So to be clear you “know what illiterate means” and you’re gonna double down on how you think I’m illiterate?
Despite all the evidence to the contrary?
It was not a rhetorical question. You either don’t know the definition, you are lying when you continue to press on it, or you’re a fucking idiot.
Not for most people, no.
Wow ok then. Didn’t realize you knew so much about most people. Thanks for the evidence.
That you can’t read for shit. Either that, or you’re arguing in bad faith. I’m on the fence.
Man, you just fuckin love irony/projection huh?
Yes. Let me ask you a question: do you think all starting teachers die? Or live in the street?
I don’t. Do you think that either of these would be necessary for it to be a non living wage? Do you think all people that work for minimum wage die or live on the street? Or do you think that minimum wage is a living wage?
Don’t answer, this is another rhetorical one, it’s supposed to make you think about something you’re not getting!
Lmfao. Got me there! Was that pretty confusing for you without the apostrophe?
You still haven’t made a case why any of them are ignorant. Using the word doesn’t make it so.
I have, but I’ll say it again.
It’s ignorant because the jobs that give back to humanity and pay a livable wage are hard to get. You just choose to believe that they are not.
You also seem to be willfully ignorant of what a livable wage means.
Which is why the reductio ad absurdum was mine
If this is what you were trying to do, you did a shit job. I even deconstructed it for you.
More movement of the goal posts I see… whatever happened to food and shelter?
This isn’t moving the goal posts. This is the literal definition of a livable wage.
What is your definition?
What’s your point? Why shouldn’t I generalize?
Loads of reasons, but most relevant here is that you can make some very misleading but technically true statements when you do so.
For example:
Not all homeless people are poor.
Not all doors can open.
We don’t know the financial situation of each teacher so we can only speak in general terms.
Technically true, but when we’re talking about the typical case, highlighting that there are exceptions is pointless.
The fact that teachers are underpaid is something I already addressed in the comment you responded to. So I don’t know what you’re trying to argue.
You dont? I’m trying to argue that many many teachers don’t get paid a living wage.
Are you illiterate or something?
And for the umpteenth time: it’s not about the teachers, or the nurses, or whatever job
It is though. The fact that these jobs don’t exist, or are hard to get, is what this entire conversation is about. That, and you trying to derail it to shit on me.
The premise was that the jobs were hard to find. They are not. Period.
The premise was that the jobs that are both fulfilling and pay decently were hard to get. And they are.
Removed by mod
So to be clear you “know what illiterate means” and you’re gonna double down on how you think I’m illiterate?
Despite all the evidence to the contrary?
It was not a rhetorical question. You either don’t know the definition, you are lying when you continue to press on it, or you’re a fucking idiot.
Wow ok then. Didn’t realize you knew so much about most people. Thanks for the evidence.
Man, you just fuckin love irony/projection huh?
I don’t. Do you think that either of these would be necessary for it to be a non living wage? Do you think all people that work for minimum wage die or live on the street? Or do you think that minimum wage is a living wage?
Oops my bad. What was the thing I’m not getting?
Removed by mod
Sorry so it was a joke or not?
Or is this a joke now?
I really did. Thanks for answering the question both the first time, and the second time when you copy/pasted it.
Weird thing to do for questions you thought to be rhetorical.
I guess I could have been nicer when replying to your ignorant comment.
This is not an example of moving the goal posts. This was a clear and obvious example of showing you how bad your argument was.
Specifically, it’s a logical fallacy called denying the antecedent.
Eg if A then B
DOES NOT imply that
If NOT A then NOT B
In many many parts of the us, this is simply not a living wage. It’s borderline poverty.
https://livingwage.mit.edu/
Removed by mod
You did. You also doubled down yet again with “none that I’ve seen”. Am I misreading that or was this another hilarious “joke?”
I’ve understood every word you’ve said. You’re just wrong.
There was and is. The comment were referring to is the one where you said “it’s not that hard” right?
That ignorant as fuck comment?
So to be clear, everybody who is not dead or homeless is making a living wage? Is that your argument?
This appears to be your standard. Not mine.
If I am misconstruing your standard, what is your standard?
Mine is that they should be able to afford reasonable shelter and food without having to find roommates or other external sources of income.
That is what I used to attack your argument, yes.
Why do you keep generalizing it to “all”? Where did “all” come into the conversation?
https://www.erstrategies.org/news/average-teacher-salary-is-below-the-living-wage-in-half-the-country/
Removed by mod
Lmfao. Got me there! Was that pretty confusing for you without the apostrophe?
I have, but I’ll say it again.
It’s ignorant because the jobs that give back to humanity and pay a livable wage are hard to get. You just choose to believe that they are not.
You also seem to be willfully ignorant of what a livable wage means.
If this is what you were trying to do, you did a shit job. I even deconstructed it for you.
This isn’t moving the goal posts. This is the literal definition of a livable wage.
What is your definition?
Loads of reasons, but most relevant here is that you can make some very misleading but technically true statements when you do so.
For example:
Not all homeless people are poor.
Not all doors can open.
Technically true, but when we’re talking about the typical case, highlighting that there are exceptions is pointless.
You dont? I’m trying to argue that many many teachers don’t get paid a living wage.
Are you illiterate or something?
It is though. The fact that these jobs don’t exist, or are hard to get, is what this entire conversation is about. That, and you trying to derail it to shit on me.
The premise was that the jobs that are both fulfilling and pay decently were hard to get. And they are.
Assertion fallacy.
Removed by mod