If you read the comments, it’s actually not. Inflation alone doesn’t account for pinning wages near $30, so that’s not really a good explanation given that it’s nonfactual. Even if he’s considering the living wage instead of historical minimums, $30 is still about 30% higher than what an average living wage would be. Is there some other consideration he has that I’m missing? I wouldn’t know without asking due to an unfortunate lack of psychic powers.

Anyways, sorry I asked for the policy reasoning behind a policy position. It clearly offended many, I realize my mistake, and won’t bring that kind of nonsense around here again.