First presidential debate - September 26: Trump vs Hillary

[KeirAdish]

Define sufficient. Because some people expect to make 800 a week working ten hours total.

I almost asked if we were talking about Congress with your statement, but then I remembered they get paid far more for far less.
But that's somehow okay, but a 40hour/week employee should be forced to live in poverty.

[Dextroden]

Trump is literally providing negative lip service to the topic in question. You'd honestly have to hope he was lying just to come out neutral.

You can say "lip service" all you want, and you may or may not be right. But it would still be hypocrisy to cut education, then tell everyone to go to school. Clinton, at least, won't do that, as she's promising to make it easier, not harder, to do this.

She won't do it. Trump being an idiot doesn't excuse shit.

[Elegiac]

True. But I always get a kick out of left leaning people talking about everyone voting Republican like they're unfit to think or do anything because they chose the other side.

Not everyone. But a large proportion of Republican voters are -not- in fact educated individuals, and barely any when it comes to the Trump bloc.

[Dextroden]

Not sure what this is supposed to mean, but I am going to go by the The Census Bureau calculations:

"These estimates, of course, rely on the oft-debated gender wage gap. The Census Bureau calculates that the median woman in the United States makes 79 cents for every buck paid to the median man. The gap widens by race, with black women earning 60 cents and Hispanic earning 55 cents to every white man's dollar."

Source:
It’s 2016, and women still make less for doing the same work as men
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...e-work-as-men/

That numbers been a farce since the get go and shrunk ever since. Informed.

[alexw]

Because upping the minimum wage for jobs on the way out the door is a stroke of brilliance.

The other side being stupid doesn't forgive yours.

The costs of automation are continually falling. That means the only way to actually keep these jobs is to continually lower the minimum wage to the point where everyone is living in shacks surviving at a basic subsistence level. Even then falling costs will eventually make automation cheaper than workers and those jobs will disappear. Thus raising the minimum wage is irrelevant. You are using a non-argument.

In contrast I see raising the minimum wage as a good thing. It means that society will be forced to confront this issue head on, before we've forced large parts of our population into third world living standards, which is exactly what we are in the process of doing now. Or do you think we are not?

[Daerio]

Still not answering my very easy question. Are you unable, or unwilling, to find evidence that's blatantly in your favor?

I have the evidence, but I don't have the equation ready to compress it for transfer through the slipstream into whatever reality you live in.

[Dextroden]

I almost asked if we were talking about Congress with your statement, but then I remembered they get paid far more for far less.
But that's somehow okay, but a 40hour/week employee should be forced to live in poverty.

Where did I say any clown, Democrat, Republican or otherwise, deserves the pay check they get?

Oh right. Talking points.

[Breccia]

She won't do it.

I agree that she won't do it, but I think we'll disagree that she'll try.

Clinton knows full well there is still most likely going to be a GOP-led House and Senate. She can propose liberal actions all she wants, knowing they won't get through. it would be trivial to "fulfill her promise" by proposing something that has a zero percent chance of success, then pointing to the GOP "no" vote for political points.

[Elegiac]

It's an ugly cycle really. The cost of living is pretty high. So the wages need to meet that cost. Since the cost of wages (labor) is high, companies don't want to have their work done here. Since the companies don't want to be here, there are less jobs. Since there are less jobs, people have less money. Since people have less money, they can't afford the cost of living (comfortably).

So basically we are screwed.

Actually no, we aren't. Rising wages do not in fact generate a net increase in unemployment since the increase in aggregate demand generally makes up for it by the generation of new jobs.

The apparent decline in the actual amount of jobs in any given sector is a function of technological and administrative efficiency. This can be solved by shifts from wage to salaried employment and the introduction of guaranteed minimum income.

[Breccia]

I have the evidence, but I don't have the equation ready to compress it for transfer through the slipstream into whatever reality you live in.

I'll take the reality of FOX News, then. Use them. How many hearings? How many federal agencies? Again, this is evidence in your favor I'm asking you for.

[KeirAdish]

I have the evidence, but I don't have the equation ready to compress it for transfer through the slipstream into whatever reality you live in.

Then perhaps you could post it in whatever format you currently have it and leave it up to everyone else to decipher.
Or just admit it doesn't exist since we're very obviously in the same reality, unless of course you yourself have some form of cross-dimension communication device to speak with us?

[alexw]

I agree, but I think the GOP has a problem with being "educated", "smart", or "prepared" (Sorry Illidan)...

After the debate, all I heard from the harcore Trump supporters was how "Smug", "elitist" and "scripted" Hillary was.

As opposed to a person that lasted all of about 30 minutes before he became unhinged? Not at all prepared for the debate, and seemed to just try to wing it, like he tends to do when he is in front of a camera.

The GOP has a strand of anti-intellectualism running through it, and Trump is the bulwark of that string.

It does. Because education and the broadening of the mind that goes with it tends to make people more liberal. And that means they are more likely to vote democrat.

So if they increase societal education levels they will increase the number of people that vote against them. That's why there is a big anti-education strand running through the party.

[Breccia]

Or just admit it doesn't exist

Oh, it does exist. I asked for the number of Benghazi hearings, a number that does exist. I asked for the number of federal agencies that were asked to investigate the emails, a number that does exist. They're out there. And they're blatantly in his favor.

[Deleted]

Or it could be a legitimate point that the Republicans have difficulty appealing to educated voters because of very significant anti-science and anti-intellectual elements in their platform.

Ha not sure about how republicans appeal to educated citizens. But from my experience the most dumb bimbos you can find on the face of the earth are the so called anti racist liberals.

There is a reason youtube is full of hilarious feminist, liberal and sjw videos. I mean i could have never imagined those people actually exist.
Like one said you must be highly educated (in gender studies or w/e the fuck useless crap they learn) to be that dumb.

[Edge-]

So, now to wonder if Sniffles McGee's (Trump's) campaign will manage to convince him to do some actual debate prep, including making him aware that mean mugging the camera for long periods of time doesn't look very presidential.

[KeirAdish]

Where did I say any clown, Democrat, Republican or otherwise, deserves the pay check they get?

Oh right. Talking points.

You never did, but you did say the following.

"Define sufficient. Because some people expect to make 800 a week working ten hours total."

Only people I have ever heard of that actually want anything like that tend to be in the Government, or higher up in the business world(think CEO's)
The average American wants a livable wage if they work 40 hours a week, I've personally never heard of an argument from the middle and lower class demanding anything like 80$ an hour for minimal work.
That is just the rights rhetoric to try and disenfranchise the desire to have a livable wage.

[Breccia]

So, now to wonder if Sniffles McGee's (Trump's) campaign will manage to convince him to do some actual debate prep, including making him aware that mean mugging the camera for long periods of time doesn't look very presidential.

Also they might take his water away. When one candidate pounds it down while the other takes nary a sip, it's the Nixon debates again.

[mvaliz]

So, now to wonder if Sniffles McGee's (Trump's) campaign will manage to convince him to do some actual debate prep, including making him aware that mean mugging the camera for long periods of time doesn't look very presidential.

...his advisors are the ceo of Breitbart and Roger Ailes... Chances are they'll tell him he wasn't being angry enough at "a lowly woman".

[KeirAdish]

Oh, it does exist. I asked for the number of Benghazi hearings, a number that does exist. I asked for the number of federal agencies that were asked to investigate the emails, a number that does exist. They're out there. And they're blatantly in his favor.

I know the numbers exist, but its hard for him to keep harping on the Benghazi train if he willfully admits that the right wasted all that time and money continuously harping the investigations time and time again without success.

[Elegiac]

Ha not sure about how republicans appeal to educated citizens. But from my experience the most dumb bimbos you can find on the face of the earth are the so called anti racist liberals.

I really could not care less about 'your experience', because it isn't generalisable.

Like one said you must be highly educated (in gender studies or w/e the fuck useless crap they learn) to be that dumb.

"In my experience", most people who bitch about gender studies don't actually know the material that discipline covers.