stonerboner

If you think caring about one tragedy means ignoring another, that’s a ‘you’ problem.

People who actually care about human suffering don’t play the ‘whataboutism’ game—because it’s not a contest, it’s a crisis. Your deflection isn’t advocacy; it’s just lazy, performative outrage disguised as moral high ground.

*bottom 20%

Because it’s not okay to write off underserved and disadvantaged as “silliness.” How we treat the least of our people says a great deal about how “good” the economy is.

The least paid full time worker should be able to live on the federal minimum wage. They can’t. That should be a huge red flag to anyone who A) cares about people in general and B) understands that corporate profit doesn’t equal a good economy.

And yes, people should be able to waive the salary they are entitled to and take $1 instead, of their own volition. But that has nothing to do with the question: how could the lowest paid full time wage be the best measure of anything in our economy? It absolutely the best indicator of our humanity and empathy (or lack thereof). You could look at the median of the bottom 2% but it wouldn’t point to our failures we need to fix as clearly as looking at the lowest paid full time salary.

That will not suffice

Yes, we are 100% looking at people working 40 hours a week for this particular insight. The basis is, our economy is only baseline good if the least paid full time worker makes a living wage. Any other answer is a fail. Incentives for employers to hire staff from traditionally underserved persons can absolutely be affected through better means than giving them less of a share of their work.

As well, the question above that spawned this little thread was: Why would the lowest full time annual wage be the best measure of anything to do with an economy?

How the lowest paid full time worker is compensated is a keystone data point. The current full time yearly pay for a standard worker (should be ANY full time worker if the economy was good) is $15,080 a year. Before taxes and workers comp and health insurance. Not nearly enough for someone to survive, nonetheless better their situation. The underserved populations are getting even less currently, which should really grind your gears.

It is not the only data point that’s important, but to suggest it’s useless as a data point is ridiculous

Idk, I’d counter that the paperboy or special needs cashier would be a good starting place because they deserve the same quality of life for their work as others 🤷‍♂️ why should they be paid less and just ignored in the data “because they’re problematic?” Keep in mind that we are discussing full time wages.

The least a full time employee can make is absolutely an indicator of how good the economy is, as it impacts if there’s opportunity or not for the worker to better themselves. If the full time employees on the bottom couldn’t possibly work to the middle without additional assistance, the economy is shit.

Strawberry doesn’t appear to include a visualizer?

Lmao “far left extremism” is somehow contextually different than the phrase OP used (which btw is the context for this whole thread) than “extreme liberal?”

Laughably, you think your quibbling got you an out as far as providing proof of your claim. Please show me where Far Left Extremists™️ banned or burned books in any way near where Conservatives have. My proof is below, let’s see yours?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_banning_in_the_United_States_(2021–present)

You can’t skeet on my ex, I trademarked that ass ;)

I can attempt something and succeed. Or I can attempt something and fail. Attempt does not imply it didn’t work

I never said it didn’t 😆