BIRT We should abolish the minimum wage.
Debate Rounds (3)
Once you use the first line it will mean that the debate has started.
When employers pay more than than they earn to workers, their business will collapse. This means that if a worker can generate 7$ an hour in capital for the employer, the employer can only employ the worker at under than 7$ an hour in order to not receive a loss. When it becomes unprofitable for someone to be employed, that person won't be employed.
Minimum wage laws make it so that anyone who generates capital below the MW unemployable, meaning a decrease in opportunity for unskilled workers. In addition to this, unskilled workers will no longer be able to develop the skills necessary for higher wage jobs since MW laws have destroyed their opportunity for improvement. No one stays in a low wage job forever since the capital the person can generate increases with every skill he has.
Minimum wage laws have essentially created a situation in which people are unemployed because they can't generate enough capital, significantly hindering private sector development. Without minimum wages everyone is better off, whether you are the employer, or the employee.
1. So called everyday essentials can always be provided by family or private philanthropy before one is able to sustain themselves.
2. Companies compete for workers, meaning that if one company doesn't pay its workers enough, they will simply move to other companies. This creates a situation in which almost all companies pay workers the same price for the same job.
3. In many cases, those who generate low capital can only work at low wages. The alternative is to be unemployed.
First of all, what your points have been telling people is that the employees have other family members to help them out, in some cases that may be true, but there still those who even with the help of their family, they still will need more help. The idea that family will help you through the worst is wanted by everyone, but that is just simply not the case. Everyone gets tired of helping out, especially when they ask for it constantly. I have also not forgotten about charity's, they help many people out but it is simply not possible for it to help every single person in the community.
Second point, some people haven't yet developed the skills in order to be spotted by employers, some people hadn't finished Secondary (High School) at all, giving them an unfair disadvantage.
Third point, there are families that are in debt, they would have to work multiple jobs to barely support them all. The employers would find other people that have the energy to work, dropping them or lowering their wage.
Fourth point, having a minimum wage ensures that no one can be given a wage that is impossible to live with, the minimum wage has been created as way the with it, you are able to buy the necesities. Minimum wage has changed when prices of items have as well.
Before I construct my closing argument, I will address some of rebuttals made by side opposition today.
1. Families are almost always capable of helping people out, but if not, one can always borrow from a bank and pay it back when move to a higher income bracket. Side opposition has neglected to touch upon this point.
2. This point is true although I don't see how this supports side opposition's argument, in fact it supports mine. You do not need skills to be a cashier, but you will gain valuable work experience as a cashier. This is a part time job that can be given to a Secondary school student, and, it goes without saying that being a cashier doesn't pay very much. You don't see people in their 50s bagging groceries for a living because they have developed skills while working lower paying jobs when they were younger, allowing them to earn at a higher income bracket now.
3. Yes, but I just don't see how the minimum wage helps in this situation. In fact, it gives the employer more reason to fire people working more jobs.
4. Does a wage of 0$ an hour seem impossible to live with? Yes? That's what happens when you are unemployed, which is what the MW law does to people. Employers in BC have to fire employees who generate capital of less than 10.45 $ because it's no longer profitable to employ them at minimum wage.
Here we have seen illustrated that anyone who assesses the situation in both logically and morally will support the proposition. Side opposition has failed to refute the points I have previously made and seems to only be able to think of the proposition in a naïve and somewhat callow sense.
For these reasons, the minimum wage must and will be abolished.
First, he believes that small businesses won't benefit from the minimum wage. But, as I researched more into this subject, I found out that most businesses do in-fact prefer the minimum wage. Because, giving more money to the people lower in the economy will let them be able to buy commercial goods again, meaning that money will now flow through businesses quicker and better then without the minimum wage, making this statement that my opposition told, a myth.
Second, we should actually be raising the minimum wage instead. Since 1938, the US have raised the minimum wage an astounding 22 times through the years, and yet at the same time, they had their real GDP per capita raise as well! This is an example that we should acknowledge.
Third, I have already talked about this subject, but it is such an important subject. How do we expect to get the economy going when people aren't paying for stuff. Not having a minimum wage means that people could pay less then the amount that is needed for money to go around. Minimum wage is also used to have a pay that will give a good amount of money and also encouraging them to use it on buying more stuff. Also making the money flow from the businesses to the people and back again to the businesses.
This is why the minimum wage is top priority to any country, how do we expect a company or even a country to run without a good economy. This has been my end of the discussion, and would like to thank my opposition for this chance to argue for this side of the argument.
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.