Sure, that isn’t hard at all, unless you got your head stuck up your ass.
You question the need to have adequate nutrition, access to affordable (or preferably free, as it is here) childcare, affordable housing and transport and to top it off, you seem to have something against a wage you can actually live on, instead of barely getting by month-to-month.
So yes, you definitely dehumanize a vast majority of the human beings that try to survive on this planet, and you do it in a really ugly way, too.
You are literally lying. I did not say or even begin to imply that. Are you really so shameless to be this blatantly dishonest, when there is a full record of everything I literally wrote right there as evidence of your lie?
[You question the need to have] access to affordable (or preferably free, as it is here) childcare
Again, a lie. I was making a point about how the fact that people have differing numbers of children makes the assertion that ‘a living wage must include the cost of childcare’ overly simplistic. I was trying to get them to actually think their position through and go into more detail about how they think such should actually be calculated. Do you do it based on the average number of children people have? Do you have an amount X that must be added to one’s wage per child they have? And so on.
affordable housing and transport
Again, similar to the above, all I did was ask for more detail because this is too simplistic. “Housing” is something with an EXTREMELY variable cost. And both “transport” and the need for it, also vary wildly from person to person.
I know that general ‘cost of living’ varies from place to place, so a single dollar amount is not appropriate for a ‘living wage’ proposal. But my point, clearly, is that even defining living wage by saying, for example, that part of it should include ‘the cost of childcare’ is STILL not specific enough, to be something you’re even at the level of being able to PROPOSE to anyone. If those ‘pieces’ that add up to the living wage are never defined, how do you expect them to be calculated?
There are hard questions here that ‘minimum wage should be living wage’ proponents NEED to answer, if they expect their cause to go anywhere. All I did was point that fact out. To call that “dehumanizing” is absolutely ridiculous. Insisting that you formulate your proposal to a degree that it’s ACTUALLY ACTIONABLE, is not even on the same planet as ‘questioning the need to have adequate nutrition’ or any of the other bizarre bollocks you accused me of.
So no, shame on you, for having such poor reading comprehension.
Nah, it’s you. Hiding your argument behind semantics and policy is even worse than coming out and saying you think all the poor people should die - at least then you’d be honest, instead of these theatrics.
I didn’t expect you to do anything else than continue that particular charade, and you didn’t disappoint.
You’re not doing anything original though, you sound juuuust like all the other temporarily embarrassed millionaires (and real ones, for that matter) that vote against anything even remotely humane.
Free lunch for the children? Fuck no.
A wage you can prosper on? Think of the shareholders!
Adequate nutrition? Eat cake, or something.
etc.
You may think your arguments are completely normal, but they are anything but, no matter how much bullshit you try to spin. It’s pretty telling that all your arguments so far have been personal attacks and not much else.
After all I’m just one of those poor people that doesn’t know his place, right?
It’s truly pathetic to be this proud of strawmanning someone.
It’s pretty telling that all your arguments so far have been personal attacks and not much else.
LMAO, this literally the exact opposite of the truth! All the personal attacks are coming AT me, not from me.
On what planet is pointing out weaknesses in an argument a personal attack? I’m trying to get you guys to come up with a proposal that has some actual substance. How the fuck do you expect this to actually happen if this is how you react to someone asking you to properly structure your plan?
You will never, ever, effect any sort of ‘living wage’ legislation if you can’t even define it. You won’t even reach the first step of making it a thing. That’s the reality check–you don’t even actually know what you want!
You know who else avoids ever having to change things by saying it’s impossible?
I’ll help you; it’s the ones profiting from the current system and for some reason you’re defending that system and the ones that perpetuate it.
You questioned my reading comprehension several times and I’d dare say that qualifies as a personal attack. The problem isn’t my comprehension, it’s your half-assed rhetoric.
The way you dehumanize people is pretty abhorrent.
…you don’t know what “dehumanize” means, do you?
Cite literally one example of me dehumanizing anyone.
Sure, that isn’t hard at all, unless you got your head stuck up your ass.
You question the need to have adequate nutrition, access to affordable (or preferably free, as it is here) childcare, affordable housing and transport and to top it off, you seem to have something against a wage you can actually live on, instead of barely getting by month-to-month.
So yes, you definitely dehumanize a vast majority of the human beings that try to survive on this planet, and you do it in a really ugly way, too.
Shame on you.
You are literally lying. I did not say or even begin to imply that. Are you really so shameless to be this blatantly dishonest, when there is a full record of everything I literally wrote right there as evidence of your lie?
Again, a lie. I was making a point about how the fact that people have differing numbers of children makes the assertion that ‘a living wage must include the cost of childcare’ overly simplistic. I was trying to get them to actually think their position through and go into more detail about how they think such should actually be calculated. Do you do it based on the average number of children people have? Do you have an amount X that must be added to one’s wage per child they have? And so on.
Again, similar to the above, all I did was ask for more detail because this is too simplistic. “Housing” is something with an EXTREMELY variable cost. And both “transport” and the need for it, also vary wildly from person to person.
I know that general ‘cost of living’ varies from place to place, so a single dollar amount is not appropriate for a ‘living wage’ proposal. But my point, clearly, is that even defining living wage by saying, for example, that part of it should include ‘the cost of childcare’ is STILL not specific enough, to be something you’re even at the level of being able to PROPOSE to anyone. If those ‘pieces’ that add up to the living wage are never defined, how do you expect them to be calculated?
There are hard questions here that ‘minimum wage should be living wage’ proponents NEED to answer, if they expect their cause to go anywhere. All I did was point that fact out. To call that “dehumanizing” is absolutely ridiculous. Insisting that you formulate your proposal to a degree that it’s ACTUALLY ACTIONABLE, is not even on the same planet as ‘questioning the need to have adequate nutrition’ or any of the other bizarre bollocks you accused me of.
So no, shame on you, for having such poor reading comprehension.
Nah, it’s you. Hiding your argument behind semantics and policy is even worse than coming out and saying you think all the poor people should die - at least then you’d be honest, instead of these theatrics.
“Make minimum wage a living wage?”
“How much would that be?”
“You think all the poor people should die!”
If your fingers were any further in your ears, the tips would be touching.
I hope you become willing to use your brain one day.
I didn’t expect you to do anything else than continue that particular charade, and you didn’t disappoint.
You’re not doing anything original though, you sound juuuust like all the other temporarily embarrassed millionaires (and real ones, for that matter) that vote against anything even remotely humane.
Free lunch for the children? Fuck no. A wage you can prosper on? Think of the shareholders! Adequate nutrition? Eat cake, or something. etc.
You may think your arguments are completely normal, but they are anything but, no matter how much bullshit you try to spin. It’s pretty telling that all your arguments so far have been personal attacks and not much else.
After all I’m just one of those poor people that doesn’t know his place, right?
It’s truly pathetic to be this proud of strawmanning someone.
LMAO, this literally the exact opposite of the truth! All the personal attacks are coming AT me, not from me.
On what planet is pointing out weaknesses in an argument a personal attack? I’m trying to get you guys to come up with a proposal that has some actual substance. How the fuck do you expect this to actually happen if this is how you react to someone asking you to properly structure your plan?
You will never, ever, effect any sort of ‘living wage’ legislation if you can’t even define it. You won’t even reach the first step of making it a thing. That’s the reality check–you don’t even actually know what you want!
This is what’s happening here: https://imgflip.com/i/8moz5y
You know who else avoids ever having to change things by saying it’s impossible?
I’ll help you; it’s the ones profiting from the current system and for some reason you’re defending that system and the ones that perpetuate it.
You questioned my reading comprehension several times and I’d dare say that qualifies as a personal attack. The problem isn’t my comprehension, it’s your half-assed rhetoric.