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

Minimum Wage Raise

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: 1/10/2015 Category: Economics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 871 times Debate No: 68115
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (10)
Votes (0)




Many people believe that the minimum wage should be raised. Poor familes just can't make it. I however believe that the minimum wage law should not be raised.

My opponent will have the burden of proof to show you why the minimum wage should be raised.

Pro shall speak first and I shall speak last. So pro, leave your last speech smpty.

No foul language
No trolling
Silence is consent. If you don't respond to an argument then it flows to the other side.

Minimum Wage "an amount of money that is the least amount of money per hour that workers must be paid according to the law" [1]

*I know that in different states, the minimum wage law differs. So we shall assume for this debate that the minimum wage law is ten dollars an hour. Pro must prove that the minimum wage should be raised at least by five dollars or more.

*I know that time can be an issue in these debates, so if you need to forfeit one round that's fine. Just say so, that is a reason why I made this debate so long.



If the minimum wage were raised to $10.10, more than 1.7 million American workers would no longer rely on public assistance programs boosting the stability of our government and economic systems
Debate Round No. 1


Thank-you Pro for accepting this debate.

Before we go any further, I would like to set some context for this debate. This debate is really about the principle of the minimum wage law itself. I as con think it doesn't work and harms those it seeks to help; the poor. Pro must show that it helps in the first place, and therfore raise it to more effectively help.

The bottom line is this, does the minimum wage work? That really is the question.

Now that we have some bearings, let's take a look at pro's argument.

Pro's Argument: Raise the Minimum Wage

Pro's main argument lies upon the fact that the minimum wage law would help get poor people on thier feet and no longer have to rely on government assistance.

"If the minimum wage were raised to $10.10, more than 1.7 million American workers would no longer rely on public assistance programs boosting the stability of our government and economic systems"

Before I respond to his point I would like to clarify something. is Pro trying to raise the minimum wage by ten cents? Or is he trying to raise to $20.10? Now to the response.

Reponse: No Source

Pro has provided no source for his claim that the minimum wage would get 1.7 million Americans on their feet. Untill we have a source, this cannot be counted as fact.

Now that I have responded to pro's claim, I would like to take a closer look at the minimum wage law itself in a couple points and show you why it doesn't work.

Point 1 Minimum Wage Loses Jobs

If something costs more, you will buy less of it. If the minimum wage law is increased, employers will be less likely to hire band new workers. Soon employers will want to buy automated machines to the job. An example of this is automated check-out stands. If you force an employer to pay more for his emploeeys, he will have less of them.

This is from an article entitled, "Why Raising the Minimum Wage Kills Jobs." Published by William Dunkelberg on 12/31/12. [1]

"As a jobs program, raising the minimum wage is a real loser. Congress raised the minimum wage 10.6% in July, 2009 (know of anyone else getting a raise then?). In the ensuring 6 months, nearly 600,000 teen jobs disappeared, even with nearly 4% growth in the economy, this compared to a loss of 250,000 jobs in the first half of the year as GDP growth declined by 4% Why? When you raise the price of anything, people take less of it, including labor. The unemployment rate for teens remains unacceptably high. Workers of all ages that are relatively unskilled are adversely impacted by this policy."

Point 2 Minimum Wage Drives up costs

If you raise the prices of wages, you will cause prices to rise. Employers must raise prices to match rising wages.

This is from an article entitled, "Higher Fast-Food Wages: Higher Fast-Food Prices." Published by James Shark on September 4, 2014. [2]

"Union activists want to raise the minimum wage in the fast-food industry to $15 an hour. However, fast-food restaurants operate on very small profit margins; they could only afford such wages by raising prices—significantly. Higher prices would, in turn, drive customers away, forcing even larger price increases to cover costs. Ultimately, the average fast-food restaurant would have to raise prices by nearly two-fifths. This would cause sales to drop by more than one-third, and profits to fall by more than three-quarters. Absent the widespread adoption of labor-saving technology, the union-led “Fight for 15” would make fast food much more expensive for Americans."

When you raise the wage, employers will raise prices causing poorer families to not be able to buy.

Point 3 Free Market helps the Poor

So what are we to do about the poor? Get government out of economics as much as possible. Now don't get me wrong, some government is good, such as no stealing to killing etc... However the more free a countr is, the less poverty it will have.

This is from an article entitled, "Government Intervention: A Threat to Economic Recovery". Published June 10, 2009 by Ambassador Terry Miller.

"Some criticize the free market system as good for the rich but not for the poor. The data show otherwise. When we compare economic freedom scores with poverty levels as measured in the United Nations Human Poverty Index, we find that countries that gained at least 5 points of economic freedom in the decade between 1997 and 2007 moved almost 6 percent of their populations out of poverty on average. Countries that lost at least 5 points of economic freedom, by contrast, saw poverty levels increase."

The bottom line is this, to help the poor we need to have a free economy. Not higher minimum wage laws. (I realize this last point was out of my direct area in this debate, but since I had time. I couldn't resist.)

Back to Pro.




cathrynvclark forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


Unfortunately my opponent has not responded to my arguments. I forward all my arguments and facts. Hopefully Pro will be able to continue this debate.


cathrynvclark forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


debater409 forfeited this round.


cathrynvclark forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4


debater409 forfeited this round.


cathrynvclark forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Economicsgeniusorsoithink 1 year ago
yeah i just realized my name is a bit of a boaster regret it.but pls just chk the merits of my argument.
second of all i know my argument is a bit liberalistic and hopeful but it is the way you'll developed.
Third of all this innovation may lead to you'll being in a mode of growth and development but that need to be continuous in nature or else there will be no use for said innovation or raise in minimum wage. But a larger US economy helps you'll buy things around the world
so yeah you'll should still go for it

BTW i want to have a discussion on free trade.
those that keep shouting the merits of free trade(u will say this may be a way to decrease the reliance on minimum wage workers) should know it leads to the overall development of China. In the long run really long run like 40 years, the development of china leads the world economics towards china's currency and USA would lose its dominance thats if you'll do nothing. I know you'll have always risen to the occasion so let that be.
Posted by Economicsgeniusorsoithink 1 year ago
After which you will realize profit of such a company would automatically rise, because of a greater profit margin.
This innovation(brought to you by profit margin)(will take place because corporates use profits to increase profits) and new tech would create a flurry of new jobs(mostly better paying because of the new nature of it and the surplus created by the savings such innovation has in the industry) replacing old jobs(burger flippers & yes burger flippers must study or be aware of such changes and get them) and developing the economic model of the united states.

But such innovation and growth must not be restricted in one single industry it should be in as many as possible. But even if it is not pan industrial innovation it will still lead to gross increase in money flow and increase and generate new jobs

also if you'll increase the minimum wage the number of immigration generally falls (down as there is no reason for having them to jobs that an american is ok having at the minimum price ....)(this is by the way assuming that companies don't go for illegal immigrants
Posted by Economicsgeniusorsoithink 1 year ago
hi debater409,
I am a new member to this debate society would love to tell you i am pro for raising minimum wage and i don't even live in america. i live in India but i study economics.
Your point that people need to stop flipping burgers(low paying jobs) and being higher paying jobs like teaching, engineering, law, medicine etc. but there aren't any jobs like that in the USA.

Those that are educated for such jobs are not recruited for them cause either they are not needed i.e. the current field is saturated.
Your country needs to innovate new things in order to create the new age jobs and the higher paying jobs that automatically come with it.

This is how a minimum wage increase will help
Further more, on the topic of just gross increase in movement of money that would take place on account of raising the minimum wage would increase your country's consumption.
This will lead to a net increase in available surplus cash in hand of companies(mind you i said it right). Who will spend on innovation. (i say this because cost of labor is not the full cost of producing a burger, it may be 22.5%)
labor is 22.5% of the cost of a company
raise by 20% of labor
labor increases to 27% of the product cost so cost of product is now 104.5(100-22.5+27)
so price will definitely increase by 20%(knowing american capital greed inc.)
The cost of other raw materials will not go up much as the minimum wage raise will not be applicable to them that produce it.
The sales will not be radically affected because those that are affected by the raise will automatically buy more of their own and those that are not affected by it usually either have a surplus(high paying jobs who will not stop at all) or not(lower paying jobs who will automatically cut down purchases not stop).
Posted by debater409 1 year ago
Stefy, ,
If we people earned a living wage they could participate in te economy. You are correct, but raising the minimum wage teaches people to be satisfied with jobs like flipping burgers. Why try to get a better job that requires harder training when I get payed so much flipping burgers? It teaches families to be dependent. Also it cuts out lower income jobs, making the original job pool, when shallower so to speak

Now again, comment debate are limited and not my style. If you would wish to, we could a debate just like this one. I enjoy debating and this is one if my favorite topics.
Posted by Stefy 1 year ago
If people earn a libing wage thet can better oarticipate in he economy. Massachusetts and many other states raised it and are doing very well. Many companies have raisedit and arent going under.
It really makes me feel sad when I see that people are so scared to give poor and impovrished families the means to give their children food and shelter.
Posted by debater409 1 year ago
Thank-you for your comment. If you wish, I would be more than happy to set up a debate with you. Comment debates are so limited. :) I agree that it seems unjust/ethical to have people trying to live on $7.25. However I am firmly convinced that increasing regulation in the market will only harm the poor. Not help.

We can make the debate shorter if you wish? Five rounds is quite a lot.
Posted by gannon260 1 year ago
bro, if you want, i could argue pro
first off, more money in poor peoples pockets means less reliance on gov. welfare which helps solve the deficit.
second, it makes food jobs more selective and this ensures food safety as no regular joe shmoe will be making my hamburgers which can give me food poisoning.
third, it will stimulate the economy as the poor now have more to spend, and unlike the middle class, they wont save up since they constantly spend. saving hurts the economy since the capital disappears once people stop hoarding it,
fourth, ethics, people cannot merely survive on $7.25 an hour, not enough to feed yourself, afford shelter, and living expenses without compromise. many minimum wage earners live with each other to share expenditure costs, this is unethical and pretty suckish. we shouldn't base the livelihoods of people on purely market principles, we also have to look at ethics
Posted by debater409 1 year ago

This debate is really just around the principle of the minimum wage law itself. The raise could have been two dollars for all that matters. I don't think the wage works in and of itself.

Really this debate is won or lost on the principle of the wage it self. If you can show it is a good thing, raising it really isn't a problem. That's not the focus.

I don't really know if it could be at once, probably a little bit at a time.

Hope that clears things up.
Posted by donald.keller 1 year ago
I just... I just need a Rockstar now... I don't know why though <_<
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Tempted, even with that claim that it should be raised to $15 or more. Are you insisting the raise be all at once?
No votes have been placed for this debate.