$15 Minimum wage
Debate Rounds (5)
2:No capped words.
3:Have at least 1 website with your argument per round.
4:Cite your statistics.
5:The burden of proof is split between us.
7:You must use the structure of the debate below.
8:Failure to follow these rules will result in a loss.
Round 2:Pro makes his main argument and con makes his own argument.
Round 3:Pro rebuts con's argument and Con rebuts Pro's.
Round 4:Pro defends his argument and Con defends his.
Round 5:Respectful thank you, and conclusions.
I accept hesitantly.
Screw your rules too. That isn't how real debating works. I know it isn't your fault and all becuase you have been brainwashed by the distorted debating culture on this website, but don't worry, I'll set you right.
My first argument is that even though it will cost employers more to keep the employers hired, they will not fire them for a few reasons:
My first reason is that, if I take an example like Walmart, they make $13000 per employee after paying them, and they pay them $8.81 per hour, for one month, that is about $1400 for a regular 40-hour per week employee, I will provide a link to my research at the bottom of my argument.This means that even though they may have to pay a little more, they still gain more then they lose by employing the employees.Also, if a company starts firing their employees, they will have to drive up prices to make up for that net loss, and if they have competition with another company that make's their price the same, that company will get more consumers because they have a cheaper price, as has been shown to be true over and over again in history, I will provide 2 websites that talk about supply and demand.
My second argument is that there is such thing as a living wage.This is a wage that people have to have to be able to live properly i.e get an apartment, feed themselves, get healthcare and education, this is painfully obvious because, everything has a price, if you cannot afford to get a proper house, proper food, healthcare, and an education, you do not have the living wage I am talking about.Without this living wage, people do not live properly, and even though they may be payed, they are not being payed enough.
http://www.alternet.org... (walmart employee net profit)
http://livingwage.mit.edu... (living wages)
http://www.investopedia.com... (supply and demand)
http://www.shmoop.com... (supply and demand)
This debate should come down primarily to the matter of ethics.
What is ethical? To the untrained eye, it seems quite ethical and morally just to have society pay a fair wage to its workers. Unfortunately, the world isn't that black and white, and such naive thinking can be dangerous to our valued liberty and independence.
Minimum wage laws are literally established threats to the American people that the military is willing to "enforce" the belief that others are entitled to a 15$ wage no matter what job they are working at. These policies fail to take into account the independent needs of individual businesses and the differing circumstances found in every neighborhood in which these businesses exist. This disenfranchies those in the minority slave class, while working to fullfill the selfish greed of the majority ruling class.
Minimum wage laws also dictates that we will live under a communistic belief system, in which all people are entitled to a certain share from others; a certain share which they have earned not from doing actual work, but from simply existing. Such a worldview is harmful, and only furthers the misconception that the human race can only survive by being dependent on the good will and nature of others. This is untrue though, as humanity is quite capable of producing men and women who are strong enough to live self sufficient from the self righteousness of its fellow human beings.
Maintaining the sense of entitlement is setting the bar quite low for our own potential as a species. The real world is a harsh place, and we all know this to be true. We cannot always rely on privlege and entitlement to survive, nor is this a way to live in the first place. What kind of message are we sending to future generations, when we indirectly give them the idea that they can get a free ride through life? Even if we are not giving away a complete free ride, we must remember that, "A good bowler never uses bumpers, nor do the world's best dunkers use a trampoline."
It is nice to make a good wage and to have a comfortable living, but demanding these things through the use of force is terribly oppressive. Such policies are not born out of strength and empowerment, but rather weakness and fear. We are not a weak people, and we can be empowered if we have no other men to lean on or to expect priveleges from.
I try to adhere to a set of moral guidelines designed solely with the intent of having control over my own fate, and while I may slip occassionally, I believe this is the next step on the ladder of human evolution. I can never be the independent and empowered human God created me to be when I demand that others take on my behalf through the use of force, and in this instance, the government serves as a weapon against the minority slave class when it enacts these kinds of authoritarian and oppressive policies.
First of all, without minimum wage, bad things happen. Such things include what's happening right now in Chin, if you think the "military is enforcing minimum wage" here, you should move to China, because the military is actually enforcing that the people do not riot due to their ridiculously low wages. So actually not having minimum wage is a bad thing, I will put a link at the bottom of my rebuttal stating the Chinese people's struggle with low wage.
I must point out that you say that "the military is enforcing minimum wage" I must remind you about the time before American minimum wage:
A young workers plea
While President Franklin Roosevelt was in Bedford, Mass., campaigning for reelection, a young girl tried to pass him an envelope. But a policeman threw her back into the crowd. Roosevelt told an aide, "Get the note from the girl." Her note read,
I wish you could do something to help us girls....We have been working in a sewing factory,... and up to a few months ago we were getting our minimum pay of $11 a week... Today the 200 of us girls have been cut down to $4 and $5 and $6 a week.
To a reporter's question, the President replied, "Something has to be done about the elimination of child labor and long hours and starvation wages."
-FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELTPublic Papers and Addresses, Vol. VNew York, Random House, 1936), pp. 624-25.
I will put a link at the bottom from where I found this.
This states that the military was actually opposed to minimum wage, if you want you can read more in the website, and the struggle for minimum wage in America
Another argument you have is that minimum wage is a communistic idea. This is not true. It is a socialist idea. This is outright dogma that socialism is bad. But you see, socialism has worked out for quite a few countries.These are the happiest countries in the world by order (note they all have minimum wage).
1.Switzerland (although it is capatilist, it is the only non socialist country on this list).
This states that 9/10 happiest countries in the world are actually socialist, and all of them have minimum wage.
Your next argument is that we are showing children that it is easy to give them a free ride through life, and that we're making it too easy on them. First of all, the government only pays $1000 in welfare, this is far below living wages. Second, people always want to be on top, but they can't always do this. A good example of this is student debt, "Seven in 10 seniors (69%) who graduated from public and nonprofit colleges in 2014 had student loan debt, with an average of $28,950 per borrower. Over the last decade"from 2004 to 2014"the share of graduates with debt rose modestly (from 65% to 69%) while average debt at graduation rose at more than twice the rate of inflation. Debt at graduation varies greatly by state and by college, and this report includes average debt levels for each state, lists of notably high- and low-debt colleges, and links to data for more than 1,000 colleges nationwide. It also includes policy recommendations for reducing the burden of student debt."-http://ticas.org.... Also, I have never, ever, met someone that wants to be a minimum wage job, and this is just reflection and common sense. Do you want to work at a minimum wage job for the rest of your life? Even if it's $15 a hour? Obviously not.
You also said that giving people minimum wage by force in unacceptable. This would be true except it's not. I must remind you, you are always represented in congress depending on what senators/representatives you vote for. If you get who you want, they will represent the idea that they got voted in for. If you don't on the other hand, you were still represented in congress and it is not by force.
""63 percent of Americans support an even greater federal minimum wage increase to $15.00 by 2020
"71 percent of Americans favor raising tipped workers' minimum wage to the overall minimum wage an even greater federal minimum wage increase to $15.00 by 2020
"82 percent of Americans support automatic upward annual adjustments to the federal minimum wage"
As I've said before, you are represented in congress, the government did not support minimum wage (at first), and the people do want it. It's called the majority my friend, and democracy is all about the majority, as a definition of democracy states " control of an organization or group by the majority of its members"- Google, search up definition of democracy.
Thanks for your speedy and impassioned reply, Andhisnameis.
Not entitling citizens with a minimum wage certainly can cause worker dissent in some circles. Certainly not in all working people's circles, such as the ones which I am associated with, in which case workers encourage hard work and reject entitlement. We need to weigh out impacts here though. Sure, we can pay off priveleged people with entitlments to stop them from acting out, but we would do much better to attack the root of the problem.
China is a very special case. The people there are given low wages, but also have most of their economic liberties regulated by the ruling class. It is not the same in the Western World, in which we are provided abundant freedom and oppurtunity to make our fortune in billions of creative ways. We have benefitted from the level of oppurtunity we have in this slice of the Earth, and as long as we keep the majority ruling class out of the economic sphere, we can continue to maximize our economic oppurtunities to the utmost level. Minimum wage laws are counter to what has worked so well for us in the past.
We should also be wary about giving in whenever someone doesn't like their circumstances. With all the energy these people put into lobbying their government to raise their wages, it is hard to convince many Americans that they are actually struggling to make ends meet. I am of this mindset too. It is easy to make a living in this world through hardwork, strength, and determination.
If someone really feels oppressed, then I do encourage one to take what he has been denied, but when someone wants to use someone else to enforce their will over others, then we have a real problem.
As for the advocacy for socialism, I disagree with the premise Andhisnameis implying. These nations have plenty of social spending policies, but all then nations listed also have the least amount of economic regulations in the world. For example, Switzerland, the top country Andhisnameis listed, doesn't even have a minimum wage in any conventional sense of the term.
One of the other things that should be taken into account with welfare states, is that they are living on borrowed money, and are the most economically dependent, as well as the most likely to completely collapse during an economic recession. Resources dwindle overtime, which means we need to be increasing our self sufficiency and economic independence to match such rising challenges.
About welfare, it isn't actually true that the government pays 1000$ in welfare. They actually pay MUCH more. That is irrelevant though. The main problem is that they are paying any money at all, when citizens are more than capable of acting as strong independent individuals, and using their skill and ingenuity to procure a living standard of wealth. Let's not forget either, that this money is often forced out of the hands of those who earned it through hard work to begin with.
Something else that hits me the wrong way is how we define what a living wage actually is. Truth be told, Western peoples live in gross excess. What we consider a living wage here in America is complement in providing what would be considered luxuries in the third world. Material wealth is meaningless. Food, a bed, and a network of family and friends to provide love and support is all us humans really need in life, besides some dreams to strive for personally. To say someone with little material wealth is always going to be less happy than someone with much material wealth is an assumption that is more often than not, untrue.
To conclude my final rebuttals, I would like to simply try and convince the judges and the people of America of one basic, unacknowledged fact...
You can appeal that the majority ruling class have a right to rule over the minority slave class, but such a system is fascist in nature. We, the people of the minority, wish to live in a strong and empowered society free of entitlement and privelege. Must the majority ruling class step on our toes and use their paramilitary arm to force us into betraying our moral beliefs? I think not!
I must apologize for forgetting to cite my sources, my mistake.
Since my opponent made no act to rebut my main point, my defenses will take the of defenses to my rebuttals.
First of all sir, I love how you say I have an impassionate response but you barely deviate from what you said in the previous round.
First of all, China is not a special case, I only mentioned it because it was more recent. In the Industrial revolution, there was things such as child labor, people were poor as the people back in China, no minimum wage, it is a good example in history that proves Marxism's main point, that the rich will always screw over the poor to make more money.
My opponent's second argument is that, with hard work and determination, you can achieve your goals in life!
I my opponent's 80 years of age but I think he should have learned by now, life isn't a cheesy feel-good movie.
This brings me back to my argument above, that the employer will always take advantage of the employed to advance their wealth.
My opponent also makes the claim that since Switzerland is capitalistic and it is the happiest nation in the world, it outrules the 9 nations behind it that are socialist. I'll let you decide on that one.
My opponent makes the case that socialist countries are more in debt then more capitalist countries.
This is simply not true, Switzerland is in debt at the moment right now 33.8% GDP/debt, I will post a link to the debt at the bottom, the U.S is also a capitalistic country as well! Guess what? Our debt is 108% the GDP, that is super high. Compared to Sweden, which is only %40. I may be looking it in the wrong way too, as the people are indebted to the government, they're not, there is a difference between given and borrowed money my sir.
My opponent also makes the point that we pay a lot more then $1000, I was wrong, I thought it was the federal government, it is not, it is state government, and I see that some pay more then living wages for the unemployed, although only 8 states do this, I believe that is a dumb decision on their part, but it doesn't account for the other 48 states that have it under living wage.
The next argument is that all you need in life is family (although even at $15 an hour, you still cannot support a family) some housing (if you're fine with having a studio apartment as a house, go right ahead, you also need a psychologist by the way)
My opponent quotes Lysander Spooner, I don't know if I am reading this right, because I see an argument stating that we should let business owners pay workers very low wages, which in effect, does not allow them to get an education to progress in life, does not let him get healthcare to preserve his life, and does not give him time to complain about his life.
Next to someone that is, actually talking about the tyranny of the majority.
Your last argument is that i'm a fascist, I am not a fascist, I am a Marxist, Marxist's ideologies support the working class, the ruling class is the class in control, that is why we americans established the constitution and, supreme court, the ruling class is whoever is in charge. Also I like how you keep referring me to enslaving rich, wealthy employers to pay their workers living wages.
Slavery, is much different my good sir.
1.http://www.eiu.edu... (industrial revolution child labor)
2.https://answers.yahoo.com... (industrial revolution tyranny examples)
BlackFlags forfeited this round.
AndHisNameIs forfeited this round.
BlackFlags forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.