stret in better than 75% of the majors, if in doubt check out airlinecentral.comm.
 
BS flag was for teacher's starting pay. I worked as a school teacher while between jobs, I shopped for teacher's jobs, I know what starting pay for teachers is all about. Some teachers may start at 50k+, but I don't know where. BTW USA Jet starting pay on the DC-9 F/O off the stret in better than 75% of the majors, if in doubt check out airlinecentral.comm.






Teachers in Southern Calif start out at that much...
 
as stated above

Teachers in Southern Calif start out at that much...
S. Cal is not the standard for the US. S. Cal is not the median, it is the upper limit of the range. Do not apply S. Cal to the rest of the US. If want S. Cal wages live S. Cal and pay extra for everthing.
 
Actually, you might find that many (if not most) scientists -- even "evoluntion"/biological/genetic/etc. scientists -- believe in a higher power. They are smart enough to realize that the two are not mutually exclusive; that, in fact, the "theory" of evolution (for the record: no more a "theory" than is gravity) suggests an elegance beyond human reach. And many have addressed this issue of the origin of matter as the "starting point" where spirituality must play some role (Einstien among them).

I suspect your problem is that these scientists do not happen to believe exactly as you do. That is the problem with fundamentalism (of any flavor): it discounts other viewpoints automatically and without reason. Fundamentalists are dangerous, regardless of which "religion" they represent.

Sorry, but this is not the truth. Einstein himself tried to clear this up whenever his quotes were used out of context.


"I have never talked to a Jesuit prest in my life. I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies about me. From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist." "I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one.You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from religious indoctrination received in youth." Freethought Today, November 2004


"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."From a letter Einstein wrote in English, dated 24 March 1954.


"During the youthful period of mankind's spiritual evolution, human fantasy created gods in man's own image who, by the operations of their will were supposed to determine, or at any rate influence, the phenomenal world... The idea of God in the religions taught at present is a sublimation of that old conception of the gods. Its anthropomorphic character is shown, for instance, by the fact that men appeal to the Divine Being in prayers and plead for the fulfillment of their wishes... In their struggle for the ethical good, teachers of religion must have the stature to give up the doctrine of a personal God, that is, give up that source of fear and hope which in the past placed such vase power in the hands of priests." Albert Einstein, reported in Science, Philosophy and Religion: A Symposium, edited by L. Bryson and




"Thus I came...to a deep religiosity, which, however, reached an abrupt end at the age of 12. Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached a conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true....Suspicion against every kind of authority grew out of this experience...an attitude which has never left me." The Quotable Einstein




"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."





 

Latest resources

Back
Top