Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2021 12:49:45 GMT -5
Florida passed a referendum literally last fall for a $15 minimum wage. $15/hr polls well over 50% among Republicans. But yeah, this is a red state/blue state issue. We shouldn't do it because it's popular (although it quite obviously is). We should do it because it's morally right. Wait. Did you really just say this? Glad you finally came around.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Feb 11, 2021 12:54:03 GMT -5
Florida passed a referendum literally last fall for a $15 minimum wage. $15/hr polls well over 50% among Republicans. But yeah, this is a red state/blue state issue. We shouldn't do it because it's popular (although it quite obviously is). We should do it because it's morally right. Wait. Did you really just say this? Glad you finally came around. What?
|
|
|
Post by donut on Feb 11, 2021 12:54:42 GMT -5
Why would that be a sensible inflation adjustment? That assumes that $3.35 in 1980 was the perfect (or I suppose, fair) minimum wage. Why should we assume that? Also what are you using this graph for? It was me who suggested that. I tend to support $15 as being fine. The current wage is $7.25. All I was saying was that even the Republicans should agree it needs to be raised, right? If so, then the discussion should change to "raised how much" rather than "raised or not". Totally, I understood your post. Given inflation, ~$10 is sensible if $3.35 was sensible in 1980. I'm asking why should we assume $3.35 in 1980 was sensible? There's a logical hole in n00b's post.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Feb 11, 2021 12:55:55 GMT -5
Wait. Did you really just say this? Glad you finally came around. What? He's trying to pull a "gotcha" re: our "what is a Senator's job" conversation. The one where he suggested a Senator's job is to "do the right thing."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2021 12:56:22 GMT -5
Wait. Did you really just say this? Glad you finally came around. What? Huh?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2021 12:57:04 GMT -5
He's trying to pull a "gotcha" re: our "what is a Senator's job" conversation. The one where he suggested a Senator's job is to "do the right thing." Not trying to. Doing it. Gotcha.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Feb 11, 2021 12:58:07 GMT -5
He's trying to pull a "gotcha" re: our "what is a Senator's job" conversation. The one where he suggested a Senator's job is to "do the right thing." Not trying to. Doing it. Gotcha. Lol. No you aren't.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Feb 11, 2021 13:00:29 GMT -5
He's trying to pull a "gotcha" re: our "what is a Senator's job" conversation. The one where he suggested a Senator's job is to "do the right thing." Not trying to. Doing it. Gotcha. Yeah, I'm not a Senator the last time I checked. The "we" refers to we as a society, not a specific set of elected officials. I'm not naïve enough to think my concept of "morally right" is shared by more than one or two people in power or that's what does or should motivate them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2021 13:02:55 GMT -5
It boggles my mind that you two think Senators should do whatever their constituents want them to and not follow their own principles and conscience.
We elect people to lead us, not to follow our orders. That is their job. If we don't like their leadership? We vote for someone else next time. OF COURSE we have input. But there are limits to that input.
If 50.1% of their constituents want slavery reinstated? Just go along with it? Hell, if 99% do?
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Feb 11, 2021 13:07:45 GMT -5
I genuinely had to go back and find where you could have gotten that from. I suppose the closest I said was:
which is definitely not the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 11, 2021 13:09:49 GMT -5
It boggles my mind that you two think Senators should do whatever their constituents want them to and not follow their own principles and conscience. We elect people to lead us, not to follow our orders. That is their job. If we don't like their leadership? We vote for someone else next time. OF COURSE we have input. But there are limits to that input. If 50.1% of their constituents want slavery reinstated? Just go along with it? Hell, if 99% do? IMO the way it is supposed to work is that Senators (and other representatives) should take into account: what they promised, information they learned since then, their own judgment, and the input of the people they represent. How they balance those is up to them. They will be judged on this by the people in the next election (if they choose to run again).
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Feb 11, 2021 13:14:10 GMT -5
Like, my two dumbass Senators are both Democrats but I don't trust them *at all* to do what I consider the right thing. Pretty much ever. One of them in particular, if he was my neighbor, I wouldn't let him water our plants if we were out of town. So I have to trust they can be swayed by public opinion because they'll both be in the Senate for life.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Feb 11, 2021 13:27:59 GMT -5
It boggles my mind that you two think Senators should do whatever their constituents want them to and not follow their own principles and conscience. We elect people to lead us, not to follow our orders. That is their job. If we don't like their leadership? We vote for someone else next time. OF COURSE we have input. But there are limits to that input. If 50.1% of their constituents want slavery reinstated? Just go along with it? Hell, if 99% do? God, you're really relying on some straw mans here. If 99% of a Senator's state wants slavery reinstated, and Senator A is anti-slavery, how on Earth is Senator A getting elected in the first place?
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on Feb 11, 2021 14:19:02 GMT -5
Trouble in paradise Darlings?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2021 15:02:41 GMT -5
It's a hypothetical dunc. And notice I started with 50.1%.
These are not strawmen. This is how it went:
1) I claimed we wouldn't need a filibuster if Senators were not so dependent on party lines. 2) I further claimed they should not be poll-chasers, dependent on their constituents for guidance. 3) This is a JOB we elect them to do. THEY need to be the ones doing the job.
COVID is the other perfect example. I do not want the "people" deciding what the appropriate response should be. I want our elected leaders to consult with the experts and then LEAD.
|
|