In The News Today...

Quote: rxwine

Btw, I never have claimed they are biological women. Not ever. I don't need to argue people have to fit under one mold to fit into society. That's a form of nazism.

Meh. So overused.

Anyway, I also would not argue that transwomen are women. That is not my position whatsoever. Transwomen are not women in the sense that most people use the word. If transwomen were women, then they wouldn't need the, 'Trans,' qualifier...which used to be seen as impolite...and certain Far Left people wouldn't advocate for the, "Cis," qualifier for non-trans women.

So., whether they like it or not, the Far Left is tacitly admitting that a transwoman is something different from a woman. Having admitted that, they still have the audacity to get all bent out of shape when someone says, "Transwomen are not women."

That said, if transwomen want to live as women and be regarded as such, that's none of my concern. I'm not a mental health professional or any other kind of doctor, so in my view, it's for me to do what is polite in the moment and acquiesce their very simple request that I use she/her in reference to them. Now, if they're going to introduce totally new words that I am supposed to use, then they can f^&* right off, because they are NOT that important to me. I don't say that because they are trans; I say that because no stranger to me IS that important to me. I'm also not going to ever remember who is what if we have 6,000 pronouns to describe people anyway and will just start calling anyone who is not clearly a man or woman, "It," if it comes to that. JK

Quote: rxwine

Btw, I never have claimed they are biological women. Not ever. I don't need to argue people have to fit under one mold to fit into society. That's a form of nazism.

Science is "nazism" now?

Male of female. It is a binary thing and cannot be change.

You do argue they are women. When you call males "she" and insist they can compete in women's sports you are saying they are women. Now, I know you do not stand behind what you say here regarding this but rather say what you want when you want to suit keeping your liberal card so I am not going to keep discussing it.

Quote: AZDuffman

Science is "nazism" now?

Male of female. It is a binary thing and cannot be change.

You do argue they are women. When you call males "she" and insist they can compete in women's sports you are saying they are women. Now, I know you do not stand behind what you say here regarding this but rather say what you want when you want to suit keeping your liberal card so I am not going to keep discussing it.

No, you treat people as equals. So, it doesn't matter if they are scientifically men or women. That's why I argue for trans rights, like anyone else.

Do we have to balance that with other people's rights. Sure.

Quote: Mission146

To your last paragraph: What I mean is the messaging is bad and ignores the Microeconomy in other locations. When conservatives make statements like, "Someone working part-time at McDonald's in High School does not need a 'living wage,'" I don't think anyone on the left is arguing for that.

When you look at the comparison I made in my post, I was looking at an actual, full-time, Assistant Grocery Manager job in San Francisco that says the range is $30-$36/hour, which you and I both know means $30/hour. If they don't get any overtime, then you're in a position where making $30/hour there is roughly the equivalent of making $8/hour in some other places. Except, AGM's at grocery stores almost certainly make more than $8/hour anywhere.

They are kin of arguing for it with the teenager at McDonald's. Notice that they never exclude those folks. San Francisco has made itself a weird sort of cut-out. Due to various factors it is impossible to live there for all but the top 2-3% of the population. Their systems of rent control and zoning make affordable housing impossible. So you have a commuter class of workers. Other places have the same, but SF has it to the extreme. No matter what you legislate wage-wise there will help the matter.

Quote:

In terms of policy, you think that states should handle their own. I would also assume, based on that, you think that states can even kick the matter further down to Counties and Cities, if they wanted, which I would also agree with. That SHOULD be the messaging. The messaging should not be that some high schooler dunking french fries into hot oil does not need a living wage....nobody is arguing that he does.

I would make it so the feds say the states have to have a minimum wage but they can decide it. Make it $1/hr but have guidance so that it would avoid legal issues. As to counties and locals it depends. Lets use PA which we both know about. PA has cities of the 1st and 2nd class that have some privileges that others not. Philly is the only 1st and Pittsburgh the only 2nd class cities. I'd let those two have their own MW. But no reason for Mercer, Bird in Hand, and Lemont Furnace to be allowed to, that just makes it hard on employers.

Quote:

As far as the home schooling, what would you suggest is preventing that from taking place? Also, wouldn't, "Neighborhood home schooling," de facto, just be the same thing as a really small private school?

No. A small private school is an ongoing thing. I am talking home schooling in the neighborhood. Maybe you know math better and I know history better so we split the duties among both of our kids. Maybe you work days this week and swing next while I am on the opposite rotation so again we split duties. When our kids are done with school it is all over. We would not have to let in the problem kid from down the road who throws rocks at our dogs because we just do not want him around and do not have to give a reason. A small private school is not like this.

Quote: rxwine

No, you treat people as equals. So, it doesn't matter if they are scientifically men or women. That's why I argue for trans rights, like anyone else.

Do we have to balance that with other people's rights. Sure.

"Equals" does not mean letting men compete against weaker women because the guy has some kind of mental illness that makes him think he is a woman. Equal means if your sex has to compete against just your sex that is who you compete against.

There are no "trans rights." Trans people do not get special rights.

Saying men should be allowed to compete against women in women's sports is misogynistic.

Quote: AZDuffman

"Equals" does not mean letting men compete against weaker women because the guy has some kind of mental illness that makes him think he is a woman. Equal means if your sex has to compete against just your sex that is who you compete against.

There are no "trans rights." Trans people do not get special rights.

Saying men should be allowed to compete against women in women's sports is misogynistic.

Exactly.


To be more specific, it's reverse discrimination.

They already have all the rights that everyone else has.

Quote: AZDuffman

"Equals" does not mean letting men compete against weaker women because the guy has some kind of mental illness that makes him think he is a woman. Equal means if your sex has to compete against just your sex that is who you compete against.

There are no "trans rights." Trans people do not get special rights.

Saying men should be allowed to compete against women in women's sports is misogynistic.

What special rights? They're not asking to use both male and female bathrooms. They're not asking to be treated as two sexes

Just because there some specific issues with trans rights doesn't mean we don't treat them like other people with unique issues where we can. We try to make allowances for religious claims and handicapped up to a point. Then it starts interfering with the balance of other people or things you make compromises. You probably can't reasonably expect blind people to work an air traffic control job. (as yet, but we do the best we can where we can) We allow people to live as close as they can the way they want. Or that should be the idea.

Quote: AZDuffman

They are kin of arguing for it with the teenager at McDonald's. Notice that they never exclude those folks. San Francisco has made itself a weird sort of cut-out. Due to various factors it is impossible to live there for all but the top 2-3% of the population. Their systems of rent control and zoning make affordable housing impossible. So you have a commuter class of workers. Other places have the same, but SF has it to the extreme. No matter what you legislate wage-wise there will help the matter.

It's all the same thing. That's why the, "Fight for $15," doesn't make sense in a great many places. I think that we fundamentally agree on this issue more than we disagree. My problem is not the Conservative outlook as much as it is the Conservative way of messaging this.

Quote:

I would make it so the feds say the states have to have a minimum wage but they can decide it. Make it $1/hr but have guidance so that it would avoid legal issues. As to counties and locals it depends. Lets use PA which we both know about. PA has cities of the 1st and 2nd class that have some privileges that others not. Philly is the only 1st and Pittsburgh the only 2nd class cities. I'd let those two have their own MW. But no reason for Mercer, Bird in Hand, and Lemont Furnace to be allowed to, that just makes it hard on employers.

I'm not opposed to having a Federal Minimum Wage. As so often gets pointed out, almost nobody is actually making the Federal Minimum Wage, so because of that, we must conclude that the mere existence of some FMW is not, in and of itself, burdensome to employers. I think that we should make the FMW gradually look like $11/hour by 2025, or something, and then index it to inflation thereafter.

I'm opposed to allowing some cities, or counties, to set their own MW, but not others. If a city manages to royally screw things up by setting something ridiculously high, well, it was their city to screw up. Who am I to tell them they can't? We'll certainly see what works and what doesn't for cities of a particular size with other similar demographic factors.

Also, I don't know who the mayors of those are off the top of my head, but I find it difficult to imagine that Republican cities/counties would be particularly inclined to increase the minimum wage to greater than whatever the state is doing. It's going to be a non-problem in many instances.

Quote:

No. A small private school is an ongoing thing. I am talking home schooling in the neighborhood. Maybe you know math better and I know history better so we split the duties among both of our kids. Maybe you work days this week and swing next while I am on the opposite rotation so again we split duties. When our kids are done with school it is all over. We would not have to let in the problem kid from down the road who throws rocks at our dogs because we just do not want him around and do not have to give a reason. A small private school is not like this.

I'd still say that's, de facto, a sort of mini-school unto itself, but it's semantical anyway.

Quote: rxwine

What special rights? They're not asking to use both male and female bathrooms. They're not asking to be treated as two sexes

Well, the, "Non-binary," people might ask to use whichever one they feel like, at any given time.

Of course, we've proven, as a society, that we can't handle the privilege of having separate bathrooms. I'd just make all bathrooms unisex and have a separate one with a locking door for families. Problem solved.