That’s a pretty ridiculous over the top generalization. Half of the US is not Nazis, lol. This is not a country where 170 million Nazis live.
I mean, unless of course you dilute the definition of “Nazi” so much that it becomes completely meaningless.
Yeah no, most politicians, regardless of wing, do not spend inordinate amounts of time, over years and years, on various forums on the Internet, all using the same username, and all dropping a fuckton of information in their posts that traces inarguably back to them irl.
Hell, considering their average age and PC savvy, I’d bet most of them have never posted on a forum AT ALL.
P.S. Oh, just noticed “Ghouliani”, you’re one of those people, lol. I don’t know how you guys can even write stuff like that without your fingers seizing up from embarrassment. Lack of self-awareness, I guess.
The classic definition is the wage needed to cover the basic needs of the family including things like rent
Rent where? Rent costs vary wildly.
childcare
What sort of childcare, and how many children is it meant to support? Or do you get $X per child? And if so, is there a maximum number of children, where having more won’t get you more money?
transportation
Over what distance? And how, owned vehicle or public transportation? If owned vehicle, what kind of vehicle? Used/new? Price ranges for vehicles also vary wildly.
I would go one further and say that the family needs to not be living paycheque to paycheque.
That entails what amount of extra money? And what do you do about people who willfully choose to spend it instead of saving it? Are you aware that in the US, 1 in 4 of people earning $150k or more live paycheck to paycheck? Just because one has money to save doesn’t mean they’re going to do it.
go out once in a while
Again, far too vague. How often? And how much money does ‘going out’ cost? You’d have to figure both of those out, and multiply them by each other, to ensure this goal is met.
educate their children
Taxpayer-funded public school already covers this. Unless you feel everyone should be entitled to the cost of private schooling?
save and pay for university
University tuition is another massive variable, so you’d need to decide how much is given for tuition. Also, if someone does not go to college, do they not get that part of the money?
and advance themselves.
The vaguest criterion yet. It’s pretty much impossible to say if a given minimum wage satisfies ‘everyone can advance themselves’.
As anyone can see, this “classic” definition is still full of major holes, and not nearly complete enough to even conceptualize a goal such that progress toward it can even be measured. Just saying “living wage” over and over will never get anyone anywhere.
You should link to the actual source this article is pulling everything from: https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/19/politics/kfile-mark-robinson-black-nazi-pro-slavery-porn-forum/index.html
On another note, I have never seen so many receipts on one guy, lol, damn.
There are two types of loans: subsidized and subsidized.
🤔 (lol)
Student loan forgiveness is regressive by definition (those lucky enough to go to college are a minority that earns on average $0.5 to $1 million more over their lifetimes, than those who don’t), aren’t you against wealth transfers from poorer to richer?
There should be no profits, no bonuses, and no dividends until every worker (not employee, it doesn’t matter what your relationship with the company is if they benefit from your labour) is making at least a living wage with full benefits.
To get anywhere, you must define “living wage” concretely. You can use variables of course, but without at least a ‘formula’, “living wage” is just a meaningless, unachievable talking point. You at least have to know what you’re aiming at, to have any hope of achieving it–you’ll never get anywhere just saying “living wage”, because ‘enough to live on’ does not nearly have the same definition for everyone. So, what’s the baseline, in your view?
Example: ‘the living wage should be enough money to afford [list of things] with $X leftover for discretionary spending/saving.’
Uh, no, the primary reason inflation exists is so that there is an economy, lol.
If there was deflation, the ‘optimal’ thing to do with your extra cash would literally be to stuff it under a mattress.
Too much inflation is obviously bad, but deflation is also really bad. A tiny amount of inflation is optimal long-term.
Huh, according to Indeed, the range for Domino’s delivery drivers around me is $18-$25 an hour. How far over minimum wage is your $12?
The cost of living will just keep going up because inflation is necessary in our current, debt based monetary system.
You’re making this sound like it’s something that was arbitrarily decided by powers that be, but the fact is that if there was deflation instead, the economy would come to a screeching halt, because it becomes more ‘optimal’ to hold onto cash under a mattress (since in deflation, it grows in value over time) instead of spending it on goods and services.
A tiny amount of inflation is best long-term, for the whole.
The not-so-subtle misogyny of equating adult women with children, depriving them of all agency, strikes yet again.
It’s not victim blaming because he’s not referring to the same women you are. Like it or not, there are plenty of women (no one is saying it’s all or most women, by the way) who will pursue rich men with the desire for a purely transactional “I’ll fuck you so I can have your wealthy lifestyle and/or a part of your fame.” They’re perfectly content with that arrangement, as are said men.
Johnny Depp’s girlfriends for decades have basically all been women in this category, even now that he’s way past his prime aesthetically. The women accusing Trump of sexual impropriety are, obviously, NOT in this category.
Women are not a hivemind–different types of them can exist in the same society, you know.
He was tried and found guilty of raping a woman.
That’s not true. He’s never been convicted of a sex crime. “Found liable” in a civil court and “found guilty” in a criminal court are VASTLY different, and require VASTLY different standards of evidence.
It’s important to be accurate.
In the US at least, we already pay more every year in welfare programs than we could afford even if we wealth taxed our “very richest” at literally 100%. Nearly $800 billion. Yearly. This is not a solution.
We as a country pay more than enough taxes already, period. It’s the government not spending it efficiently, and not being held accountable when it doesn’t.
As just one example, the US government already pays more per person for healthcare than any other nation on the planet. But how many health categories are we first place in? We put the most in, we should be getting the most out, right?
The majority just give enough to lessen their tax burden.
There is no amount of charity you can give that results in you having more money than if you hadn’t, Kramer.
When was the last time such a thing happened directed at a specific company?
The vast majority of consumers of the vast majority of companies’ products are completely in the dark about the demographic makeup of its workforce, so even the possibility of this being a factor is minuscule.
Companies supporting LGBT matters is a good litheness test
Then they’re often obese as fuck, lol
I’m not the one who wrote out a whole scenario involving a “nightly circle jerk” among Libertarians, complete with sound effects, lol.