Clearly.

I mean, sure. But I bet it feels like a pretty big deal to that small percentage of folks. Like my in-laws. Who now live on a fixed income with no real investments outside their housing because they were perpetually struggling to make ends meet as poor people raising a family.

That means half of all Americans earn less than that wage, yes? How many of those folks earn just north of minimum wage? There’s a reason many local and state governments mandate a wage higher than federal minimums. That leaves about 20 states that don’t.

Yeah, that's an excellent way to restate it.

I felt like Gorsuch's question about "Does the President have to execute all laws" was a trap, too, so I kinda understood Agarwal's reluctance to just give a yes or no answer. Of all the justices on the court, I feel like Gorsuch least deserves to be there.

I'm not a lawyer, but I also got that feeling listening to Agarwal answering questions from the justices. I'll also reiterate that I get big smiles when Jackson eviscerates Sauer.

It's missing 3 more zeros...

I take issue with the claim about public-sector incompetence. There's a running theme from the 1960's to 2025, in particular, that picked up steam around 1980...and it wasn't public-sector incompetence. It was the beginning of the erosion of New Deal policies promoted by? (You get one guess)

The biggest defect I see in conservatism as it's practiced presently is the inability to reconcile true liberty (and all the freedoms that entails), with the inherent patriarchy, bigotry and misogyny found among modern conservatives. The chronically online only make it worse.

I see that statement quite frequently in online circles organized around conservatism. It is an intellectually dishonest statement, the equivalent of "whatever, loser..." when a person is incapable of speaking to the subject at hand, typically b/c they KNOW they don't have a valid counterargument.