The Instigator
Purkatotamus
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Sean_Norbury
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

"Blanket" law requiring a set minimum wage should be abolished.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/2/2014 Category: Economics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 432 times Debate No: 45084
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Purkatotamus

Pro

1st round for establishing debate outline and acceptance.

Resolved: "Minimum wage (lets just restrict this to the U.S.) should not be required/enforced by law. OR "Blanket" law requiring a set minimum wage should be abolished."

(latter wording is as stated in title - either works)

Burden of Proof, Pro: to argue that the cons of a legal requirement of a minimum wage for jobs across the board outweigh the (if any) pros.

Burden of Proof, Con: to demonstrate that the pros of a legal requirement of a minimum wage for all jobs outweigh the (again, if any) cons.

5 rounds (4 for arguing), 8000-character argument max, 72 hours to argue, 10-day voting period. Sources must be posted in round. No plagiarism.

May the best debater have the truth on their side, and may the truth win out :)
Sean_Norbury

Con

If there were no minimum wage set corporations would take advantage of people even more than they already do. The minimum wage is already disgustingly low, so how would abolishing it help in any way whatsoever. Are you related to the Koch brothers?
Debate Round No. 1
Purkatotamus

Pro

Firstly, I would like it noted that I set aside the first round for setting the bounds and particulars for this debate, and for you to declare your acceptance, as appears to be the standard on this site. You have taken advantage of this, giving me your initial argument right alongside your acceptance. As the instigator, according to the design of this site, I should have been the one to present my initial argument first. However, I'm not going to sit here ranting and complaining about, essentially, cutting in line - especially since you have given me an advantage. I can now answer your initial arguments right alongside the presentation of my initial arguments. In essence, you have handed me more ammunition to load into my already-loaded gun.
Secondly, in answer to your question pertaining to my alleged relationship(s), I have already done extensive family history and family tree research, considering that I do a lot of genealogy in my spare time, and have found no connection (yet, at least) to anyone surnamed Koch, let alone a pair of brothers with that surname. In fact, I am descended from the Birkenbeul (Birkenbile/Purkeypile/etc.) family of 17th-century & 18th-century rural Germany. I hope that answers your question adequately.
Now, onto the actual debate:
"If there were no minimum wage set [there should've been a comma here] corporations would take advantage of people even more than they already do."
In response, I would like to quote the 1837 editor of The United States Magazine and Democratic Review: "The best government is that which governs least." I believe that those up on our government's "Capitol Hill", our ruling class, are in no way fit to try to end corruption among the wealthy business-owners of America while they themselves are so obviously and extremely corrupt. They give (or vote, actually) themselves increases in pay - frequently (Source 1) - and then proceed to put heavier taxes (and public criticism) on the "1 percent" (Source 2, 4th paragraph). These federal pigs generate so much pork, it almost literally makes me sick to my stomach - I mean, just think about why our current Speaker of the House has decided to cave on amnesty: he wants cheap labor - more money - AND actually believes he might get more votes <*I laugh*> (Source 3).
You appear to be operating under the assumption that corporations are inherently evil. I therefore encourage you to read this terrific article by Don Mathews: http://www.fee.org...
It appears to me as though the people in government are actually the ones that are inherently evil.
To clarify: the people you fear would be taken advantage of are people such as those that work for around minimum wage - correct? Now, assuming what I have said is correct, consider this: a lot of minimum-wage workers work for corporations. Your claim seems to agree with this, so I won't bother finding a source for it just yet. Now, I believe that minimum-wage jobs exist to give one a leg up in getting an "actual" job - that that kind of a job serves as a helping hand, if you will. I don't believe they were ever really intended to be jobs that provided the "minimum" expenses for living one's entire life comfortably (besides, how could one ever determine a blanket definition for "comfortable" in that context?) on that one level income. Unfortunately, that seems to be how a lot of people look at the whole minimum wage issue.
Forgive me, but I'm going to carve out this one paragraph here to interrupt myself just a little bit: If someone is content to do a certain job for a dollar a day, and the person doing the paying, and receiving the service, is in agreement with the proposed sum - or even if the worker wasn't the one doing the proposing, but is still in conscious and understanding agreement - then the 2 parties should be allowed to come to a mutual agreement without any interference from "Big Brother".
Now, back to this: If a minimum wage is set (or, in the context of America today, if a set minimum wage is raised), the idea (as I understand it) is that people resting on the bottom rung, so to speak, financially, can afford to buy food, or more of it, and other things similarly essential to living, therefore supporting themselves (and their families, if they have them) acceptably (or more so, at least). However, since the corporations that put the food on the shelves at [whatever grocery store happens to be nearest you] hire so many minimum-wage workers to do the more difficult and low-level jobs involved in the food-producing process, they have to raise prices on their products in order to meet the legal requirement of the new (or higher) minimum-wage salaries - otherwise they lose money (I'm sure you can appreciate why losing money is bad). Everyone's situation is still the same, and worse for some: the poor people can't buy anything more than what they could before.....but at least the numbers following the dollar signs are all a lot bigger! So...everyone feels a whole lot richer now, right? Well, I, for one, do not. I do, however, rest assured that the American dollar has just decreased in value and inflation has gone up - again.

Source 1: Longley, Robert. "Congress Votes Itself a Pay Raise." About.com US Government Info. IAC/InterActiveCorp, n.d. Web.

Source 2: Kocieniewski, David. "Tax Talks Raise Bar for Richest Americans." Business News - Economy - The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 19 Nov. 2012. Web. 5 Feb. 2014.

Source 3: Hawkins, John. "Why Pro-Amnesty Republicans Are So Desperate To Pass Immigration Reform This Year." Townhall.com. Salem Communications, 28 Jan. 2014. Web. 05 Feb. 2014.
Sean_Norbury

Con

Sean_Norbury forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Purkatotamus

Pro

Well, that there was my whole argument in a nutshell. Why 5 rounds, then? Simple: to give you a few in which to try and come up with a sensible defense - if you can.
Sean_Norbury

Con

Sean_Norbury forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Purkatotamus

Pro

Come on! This is boring me...at least try to make this challenging for me!

Your Move
Sean_Norbury

Con

Sean_Norbury forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Purkatotamus

Pro

One last chance to put up a fight! If you believe something, you must have reasons why...
Sean_Norbury

Con

Sean_Norbury forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Purkatotamus 2 years ago
Purkatotamus
Did he just forget he was debating this, or something?
No votes have been placed for this debate.