The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Every job should have the same wage.

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/30/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,723 times Debate No: 27639
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




Every job should have the same wage.
Whether you are a doctor or a rubbish collector, all jobs need doing, so why are some paid more that others.
Who works harder, the rich lawyer, or the humble, hard working rubbish man that is up every allocated morning to do the dirty work for you.
Just think what would happen if for one year, one rubbish truck didn't work and one lawyer didn't work. What would have more of an impact on our society.

I would like to thank in advance my opponent, I look forward to debating with you, this debate is sure to be a good one.


Good luck to my opponent.

While I do agree that many jobs are neglected as essential jobs, and I am a firm supporter of trade jobs and blue collar work as that what I grew up around and as, I disagree wholeheartedly with your opinion.

The reason various jobs pay more than others depends on job quality, skill, the worker's ability and experience, and competition for employees in the job market.

Your example of a trash man is actually somewhat flawed as well, trash collectors are actually paid quite well due to the hazards of the job. In some states in the US, they can make as high as $75k annually. Regardless of that though, there is a flaw in your argument on one truck vs one lawyer. One truck not working involves multiple employees, usually at least three in the US, along with that there are others to compensate. Either way, yes there may be problems but companies are prepared for things like that, a better example may be an entire company not working vs a law firm, but then you have to consider the type of law, the location of the company that stopped, trash levels, could another company take the workload etc. It's a hard example to grasp.

If you do consider that though, why ALL jobs paying the same? If a McDonald's fry cook stopped working would that really hurt society? If a Starbucks barista quit? What about college degree style jobs, if a computer programmer for Apple quit? Or as you mentioned a lawyer? Jobs within companies are much different than service industries provided by the government or companies contracted by the government to provide societal services.

All employees are not equal, what about advancement in a company? Promotions? Bosses? Should a manager make the same as his employee? Should someone that works at a company for 20 years make the same as the new guy?

In a world where everyone makes the same there is no progress as there is no incentive for doing good, excelling at your job, or doing anything beyond the mundane. If a lawyer made the same amount as a video game tester or a beer taste tester why would anyone be a lawyer, or a trash collector, or a janitor. Everyone would flock to easy jobs and no one would put in the effort to learn, excel and get a better job.

Also, you're forgetting one thing, this was tried before, it was called communism and it failed.
Debate Round No. 1



You pointed out that if a lawyer made the same amount of money as a video game tester, why would anyone want to a ber a lawyer and so on... If i may say, that particular argument is hugely flawed.
Just quickly before i carry on, who is to say that the wage for everyone is small?

You pretty much said that people will not be motivated enough to do hard working jobs so therefore and i quote "everyone would flock to the easy jobs"... Another flaw.
Actually if every job had the same wage people would just do any job they aspired to do, regardless of the money, because everyone would be earning the same amount.

Here is an example:
A man really wanted to be a doctor, but he was worried that the dump truck man was earning the same amount as him, so he decided to go for a somewhat easier job. Not likely. That is what you said in your argument.

The message i am trying to portray is that if people really want to do a certain job, whether it be a librarian, a cleaner, an actress, a camera man or whatever, they will do that job, despite the fact that they may be receiving the same wage as someone in possibly a lower rank them them and do you know why? Because my friend, money isn't everything...

Do you remember when you were little and you would be asked what you wanted to be when your were older, a mermaid, a princess, a moon walker, a doughnut taster, own a fish'n'chip shop, whatever the case, you weren't thinking about the money then were you, so why now?


Muddy-Rivers forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


Muddy-Rivers forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Why aren't you responding?


Muddy-Rivers forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by wrichcirw 3 years ago
I'm impressed...I didn't think PRO could possibly construct a case, but she did, and refuted CON's argument.

1) PRO effectively argued that by equalizing pay, people will work at jobs they WANT to do.
2) CON argued that people would just do "the easy jobs", which PRO effectively countered. Perhaps if CON responded in the following rounds he could have expanded on this point, but he didn't.

I will add one argument:

Very few people can actually be a doctor or a lawyer. Those jobs require a high degree of a specialized skill, whether it be a voluminous amount of medical knowledge, or an incredibly sharp mind that can cut straight to the core argument in the case of a lawyer.

You can get to even more specialized jobs, like say a nuclear engineer, or anyone working in petroleum (which can be rather dangerous), and then realize that these people get paid more for a reason.
Posted by Muddy-Rivers 3 years ago
My apologies. I was involved in some complications at a trade show for work. I will respond on my next round
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: see comment