Dude123

I think you're missing the point. Purchasing a utility item for its utility is fine, just don't splurge on a car when that money is far better put into housing, healthier foods, education, etc.

It is legally discrimination. What part of that isn't understood? Substitute women for any other group based on height, age, race, religion, or sexual preference and see that your argument doesn't hold water.

Imagine if this was a whites only or over 6ft tall job fair, this stuff just fails to make sense when you divide groups based on criteria you can't control.

Brother our infrastructure is why our kids are all weak and obese and all of ours cities are unlivable.

Remember, if you live near a major road you and your family are breathing in brake and tire dust constantly and it will take years off of your life. Not to mention the lower quality of that shorter life.

Imagine questioning a free neck stretch

How does it feel being a sycophant of the status quo?

Authentically authentic candidate per the Dem guidelines. Didn't stand up for rail workers then got heat for it, now he is a workers champion while also being business friendly. Incredible.

We need to vote for people that will actual codify real change and stop straddling the line. We need representation that is not some rich family's kids.

If worker unions were required by law then I would agree. The issue is that companies will corner the job market to suppress wages. The government applies some pressure the opposite way via minimum wages to help force progress. Self checkouts and various other automated processes don't occur without some kind of selection pressure.

Think of minimum wages as forcing weaker companies out of the market.

Look cognitive dissonance!

That's EAs former CEO lmao