As I understand it, Dick offered some pittance of funding for Trump’s wall:
That sounds quite a bit different than “offered to build Trump’s wall”, doesn’t it?
Do you imagine that Obama would have “taken the deal in an instant” if the “deal” was only 10% of a single-payer system? I don’t.
First - to clarify, political commentary is not prohibited in Great Debates.
Second - your warning was in General Questions, where discussion is limited to factual matters.
Third - typically questions or commentary about moderation belong in ATMB. To head off any potential hijack I’ve responded to close out the issue.
[/moderating]
Thanks, but that in no way, shape, or form tells me why YOU think that goal is harmful to the poor. It certainly does show a study of some people with regards to job creation and retention though, so there is that.
I think increasing the minimum wage leads to increased unemployment, particularly among the poor. Unemployment among the poor tends to lead to them staying poor, which I hope we can agree is generally harmful.
Might be quicker if you tell us which liberal policies you do support (if any), and if implementation of liberal policies = “failure of government”.
Ok, thanks. So, is it your opinion that the minimum wage should never be increased?
Odd that you think letting employers underpay employees a la WalMart helps the poor - even though your citation doesn’t even mention poverty - but whatever makes you feel comfortable.
The federal minimum wage has been increased 22 times since it was created in 1935. The unemployment rate is currently at record lows in 14 states.
Your fears are misplaced.
I don’t recall having ever described the implementation of liberal policies as “failure of government”. I don’t think it’s a formulation I’d adopt.
As for liberal policies that I support, I skimmed the table of contents of the Democrats’ 2016 platform. I’m not really interested in going point by point, but here’s one example of an area of agreement that seems timely:
Here a few more areas I think we’re broadly in agreement on:
I don’t consider a minimum wage law to be part of the proper role of the federal government. I’d prefer to see it abolished. I feel less strongly about state or local minimum wage laws - particularly if it’s not my state or locality - but I’d probably still mildly oppose them, as they seem to be harmful to those they purport to help, or at least to some of those they purport to help.
Again, thanks for answering. So you feel that abolishing the minimum wage would actually be beneficial to poor people?
I didn’t say you did. That’s why I asked. Though the qualifier does sound like a hedged bet.
On the rest of the points you highlighted, seems like common ground. Of course, devil is always in the details.
This is a case of the moving goalposts, Trump-style. Trump’s budget requested $1.6 billion to begin construction. Graham and Durbin agreed to that as part of their DACA deal, which Trump also says he wants.
Then, when Graham and Durbin propose THE VERY THING THAT TRUMP SAYS HE WANTS – $1.6 billion for the wall and a deal on DACA – the failing Washington Times reports that $1.6 billion is less than 10% of the total, ten-year cost of the wall. The fact that Trump didn’t ask for $25 billion in his own budget request is conveniently forgotten!
And I’m not aware of any conditions, other than your cite from a terrible newspaper saying there were some.
Why are we discussing the minimum wage? Like, did a bill repealing the minimum wage pass in the House, but those dastardly Senate Democrats filibustered it?
No, that didn’t happen. And why? Because no such bill was proposed by the Republican controlled House, much less passed the House.
So it’s not Democratic obstructionism that is preventing the repeal of this draconian minimum wage law that hurts the working poor. It’s something else.
And that something else is the fact that Republican lawmakers need votes, and repealing the minimum wage would be hugely unpopular among voters, even Republican voters, despite being a perennial conservative policy-wonk dream. Conservative pundits and think tank staffers talk about repealing the minimum wage all the time, Republican elected officials almost never do. And so, since you win elections with the voters you have rather than the voters you wish you had, repealing the minimum wage is a dead issue.
And in fact, de jure repealing the minimum wage is kind of moot, since it’s been drastically eroded by inflation over the past few decades. It’s been de facto lowered by a significant amount. In constant dollars the minimum wage is lower than ever. So what exactly is out and out repeal supposed to accomplish?
The whole point is that the last year and a half of Republican control of Congress and the White House has not seen constant Democratic filibusters against conservative proposals. What’s actually happened is that nothing can pass in the Republican controlled House because mainstream stuff is opposed by Freedom Caucus types, and Republican leadership won’t push the Freedom Caucus stuff because it would be electoral suicide. The one thing that was palatable to both were tax cuts for the rich. Tax cuts for the rich got passed, so they’ve got that going for them in the 2018 elections.
I’m not moving any goalposts. Your post said “Dick Durbin and Lindsey Graham say that they offered to build Trump’s wall”. In reality they did not. They offered to fund one year of a multi-year project. Or is it your impression that Dick Durbin and Lindsey Graham were offering some commitment to fund Trump’s wall at the levels Trump wanted for the next 10 years?
Here is another cite:
You still feel that your characterization (“Dick Durbin and Lindsey Graham say that they offered to build Trump’s wall”) is an accurate one?
Wasn’t it a big enough goalpost shift already from “And we’re gonna make Mexico pay for it!” ?
It’s part of a winding hijack that began when manson1972 asked me “Without derailing this thread, could you pick one of the goals from this list and explain why you think it’s harmful to the poor?” and I picked the federal $15 minimum wage.
ETA: I don’t blame manson1972 for the hijack. He was just asking a question. Others continued asking questions on the topic, and I continued answering. The whole thing could serve as a sort of a case study in the evolution of a thread hijack.
Hey, I’m not responsible for what others are asking/saying regarding minimum wage.
My questions are sincere.
We’re still waiting for the explanation, btw.
How could this problem possibly be solved in the future? Ar the American public more split than ever? Who do you see as a unifier in the future?