Total posts: 332
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
@3RU7AL
This pie chart https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/styles/medium/public/2016-05/global_emissions_sector_2015.png shows that climate change (or global warming, whichever is the correct term) is caused by at least 25% electricity and heat, at least 14% of transportation, at least 6% of buildings, and at least 24% of agriculture.
So basically, to "fight climate change" we would have to stop using electricity, stop using any kind of transportation, stop building, and stop farming.
That means no electronics of any kind, no TV, no computer, no smartphone, no vehicles except for bikes skateboards roller skates and scooters, no buildings, and no foods that require any sort of farming, such as fruits and vegetables.
Do you need to drive to work which is miles away? Too bad. Gotta walk or ride a bike, even if it's raining or snowing.
Need to call 911 due to an emergency? Nope, 'cause calling 911 emits greenhouse gases, so you gotta fend for yourself.
Do you live in an apartment? Well, gotta move out and demolish it 'cause buildings aren't good fOr tHe eNviRoNmENt!
Also, you can't shower or do laundry either 'cause apparently those too emit greenhouse gases, nor can you have access to any kind of news like a newspaper since those too are only possible due to cutting down trees for paper and using energy.
Seriously, who wants to live like that? That's right. No one. Not even the very climate change activists themselves such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez would want that.
I'm aware that "clean energy" sources such as Solar Panels and Windmills exist, but those things, especially solar panels, have proven to be unreliable. Back in 2018 I stayed in a solar-powered house, and oftentimes the air conditioner would stop, since the solar panel that powered it wasn't getting enough sunlight, and I was left to deal with the 100+ (farenheit) temperatures and sleep in a bed soaking in my sweat. Since the Wi-Fi and surveillance cameras were also solar-powered, those too would often shut down at random when there wasn't enough sunlight. With windmills, you aren't always going to get wind.
Many facilities such as hospitals cannot afford to risk relying on unreliable energy source, since there are people who depend on some machine just to stay alive and that machine needs to be functioning 24 hours a day regardless if there is wind or sun. Police departments and Fire departments need to be able to respond to emergencies with reliable energies like fossil fuels; the last thing they need is a solar panel or windmill failing to operate 'cause there wasn't enough wind or sun, and then getting someone killed because of that.
On top of all that, you have, like you said, the extremely high prices/costs to assembling these "clean energy" sources and making it so that there is enough for everyone in the country, plus the fact that there might not even be enough ROOM on this planet to build millions of solar panels and/or windmills to begin with. If there is a way to utilize clean energy that does not involve sacrificing all those important things I previously mentioned (electricity, buildings, farms, transportation) and also does not involve relying on such unreliable energy, then I'm happy to hear it.
And yes, I do enjoy "eating too often" since I have a higher metabolism, but now I may have to give that up too, and we have to give up precious tax dollars, for a bunch of unreliable solar panels and windmills.
Sources:
Created:
Posted in:
Poor people should be judged based on the life choices that they made that made them poor in the first place.
Created:
Posted in:
I don't like the fact that he along with Barack Obama screwed up our school system with their No Child Left Behind and Every Student Succeeds Acts respectively. Those two are corrupt and have corrupted our schools by spreading their corruption to them.
Created:
Posted in:
Second, climate change. "the greater good" argues that although some people have significant negative economic impacts as the result of environmental policies, the cost of doing nothing is catastrophic to all humans, so even if you or someone you love has been harmed by environmental policies, your suffering is of little concern to "society at large" because statistically, way more people will suffer under the status quo.
10,000 scientists in disparate organizations over 40 years are less likely to be wrong, or dishonest than a handful of non scientists, and fewer scientists with ties to the industry most likely to lose profit if climate change policies are enacted.
You keep asserting that there is probably some major conspiracy and scientists aren’t to be trusted - yet you seem to completely ignore that the opposing side of the argument had even more reason to lie, and is part of an even bigger multi billion dollar industry.
So, assuming that climate change is as serious of a threat as those "97% of scientists" say it is, what exactly are we supposed to do to combat it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
I would say both.
I'm aware that Trump isn't perfect and has made mistakes in his life, like saying some things that people don't like, but he apologized for what was said in the access hollywood tape and is trying to make up for it.
At the same time, ebuc isn't giving any citations or evidence to show that Trump raped anyone. When I ask him to do so, he instead throws insults and me and others.
Something that I think you should know is that, I never learned about Donald Trump nor heard about him until 2015-2016 so I wouldn't know what good or bad things he did in the past. Prior to that, I was never really into politics or news. I never cared that Barack Obama was president at the time and I wasn't concerned with who my next president would be since it just wasn't interesting to me.
I was still in high school at the time, and one of my teachers randomly asked me "Are you gonna vote for Donald Trump in 2016?" I asked "Who's Donald Trump?" He said "Donald Trump is going to try to become president so he can make America great again and I'm gonna vote for him! You should learn more about him."
I did just that. I learned about Trump and talked to various people. I started getting more and more into politics. I heard many mixed opinions about Donald Trump, one of which was the classic claim that he was a racist. It was then that I decided to see if Donald Trump would really make America great again.
I got to know Donald Trump even more by listening to some of his speeches and by watching the 2016 presidential debates. This allowed me to hear both his side and Hillary's side of things, and then, after thinking about it carefully, I ultimately chose to support Trump over Hillary. That's what debates are all about. You listen to both sides and ultimately decide for youself who you agree with more.
Fast-forward to 2019, and I can tell I made the right choice. https://www.promiseskept.com/achievement/overview/immigration/#
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
You will only remain in denial lies
Well you're making wild accusations about Trump without giving any citations or evidence to back it up, so of course I am going to be in denial about it.
no matter how many truths are presented to you. Sad :--(
The only things you're presenting to me are insults, hostility, and hate. No evidence. No citations. No testimonies.
How to you prove rapes that happened years ago?
Oh, so you're admitting that you have no evidence that Trump raped anyone? Okay.
Just look at other behaviors we know happened because we know Trump paid off the women to remain quiet.
Which women did he pay off to remain quiet????
Also, anyone who DOES happen to get raped by someone, whether it's Trump or someone else, SHOULD report it, not remain quiet, even for money. If you don't report wrongdoings inflicted on you and you just let the bad guy get away freely then it's ultimately your fault and not the perpetrator and you deserved it. It's one thing if you report it but the authorities fail to catch the bad guy or find any evidence to convict him, but you should at least try to do something.
This was front page a year or more ago
The front page of what?? YouTube? Wikipedia? Buzzfeed? Wall Street Journal? Westboro Baptist Church? Fake news CNN? EventHubs???
How hard is it to give citations for these things?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Christen--you need to place you ego and immaturity to the side and actually address what I stated
I did, and so did zedvictor4, Snoopy, thett3, TheAtheist, and few others.
Trump is psychotic, malignant narcissist, racist, bigoted, white nationalistic supremacist
He can't be psychotic if he isn't on drugs or isn't having any kind of mental breakdown or temper tantrum.
What exactly did he say that indicated that he was a malignant narcissist?
Which race is he racist towards, and how is he racist? What did he say that makes him a racist?
What evidence is there that he is a bigoted white nationalistic supremacist? Does white nationalist supremacy even exist? Is it even real?
It looks like people these days just blame their problems on white nationalism instead of figuring out how to deal with them. Then they try to use groups like Black Lives Matter to make whites look bad and make it seem as if this imgainary monster called white nationalism supremacism is the reason behind many of our problems today, as explained by DarthVader1 https://www.debateart.com/debates/955/black-lives-matter-brainwashes-peoples-minds-to-make-them-hate-whites
who not only thinks it is ok to grab women strangers by their crotch,
He doesn't think this. It was all locker room talk. He apologized for it too in the second 2016 presidential debate. It was just a harmless joke.
and repeated lie about his payoffs to keep women quiet about his infidelities
What payoffs did he lie about, and which woman is he keeping quiet?
and those many women who have accused of him of rape
but aren't these just accusations? Have any of them accusations been confirmed, verified, and proven by investigators? Has any DNA evidence been found to prove that Trump carried out these acts of rape?
Made the swamp of corruption and self interest greater, not lesser.
Could you define "swamp of corruption and self interest"? How does corruption exist in a swamp?
Surrounded himself with worst not best people
What constitutes "worst" people? Is it someone who commits a murder? Someone who carries out a terrorist attack?
What constitues "best" people? Is it someone who is perfect like the Christian God? Is it someone who everyone loves and agrees with?
and those few that were good bow-out of their own accord when they fianally saw the attempts to steer Trump in a moral direction were not working.
First of all, how do you define "a moral direction"? Secondly, I'm pretty sure Trump knows what he's doing and does not need any kind of steering or hand-holdinga He is mainly trying to focus on securing the border and cracking down on illegal immigration, which is something that even democrats like Barack Obama supported years ago but never bothered to actually address. Trump wasn't joking when he said that many of these people were all-talk and no action.
More turnover in this adminstration than any president ever.More vacancies in his adminstration than any other because most do not want to get near this immoral disaster.
How does this make Trump a bad person?
OMG, what else am I forgetting about this most immoral president ever?
I don't know. Maybe you're forgetting that you're helping him get re-elected without realizing it, as i've explained in my other comment.
Maybe you're forgetting that you haven't given any evidence to back up any of your claims; others had to do it for you.
Maybe your forgetting that just about all of the previous presidents, including Barack Obama and George Bush, have lied too in their lives. I don't see you criticizing them for it though. Only Trump.
Created:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
The so-called "Hate Speech" that you linked to was just a random vague comment made by Dr Franklin about how "EU should die". Dr Frankling wasn't making slurs at any race or religious group.
The so-called "Fighting Words" that you linked to was another random comment where he says "Im supadudz dad". Nowhere did I see him comment about persuading "another user into taking prohibited actions" like the definition of fighting words defines.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Large states like New York and California would decide every election if we went the "one person one vote" route. Small states like Wyoming wouldn't really have a say in who wins the election.
This is an article that talks about the electoral college in more detail: https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/385525-think-we-should-do-away-with-the-electoral-college-think-again
the College doesn’t reflect one-man-one-vote. Well, it wasn’t designed to. The College is a blend of the pure democracy of the U.S. House, with one elector per U.S. representative, each of whom represents about 750,000 Americans today, and our federal system, with one elector for each of the two U.S. senators from each state (plus three for the District of Columbia).We are both a democracy and a federation of states. The Electoral College was designed specifically to prevent the tyranny of big states over small states, as was the U.S. Senate, which affords all states, large and small, equal representation. If we do away with the Electoral College, we might as well do away with the Senate.In 2016, the Electoral College worked precisely as intended. It prevented Hillary Clinton’s 6-million-vote victory in California and New York from cancelling her 3-million-vote loss in the 48 other states.The second knock on the Electoral College is that voters in most states feel their votes don’t matter, that the entire contest is waged in a handful of swing or “battleground” states.Yet, if we did away with the Electoral College in favor of the national popular vote, the election would still be decided in a handful of states — populous states such as California and New York. Even though both of those states are deep blue, the GOP candidate would still fish in their waters, because swinging 1 or 2 percent into the red column would be worth more than swinging 1 to 2 percent in a smaller state. Voters in small states, such as Connecticut, would be permanently and completely disenfranchised.Moreover, candidates would campaign in big media markets (which, of course, are in big states) in order to reach as many potential voters as efficiently as possible. This would favor media personalities and celluloid campaigns. Candidates would never have to meet voters one-on-one, as they do currently in small swing states.
If we took the "one person one vote" path, then it would actually be harder for the president "to represent the whole Nation" because the candidate could simply try to win as many voters an possible in the large states, while ignoring the small states. With the electoral college, you can't really do that. With the electoral college, winning small states is just as important as winning large states. If a place like California has like a trillion people, but all the other states have only a couple thousand people, a candidate could just concentrate on California to get the most votes and forget the rest of the population. With the electoral college, the small states will have just as much power as the large states, so candidates have to work harder to appeal to all of these states.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Yes, Trump was chosen by a minority of USA peoples, ---white racist nationalistic supremacist bigoted cult followers--- along with Putin and Moscow Mitch and immoral evangelicals.
Trump was chosen by members of the electoral college. He got 304 electoral college votes while Hillary got only 227. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election
Trump also won more states than Hillary did. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ec/ElectoralCollege2016.svg
Without the electoral college, New York and California would decide every election. Smaller states like Wyoming wouldn't really get much of a say.
We have a false prophet as USA president and the Chinese Flaun Gong whites see this false prophet as they coming rapture and apocalyspeThese people eat 100's of lies everyday before breakfest and will eat alive for there breakfest who do not cow tow to their belief in lies.Humans, cant live with them and...well actually Earth maybe can live with out them GO figure
Ugh, it looks like TheAtheist was right. Insulting people really is the only thing you're capable of.
It's funny because, by acting like this, you're actually helping Donald Trump get re-elected in 2020 without even realizing it.
This is because, if you expect to convince anyone who supports Donald Trump to stop supporting Donald Trump, acting wildly unprofessional as well as calling them names and accusing them of eating "100's of lies everyday" is NOT how you do it.
Hillary even called us Trump supporters "a basket of deplorables". https://www.huffpost.com/entry/clinton-trump-deplorables-2016-election_n_59b53bc2e4b0354e44126979
It was unprofessional and unnecessary. It would have been better if she simply said that people who support Donald Trump should support someone else, or that people who support Donald Trump are making a mistake by choosing to support him.... but she just called us "deplorables" and yet she still wants to "be president for all Americans" despite being hostile and disrespectful to said Americans, by name calling.
I try to convince people to support Donald Trump by leading by example and explaining the good things that Donald Trump does and/or is trying to do, not by name calling. I try to convince people not to support Bernie Sanders by explaining why his ideologies are flawed, and by educating those people to the best of my ability, not by acting immature and angry.
Even if I fail to convince them, I still give them the utmost respect they deserve.
You can't persuade people to join your side and/or support your cause by verbally attacking them.
By being mean to them, you discourage them more and more from joining your side, so they then join the other side instead.
Imagine if I got into a debate with someone and I told all the voters "hey don't vote for my opponent cause he a completely stupid retarded racist idiot hehehe you need vote for me instead cause I'm a million times smarter and superior and if you don't vote for me then you are also a completely stupid retarded racist idiot and anyone who doesn't vote for me is also a completely stupid retarded racist idiot so you all better vote for me!"
Not only would that would be poor conduct, but they would vote AGAINST me instead of FOR me, simply because I verbally attack the opponent and attack the very voters who I wanted to vote for me. That's kind of exactly what Hillary did. She just verbally attacks Trump and/or his supporters, and expects them all to vote for her, only for it to backfire on her. It's the same thing here.
Gotta show respect to those who you want on your side. If you don't, you're simply helping the other side. You're helping Donald Trump.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Can you at least identify some of the so-called "good threads" and show us where the moderators are "abusing locks"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
@Nemiroff
The quanitity of consumers, and increase in spending, can make a large minimum wage functional in a city,
There are 2 major flaws with this whole idea that we should increase the minimum wage so that poor people can have more money to spend and boost the economy.
Firstly, poor people who start to gain more money should save their money, not simply spend it away carelessly. If a poor person gets an increase in their income, that's great, but why spend away that extra money carelessly for the sake of "boosting the economy"?
Just because you CAN now afford that new expensive exotic wristwatch at the pawn shop, or those fancy brand new 780-dollar shoes due to your wage going up doesn't mean you SHOULD just spend it away on them, even if your wage went up or if it would lead to "boosting your economy". I would instead save that extra 780 dollars to pay off a student loan, pay off a rent, a bill, some taxes that I owe, or something else that may need to be paid off very soon. Poor people seem to have such a hard time understanding this.
If you're poor, then your priority should be YOU, not whatever "economy" that is out there. When I say your priority should be you, what I mean is that, even if you are starting to rise up and out of poverty due to a wage increase, spending away your extra earnings instead of saving them and being more responsible with them would simply push you back down into poverty. Trying to escape poverty, while also making these same bad choices that got you into poverty in the first place, is counter-productive. It's self-defeating. It defeats the purpose of giving a poor decision-maker more money, because they will make the poor decision to spend it away on something that isn't important, or to have a child or two or whatever. Then they will go outdoors, carrying and holding up their signs with "We Work, We Sweat, Put $15 on Our Check!" written on them, and "fight" for higher and higher wages, as if that's going to fix it. When it doesn't, they simply bring out more signs, recruit more protesters, and keep "fighting" for more higher wages, and so on. https://fightfor15.org/2020-candidates-stand-with-workers/
When I often hear that an increase in minimum wage results in an increase in consumer spending, the reality is that there should be an increase in consumer SAVING, not an increase in reckless consumer spending! It's a different story if your rich and/or can easily afford various expensive commodities without risking descending back into the poverty that you escaped from, though.
Another thing that I do not understand is that, if increasing the minimum wage to 15 is supposed to be such a great thing to do, then, why wait until 2025 to do it?
Wouldn't it make more sense to raise it right now, if it's supposed to help people? Why delay it that long? Why keep people poor for several more years before you finally rescue them from the depths of poverty with this wage increase? What if I am so poor/malnourished that I cannot afford to wait that long for my wage to go up?
Why is it that people are still poor, even though we've BEEN increasing the minimum wage for many years now. Why haven't people escaped poverty yet despite minimum wages going up? Why are so many people still homeless to this day? The reason is because it takes MORE than just a wage/income increase to get out of poverty, which is another thing that poor people, as well as 15-dollar-minimum-wage advocates like Bernie Sanders, don't seem to understand. If all it took was just a wage increase, then people would have been out of poverty long ago, but that's not all it takes. It also takes SMART DECISION-MAKING which is what so many poor people are lacking. Here are 2 youtube videos talking about the various bad choices that poor people make compared to the smarter choices that the rich make.
Furthermore, why stop at 15? Dustryder's data already shows that the minimum wage would have to be at least around like 54 dollars an hour to get everyone in New York out of poverty, and, again, even if you did do that and raise the minimum wage to that amount, those people whose wages went up would likely fall right back into poverty anyways if they don't make better life choices.
The second major flaw has to do with this statement made by dustryder:
The first option is best when you carefully examine what is a reasonable increase to the minimum wage. It results in an immediate increase to an income
While it can result "in an immediate increase to an income" it doesn't ALWAYS result in that. It can also, just as easily, result in your hours being reduced to compensate for the wage increase, your prices going up, and/or you getting fired from your job since your employer is now unable to afford to pay you the new wage without going out of business. When that happens, you won't HAVE any extra money to boost the economy with, since you will just have no money and/or no job.
Even if children aren't the problem, it still doesn't make sense to have children when you can barely afford to take care of yourself. They still cost money to raise, to feed, etc. It's bad enough that a person doesn't make a "living wage" even with 2 adults and no kids, so why make matters worse by having children which will cost you dearly, and which you can't really afford?
Created:
Bsh1 made an interesting comment about how both the left and right ideologies can be bad if taken too far. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/2052/fuck-the-violent-left?page=5&post_number=105
Created:
Posted in:
You people are hating on Trump over small issues. Get over it. I'm pretty sure all of the previous 44 presidents screwed up too, and their mistakes were all ignored.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
I don't get it. What exactly are you so upset about?
Like TheDreadPirateRoberts said, he was Chosen to be our president over Hillary Clinton.
All of the previous 44 presidents were also "Chosen Ones" so what's the problem with Trump being a chosen one too?
Are you just mad that your favorite candidate lost the 2016 election?
What's with you referring to me and anyone else who supports Donald Trump as "trumpist cult followers" anyways? I chose to support Donald Trump because he is improving the country, cutting down on illegal immigration, and bringing jobs. Nobody paid/bribed me to support him, and I surely don't need a cult for that either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
It's really a human thing... people hate thinking there are levels and that someone may be above them.
How do we know that "there are levels"? What exactly are "levels" supposed to even mean in this case? If these so-called levels that you speak of do exist, then what level are we? Level 2? 3? Is there any way we could level up or is there some magic curse keeping us stuck at our current level? What's the highest level anyone can be? Level 100 like in Pokemon? Does one need to travel to some secret dungeon in Mexico and slay some mythical beast to gain experience and level, like in those MMORPG games?
How do we know that "someone may be above" us? What does it mean to "be above" us anyways? Above us how? Like in physical location? Above us in terms of some kind of skill? Above us in terms of some kind of inherent trait?
Created:
Posted in:
2) Any fraud doesn't result in you losing money immediately, like it would with a debit card
This seems to me like the only upside to using a credit card.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
@RationalMadman
@bsh1
What's this...
To an admin that has completely disregarded me, put a bastard in power who unfairly rigs enforcement of rules against many including me and in the favour of a select few? Yeah, that's also why I stopped the Patreon donating after 2 months. I owe Mr. Mike nothing.
....all about?
When and how did RationalMadman get "disregarded"?
What "bastard in power" are you all talking about?
What "enforcement of rules" was unfairly rigged?
What "select few" what it rigged in favor of?
Who is Mike??????????????????????????????
Created:
Posted in:
In that case, just turn down the volume and keep it low, or go to a quieter place or something.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Wrong, an individual can't prove God exists, this takes the practice of spirituality, which is a cultivation. It's not a good starting point for atheists to deny God because they haven't connected with that reality, sorry dude.
Where does the burden of proof lie? Is it the believer's responsibility to prove to the non-believer that God exists, or the non-believer's responsibility to prove to the believer that God doesn't exist?
An atheist worldview is limited by materialism, they don't have any real say in the matter lol.
And.... a theist's worldview is limited by a 1000+ year old book called the bible/quran, and by lack of evidence.
Theism is belief based on the corresponding evidence.
What "corresponding evidence" is there that God exists?
Science is universal, it doesn't have any say on the reality that God exists.
Neither does religion.
Are you lost? or are you trying to make a point?? The evidence that correlates with spirituality is overwhelming, anyone who ignores it is missing the mark.
I think we're both lost about what your so-called "evidence" is all about, and also trying to make the point that "spirituality" makes no sense.
Created:
Posted in:
There are far too many disagreements on climate change for us to figure out exactly whether or not it is a serious threat and/or what we can do about it.
People disagree on what exactly is causing climate change. One side says humans cause it, but the other side says it's existed for centuries.
People disagree on whether or not evidence for it actually exists. One side says there is scientific evidence for it, but the other side refutes it and says it's false/inaccurate.
People disagree on what to do about it. I say we need to just clean up more, and zedvictor4 apparently doesn't like the idea of cleaning up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Your "NBC News Report" doesn't say anything about Trump claiming that he is the Chosen one. I literally went on that site, pressed Ctrl F and typed "Chosen"
nothing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
Since I live in New York State, I went to the website that you linked and chose "Living Wage Calculation for Queens County, New York" and got this: http://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/36081
Assuming that "their calculations" are correct, and that no errors were made, if you look at the "1 Adult 3 Children" column on the "Living Wage" row, it is showing that 1 adult with 3 children requires a minimum wage of at least 54 dollars and 98 cents, and that is the highest wage number on that list.
We have 3 options to try and address this problem. We can raise the minimum wage to 54 dollars and 98 cents in order to accommodate for that 1-adult-3-children group and also have enough to cover everyone else.
The second option would be for these people to simply get better educations and/or better-paying jobs so that they can earn enough. I know people who are "single adults" with 3 children who have jobs that pay far more than 54 dollars and 98 cents per hour, which allows them to afford this.
The third option is that we can simply teach people to make better life choices and NOT have that many kids so that we wouldn't need to artificially force the minimum wage up in the first place.
The problem with the first option is that, whenever you raise the minimum wage, especially by that much, businesses that can't afford to pay that much will have to either fire employees to compensate, raise prices and push the wage increase to the consumers, or go out of business. Makes me wonder why people are fighting for only 15 dollars an hour. Why stop at 15 when they're actually going to need a lot more money than that anyways, especially if you look at "1 Adult 1 Child" and "1 Adult 2 Children" which require a minimum of $31.99 and $41.54, respectively? Not to mention you risk hurting the very people that an increase in minimum wage are supposed to help, since they could lose their jobs outright, and have no money.
The second and third options seem like the best ones to me. In fact, it looks like you can save the most money by having just "2 Adults" with no children, based on what their data, on Queens New York, shows.
Living wages can and do change, based on the decisions that we make. If I am an adult with no kids, then my living wage, according to the data, will be 17 dollars and 46 cents. If I then make the decision to get married, it will go down to 12 dollars and 10 cents. If I then have a kid, it will change back up to 31 dollars and 99 cents. You also have to take into the account the number of hours that I work and how many days off I take for vacations and whatnot. Those too can affect my living wage and/or cause it to change. If living wages do not change, then shouldn't it stay at 17 dollars regardless if I have kids or not, or regardless what decisions I make?
This document that I found on google lists the 5 main "basic necessities" as Food, Shelter, Clothing, Health Care, and Education. https://humanityparty.com/assets/five_basic_necessities_of_life.pdf
If you have these 5 main basic necessities, then you have the basic necessities that you need. The only problem is that a lot of people can't really fully agree on what all of the basic necessities consist of. For example, some people may say that having a car or a smart phone should also be included in the list of things that count as basic necessities while others may very well find having just enough money to be "living in a box" and having just a ramen noodle every day to be a living wage. Any one of them could be right or wrong. I want to say that "basic necessities" are subjective, but aren't at the same time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@linate
@dustryder
I disagree with this statement made by dustryder:
To be clear, the US minimum wage is already less than half of the US living wage. That is, the minimum amount you need to provide for basic necessities.
I believe this youtuber does a great job debunking this silly concept of a "US living wage". https://youtu.be/M-c9OW6zUtg?t=285
My favorite part of the video is when he says, and I quote:
What is a living wage? How much is a living wage pay per hour? I never been paid a living wage? I don't make a living wage now, 'cause I don't know what that is really, like what is that really? I make enough money to be able to pay for my bills that I have, but a living wage is a term that makes no sense. It has no basis in reality, because the money that you need to be able to live and sustain yourself; it all depends on what you consider "living and sustaining yourself" and it also depends upon your personal situation. It also depends on your geographic location. Like prime example: I could live in a house in the ghetto and I could live by myself. I have no debt. I have no bills other than just my household expenditures, alright, and I don't require much to survive. I may work from home. I don't need a vehicle, so I don't have a vehicle. I can ride the bus or catch the Uber if I need transportation, and I don't really require much food to sustain myself. I might eat 1 meal a day.
So my living expenses would be drastically different than somebody that lives right next door in the same kinda house or even an apartment complex. We could live in the exact similar apartment complex, pay rent to the exact same people, but yet my living expenses would be less than theirs if they have a bunch of kids in the house. They got a person, an adult, that does not work. Let's say you got a husband and a wife. The husband is the one that makes the bread (money) he is the one that brings the bread home. The wife does not work, and they got 3 or 4 kids running around.
Better yet, even better example. You got a single mother with no husband, and she is the person bringing all the money home. She has 4 kids all under the age of 10, right, and she has crazy debt, you know, she got student loan debt, credit card debt, all kind of debt. So the money that she needs to live is different than the money I need to live even though we live right next door to each other, so we go out for the same job, how do I sit there and say I need a living wage, and she says she needs the same thing, and the money that we need is different to sustain ourselves, and then it also depends on what you think is enough money to sustain yourself, because I may just say that all I need is enough to be able to eat food and pay my household bills, but somebody else may say I need money to eat food, pay my household bills, pay for car, pay for kids private school, pay for kids clothes, pay for kids this pay for kids that, right.
The amount of money that we need to survive is different, even if you same the same kind of family situation going on. A single mother with 3 kids right next door to a mother that has the same situation going on at her house. She may think that the money that she needs to live is different than that of the other person. Does that make either one of them wrong? Not necessarily.
This is the problem with dustryder's claim that "the US minimum wage is already less than half of the US living wage." The so-called "minimum amount you need to provide for basic necessities." varies from place to place and from family to family, and the people claiming that the entire United States needs to ensure that everybody gets a full living wage, including dustryder and linate (the original poster), often don't take that into account.
Like the youtuber Anthony Brian Logan said, if I choose to not have kids, to save my money, to eat only 1 or 2 meals a day, to ride a bike to work or walk there instead of taking a car, to avoid as much debt as possible, to avoid spending on unnecessary things that I don't need like decorations, and live in a cheap home, then my "living wage" will be much lower, and I could actually afford to live decently with my minimum wage, as opposed to someone next door who makes the poor decision to have kids at an early age (which will cost them more money), chooses to purchase fancy things that they don't need (which costs them more), chooses to own an expensive car (which costs them more), and makes poor life choices which results in debt (costing them more).
So yeah, dustryder's claim that "the US minimum wage is already less than half of the US living wage." would be true ONLY for people who spend poorly and make poor choices, but not necessarily for someone like me who makes better choices and does not put himself through the trouble of having to blow away money on a child or something.
Here is a youtube video about various millennials who struggle to pay for living expenses. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdKbNrANrJs
Notice how many of them have made the terrible decision to purchase useless decorations, costing them money, and one of them even purchases a pet cat, which has to be fed and nurtured, costing them more money, resulting in them needing a higher "US living wage" than someone like myself who knows how to make smarter life choices. https://i.imgur.com/7CK7Yx6.png
Created:
Posted in:
This is a pretty interesting youtube video talking about why minimum wage isn't so great. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-c9OW6zUtg
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgmi
if you have the bottom making beans, then people close to the bottom also make beans plus one, such that they won't spend money on an array of goods and services, driving the economy.
What does "the bottom" mean exactly? Bottom of what?
What does "making beans" mean? You meaning like farming beans?
What does "people close to the bottom" mean? Bottom of what??
What is making "beans plus one" supposed to mean? Plus one what?
Lastly, if you're in poverty, why would you want to "spend money on an array of goods and services"??? That's the LAST thing any poor person should be doing. You've got to SAVE your money, not spend it all away in a reckless manner for the sake of "driving the economy"!
Created:
The only problem with having an age limit on alcohol is that you can simply have an older person buy alcohol and give it to an underage'd person.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Okay so what happens when someone commits a heinous crime? Don't they then lose that so-called "unalienable" right to "Liberty" and have to go to prison?
What if you have the right to "Life" but you break into somebody's home and threaten them. Aren't they legally allowed to kill you in self-defense, making you lose your right to life because you were irresponsible and tried to put another life at risk?
Does "-all humans-" include those who are irresponsible and those who abuse their rights?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
So I guess there aren't any unalienable rights then? Or there are unalienable rights, but only to specific people?
Created:
Posted in:
This is a very relaxing song. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o87hNhgfZvI Fairy Tail Theme (Violin Cover) Taylor Davis
Created:
Posted in:
bullying and harassing anyone that dared to not praise him overtly
You mean like this person who claimed that they should be called "master"? https://www.debateart.com/debates/1179/the-united-states-would-be-better-off-without-black-people
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
I don't know. Have you heard the saying, "with freedom comes responsibility"?
Google defines unalienable as "unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor."
but what good is having "unalienable rights" if you aren't responsible?
What good is having a second amendment right to bear arms if you can never pass a basic background check or if you are deemed unfit to own a gun by the government due to having criminal records or being on drugs?
Rights have to be earned and maintained. If you commit a horrible crime and are sentenced to death, it means you have lost your "right to life".
Rights are for the responsible.
Created:
Posted in:
I don't know enough about this net neutrality thing, other than that it was repealed in 2017.
Created:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
You said:
Example:Having a pro-life position yet be for the death penalty.Saying everyone should have equal rights yet not have the same position when it comes to fetuses.Irrationality defending your side instead of bringing out rational critiques.
And you listed "Irrationality defending your side instead of bringing out rational critiques." as an example of being hypocritical, right?
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
The last time I took an I.Q. test, I scored 120 to 125.
Created:
Posted in:
If you hold a stone in your hand and let it go it will fall to the ground,
This is 'cause of gravity.
but if you hold a bird and let it go it may not land for minutes, or hours.
This is 'cause.... birds fly? Also, I don't think any bird can fly for hours without landing. Birds can and will eventually get tired of flying.
Created:
Having a pro-life position yet be for the death penalty.
What if I am pro-choice and against the death penalty?
Saying everyone should have equal rights yet not have the same position when it comes to fetuses.
Does "everyone" include:
criminals?
illegal immigrants?
foreigners?
aliens?
animals?
sub-humans?
insects?
bacteria?
fetuses?
This is why I think people, including myself too since I am guilty of this too, should be careful with words like "everyone" because I'm not sure we would all agree that a cockroach should have the "intrinsic right to life" "the right to bear arms" "the right to free speech" "the right to a free education" and "the right to free healthcare" the same way people do.
We often use words like "everyone" "everything" and "every-whatever" poorly.
Also, when it comes to "rights," it's important to remember that certain rights can be LOST. If a criminal commits a mass murder with a gun, then they lose their second amendment right to bear arms. If someone slanders and defames, then they lose their first amendment right to free speech and are legally penalized. If an unborn baby puts too much burden on it's mother, then it could lose it's "right to life" before it's even born.
Irrationality defending your side instead of bringing out rational critiques.
Irrationally defending your side isn't hypocritical. It's stupid, yes, but not necessary hypocritical.
Created:
Posted in:
I don't know for certain whether climate change is real or not, if it's actually a threat or not, or if it's becoming one. I do think that we can do basic things like keeping out environment clean, avoid littering as much as possible, throw out garbage, avoiding hoarding, and embrace minimalism. A clean environment would be the answer to stop climate change. We don't need fancy stuff like "Green New Deal" to fix our world. We just need to clean up more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7rewjFNiys
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Didnt happen? Get real dude
Or, you could get a citation like I asked. When and where did Trump claim that he was a chosen one? In a youtube video? On twitter? On facebook?
and get off your immorality drugs
I don't do drugs.
as your playing mind games with this truth is unbecoming of any human with moral integrity.
Yeah I sure am playing mind games with "this truth" that you WON'T CITE.
Trump has told more lies than any other president, of for that matter any other politician EVER!
Have you counted the number of lies that Trump told, one by one, and then compared it to the number of lies of the other presidents to confirm this, or are you just making this assumption?
Besides, I'm pretty sure every president has lied at some point in their lives. What matters is how bad the lie was and how it impacts the United States.
The "Chosen One" now wants to promote his golf resort for the next G7 meeting
Here, you've committed a logical fallacy called Begging The Claim. Saying that 'The "Chosen One" now wants to promote his golf resort for the next G7 meeting' assumes that he is the chosen one to begin with, or that he even claimed that he was the chosen one.
Created:
What are examples of such types of speech?
This forum's Rules and Code of Conduct define hate speech as "Slurs or invective against an entire class of people (such as racist, sexist, homophobic, islamophobic, transphobic, ageist, and ableist slurs, or slurs against religious, political, ethnic, or national groups)"
So, as long as you're not attacking an entire class of people with insults, you aren't committing hate speech.... but then what about Dr.Franklin here saying that "Liberals are Stupid"? Isn't that technically hate speech since a group of people are being insulted? https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/2017/liberals-are-stupid
It's hard to tell. Since he hasn't been punished by the moderators, I guess that they've decided that it isn't hate speech to say that, then? I don't know. I just treat people the way I would want to be treated. I avoid calling people names as much as I can, because I know the pain that arises when it's done to me.
Created:
Posted in:
All those awful babies trying to scale walls
A baby can't scale a wall by themself, so they simply have an adult put them on their back and carry them over.
Created:
Posted in:
Here is my major problem with solar panels, and other forms of so-called "clean energy"
In 2018 I went with my family on a vacation to the country of Jamaica. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamaica
We stayed in this remote house for like a week, and it was GOD-AWFUL. This is because the entire house was powered by a big solar panel on the roof. The way this solar panel was designed was that it would absorb sunlight and then convert that sunlight energy into power, and then transfer it into a big battery. There, it would be stored as regular electricity and then later used to power the various electric stuff around the house. Pretty cool, right?
So what was the problem?
The problem was that the solar panel and battery were programmed to "prioritize" certain electrical appliances over others. In other words, once the battery's power went down to like 75%, it would stop giving power to the air conditioner, the surveillance cameras, and the Wi-Fi that allowed us to access the internet. It would do this in an attempt to conserve energy for the more "important" stuff like the TV and refrigerator. It's kind of like how when you are in a very cold area for too long, your fingers and toes become numb and your body stops providing heat to those body parts and instead focuses on vital organs.
I don't know if any of you have been to Jamaica, but the average temperature over there is at least 90 degrees ALL YEAR long, and on top of that, it never snows or gets cold, except during heavy rain. The temperature also often rises up to like 100 to 109 degrees.
So when the air conditioners shut down, it was a hot and miserable experience. Within minutes of sleeping, my bed was literally soaking in sweat. It also didn't help that I wouldn't always get sunlight to power up the house to above 75%, since it could be cloudy, dark at night, or raining, resulting in less power going to the solar panel.
I couldn't even open my windows to let some fresh air in and let the wind blow into my bedroom to cool me down, because scattered around the outer perimeter of the house were wasps, moths, flies, mosquitoes, flying cockroaches, and spiders, all of which wanted to come inside and harass me. The ones that sting are really dangerous, and even the ones that don't sting, and instead just fly around, tend to buzz and make noise. Imagine trying to sleep when you keep hearing this over and over. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcuKTheCcsE
My parents left their window open and a wasp came in and stung 'em while they were sleeping. One morning I left the bathroom window open and left the room, and when I came back, I KID YOU NOT, there were flies and ants trying to figure out how to operate the shower, toilet, and sink! I decided to teach them how to do so..... by washing them all down the drain! HAHAHAHA!
Just typing about these bugs alone makes my skin crawl and itch though, so I gotta stop...
But yeah, solar panels are simply unreliable energy sources. I could understand a third-world country like Africa using solar panels, since it's technically better to have unreliable energy than to have no energy, but in the United States, we have people in hospitals that need machines just to stay alive. Police, Paramedics, and Firefighters depend on their electronics in order to address emergencies. No way can they afford to utilize "clean energy" for their jobs, since doing so could end up putting lives in danger since their solar-powered electronics could fail when they need it most. If our military relies on unreliable energy sources, it could put our country at great risk, since they could fail when we need them most.
Clean energy is expensive, unrealistic, and unreliable.
Created: