Hello. It is my position that poverty stems not from the amount of the minimum wage (which may rise but costs rise with it) -but from the inability to have pocket money over and above the cost of living. By providing every person in the USA a (one bedroom residence of minimally acceptable square footage for habitability) (based upon NYC standards) at birth for free/provided through taxes, would eliminate mortgage/rent slavery and enhance our economy and the standard of living for all persons. Individuals would be able to sell these properties to help obtain a larger living residence, or, if unsalable, they could gift them back to the state in lieu of maintainance, until they need the property again ie. for retirement. The Con argument will not argue the pro-minimum wage platform, but the anti-home allocation concept.
To begin with first of all I do not agree with the fact that gifting individuals a residential property upon birth would eliminate poverty. This will in fact increase poverty amongst the poor through the destruction of the entire economy. On a right winged view would say we live in a competitive world as far as resources are concerned and as we soon start to give people vital stuff for free we create a disorder amongst the people called "the dependency syndrome". People would begin to become lazy as stuff like housing becomes free. The entrepreneurial spirit in the United states is due to the fact that people have to work their way up. However if you had stated that free tertiary education in order to alleviate poverty I would have agreed with you. As you have noticed that its easy for a person without a college degree to be unemployed and homeless than it is for a educated person. So I say NO to free Property because it creates laziness in the population.