Gavin Newsom- modern day slaver

So u disagree paying below minimum wage prisoners but you are against minimum wages as a policy ?
Surely locking up someone doing nothing is far more productive than them doing some work for society ?

Fwiw I’m against force labour but I’m not against minimum wages .
You got a funny paradox in motion here .

yes if someone AGREES to work for 3 dollars that's his choice and none of our business. Banning that person from being able to agree with that for whatever reason is violence.

Btw i would disagree identically about prison work if they got paid 15 dollars per hour. People simply shouldn't be mandated to work, because that's slavery, and slavery is bad. And the quality of work of slaves is terrible as well so you don't accomplish anything

That stuff is already banned by the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the constitution. Though I guess not prior to incorporation.

Whereas slavery for crime is specifically permitted.

I do see your point about it not being limited enough in scope, I just imagine that if it was really that much of a problem then we would see actual data about it being a problem.

I was using chat gpt to find my info

Chat gpt also told me 65% of California prisoners reported being punished for not volunteering to do work.

Prison is a horrible place to be and any chance to get outdoors and do some work and get some $$$ for the commissary is something many felons would jump at. Its not like these are murderers and rapists on these details

Well, the left's going to need to get some more power on the way to having the chance to make some real change imo anyway. Unless we're just waiting for the revolution. Currently about 1in3 states are blue--even if most people live in blue bubbles. That's just not enough power to allow for a big fight to happen inside that side imo. In some ways they're just struggling to keep from being stomped out altogether lol. Maybe a proper left will form naturally at some point once the right runs wild long enough?

Agreeing when you have no choice isn’t much different then slavery

nah.
its more like u say yes with a gun pointed to your head and then giving the illusion u had a choice be saying ok i agree.

this is absurd given there are close to infinite potential employers. If everyone only offers you very little, it means that's what your work is worth.

So you can either accept that or not work. If a minwage was instituted , then you simply wouldn't be hired because employers would lose money hiring you.

The far left is waiting for the chosen one to fulfill all their candidate criteria, so they can patiently explain to everyone else why she is a worthless stooge you should never vote for.

One thing i ask them and i never understand (in the USA) is why they disregard judicial picks. Even victor can't deny that leftist judges routinely make decisions closer to his preferences than rightwing judges.

Even if literally everything else was the same for a "liberal" vs a conservative, why aren't judges enough?

I don't understand what the viktors think would happen if the right has enough time to solidify it's control of courts nationwide , do they think leftism will ever be allowed even if they win an election from the radical left? judges would strike down everything they try to pass

Neither are good .
You far right and the far left ….

U can turn this all u want both a minority shouldn’t have hold on a majority that includes or dictates everyone life .

Minority should be protecting their personal freedom , but not their pov on how everyone should be in their own life which u never seem To understand …

They don’t want to be in control of this country, they want the country to die so they can rule over the ashes.

The more and more radical and controversial opinions you hold, the less and less overlap there will be between groups who agree with you. If you express two opinions that strongly divides the populace 50 / 50, you might find that the number of people who agree with the totality of your opinions are dangerously low.

Of course, actual issue and opinions isn't the only thing that sways voters, and often it might not matter much at all. At the opposite end of the scale, the politicians without opinions also tends to be unpopular. Still, all the caveats aside, this is still a basic principle of politics that is a great hurdle to radical ideologues. Leftist politics in general takes this to the extreme, with splinter groups being the norm rather than the exception. A practice those of us on the outside might mockingly refer to as "ideological purity tests", because while it might not be the intention, it usually comes off more as one-upmanship than anything else.

So, why not focus on judges? Well, you'd have to actually win some political battles to get there and support politicians who might actually score an occasional win. Also, I think the left tends to focus more on issues of social justice than liberal principles embedded in constitutions. To that effect, they probably have had far more influence on law in developed countries than you give them credit for.

Ideologues in general also tend to underestimate people who are more ready to be politicians. Plenty of smart, intelligent and dedicated people are torn to shreds in political debate because they think the message speaks for itself. It doesn't - unless you're riding a populist wave, you actually have to sell it.

Nothing like the phony tribal theater of Democrats vs Republicans to keep the public mesmerized.

I've never read anything by Noam Chomsky that I agree with. But this is one of his worst takes.

he had some decent takes on freedom of speech back in the days (perhaps because he was subject to censorship?)