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

Minimum wage is better off the way it is now.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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: 2/25/2014 Category: Economics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 813 times Debate No: 46756
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)




I would like a debate where I as the con suggest we do increase minimum wage and the pro that minimum wage is good at what the price is today. to make sure were on the same page
Today: 7.25 a hour and 40 hours is full time on averaged 10,000 is what people make on minimum wage yearly
If it was 10 dollars: full time would still be 40 hours a week and is on average 15,000 dollars a year


Before we start, you have your math wrong. For 7.25 an hour it is 15,000 dollars a year because 7.25 X 8 X 5 X 52 = about 15,000 and for 10 dollars it would come out to about 20,000. In theory this sounds like a good idea but it isn't. If we raise this then more people will be able to get by by doing the bare minimum. Then this creates less motivation to work hard and get a good job. Why spend all those years of hard work in college to become a doctor if you could just get buy with working at a fast food restaurant. Minimum wage is meant for younger people not older people too. A man in his 30s, 40s, or 50s should not be making minimum wage to support his family. A man with a family should have a job that requires at least some type of degree and hard work to get into. If this man can just work at Burger King to support his family then he will not work hard to get a good job. Raising minimum wage would bring us closer to a socialistic or communist society where everyone is equal.
Debate Round No. 1


I was removing taxes and hypothetically getting sick. That's how i got the math i did.

You do have a good point that people would settle for less is minimum wage was increased. But, it would lessen the amount of people on food stamps and may other government assistant programs.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) 1.57 million people in the United States make the minimum wage, and another 1.98 million make even less. These 3.6 million workers make up 4.7 percent of all hourly-wage workers. People who are supposedly paid tips and people under 20 can be paid less than this minimum. Some states allow businesses that are not engaged in interstate commerce (and therefore outside the jurisdiction of the federal government) to pay less. Some territories " notably American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands " also are allowed to pay less.

Of those who make minimum wage or less 44% are in food preparation and serving related occupations, 15% are in sales and related occupations, 9.7% in personal care and service occupations, 6.5% in building and grounds cleaning and maintenance occupations, 6.8% in transportation and material moving occupations and 6.4% in office and administrative support occupations. (Note that the largest sector that is below minimum wage is in food preparation and serving related occupations, with 16.5% of all workers who make minimum or less.)

The average age of fast-food workers is 29 and more than a fourth are raising children. 64% of those making the minimum wage are women.

Raising Minimum Wage Boosts Economy

The minimum wage was first enacted because economists understood that a wage floor is a floor for the economy. (This is why trade agreements that undermined wages and broke unions have undermined the middle class and led to the slow economy we have today.)

Raising the minimum wage boosts the economy and does not "cost jobs." A 2011 Chicago Federal Reserve Bank study looked at 23 years of household spending data and found that increasing the minimum wage raises other incomes, and that every dollar of hourly wage increase for a minimum wage worker results in $2,800 in new consumer spending by his or her household over the following year.

President Obama has endorsed raising the minimum wage to $10.10 and indexing it to inflation. Monday Economist Paul Krugman wrote about the effect this would have, in Better Pay Now,

Early this year the Economic Policy Institute estimated that an increase in the national minimum wage to $10.10 from its current $7.25 would benefit 30 million workers. Most would benefit directly, because they are currently earning less than $10.10 an hour, but others would benefit indirectly, because their pay is in effect pegged to the minimum " for example, fast-food store managers who are paid slightly (but only slightly) more than the workers they manage.

Raising Minimum Wage Cuts Safety Net Spending

On November 1 the country went over the "Hunger Cliff" as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) " commonly known as "Food Stamps" " was severely cut, leaving millions of Americans in desperate straits and local food pantries overwhelmed. House Republicans currently are trying to cut the program by another $39 billion. (Senate Democrats voted to cut it by "only" another $4 billion.)

Raising the minimum wage is a better way to cut spending on assistance programs because higher wages cut the need for assistance such as Food Stamps. Raising the minimum wage increases other wages as well, for example low-paid supervisors of minimum-wage employees would receive a boost as well. So it is not just the minimum-wage employees who benefit and who need less assistance.

Currently 52% of fast-food workers get aid from public programs like food stamps. Raising the minimum wage cuts this need. And cutting the need cuts the cost of these programs.

According to the National Employment Law Project, "Low wages and lack of benefits at the 10 largest fast-food companies in the United States cost taxpayers an estimated $3.8 billion per year. McDonald"s alone costs taxpayers an estimated $1.2 billion each year."

A Berkeley Labor Center study, Fast Food, Poverty Wages: The Public cost of low-wage Jobs in the fast-food industry says "the cost of public assistance to families of workers in the fast-food industry is nearly $7 billion per year." and "Due to low earnings, fast-food workers" families " receive an annual average of $1.04 billion in food stamp benefits."

That $7 billion " $1 billion of that for Food Stamps " is spent helping just the workers in the fast-food industry. Fast-food workers are just some of the "food preparation and serving related" occupation that is 44% of workers making the minimum wage or less.

Again, we spend $7 billion on government assistance helping people just in the fast-food industry because they are paid so little. They are just some of the workers making minimum wage, which means $7 billion is just some of the spending we could cut if we just paid them more.

If minimum wage workers receives a raise, and that increase ripples up through the ever-growing low-wage end of our economy, the need for government assistance will decrease and therefore so will the spending on the programs. The right way to cut spending on assistance for Americans is to decrease the need for that assistance, not decrease assistance for those in need.

Don"t cut programs for the people who need them, cut those people"s need for the programs. It"s the right thing to do and it also makes money sense.


Your whole argument was based around helping the people on minimum wage. Of course raising minimum wage would help those people. I somewhat agree with you that minimum wage should be increased. For younger people I believe there should be a different minimum wage than there is for older people. As I have said before minimum wage shouldn't be for an adult in his 40s with kids and a wife. The minimum wage jobs should be a start for people, not a permanent job. If we raise the minimum wage for younger people that will give them a good start off to their future endeavors. Then the regular minimum wage of $7.25 should be enforced when they are in their late 20s. You talk a lot about people on minimum wage receiving food stamps and things that cost the taxpayer money. If we raise minimum wage then the Walmarts, Mcdonalds, etc... will raise their prices as a result causing more money to the taxpayer. Food stamps should not go to people who can't find a job or are poor because they are get into trouble with the law. To get food stamps you should prove that you are a good person to society and are actually trying to find a good job. Minimum wage will hurt small businesses too. If we were to raise minimum wage by that much it would hurt small businesses a lot, especially the ones that have a lot of minimum wage employees. I can see how increasing minimum wage for younger people would be good so that they can sustain themselves and worry about getting ready for the real world as opposed to worrying about money. However, if we get adults in their 40s sustaining their families on minimum wage then that becomes a problem because then there is no motivation. In America, you are suppose to have to work hard to obtained a job to support yourself and if you have one a family.
Debate Round No. 2


I agree that minimum wage being 10.10 would be really good for young worker's but, does have the influence for people not to go to college. But, if i may inset a new argument the older people should be able to go to college for free. As president bush did for the mother's back in 2000.
Many people are afraid to go to colleges or what their parents want them to major in is not what they want. Yes, not everyone who works at fast food actually needs assistance but, it is very hard to make it in America. So many law school students ave to get extra jobs just to pay rent. Women are left alone to take care of who know how many kids, because the father left.
Also 10.10 minimum wage should be for all people and all ages, because that's fair saying "when you get older you cannot get more money, you've been working all this time or maybe you haven't but now that you are older you get paid less.? That doesn't make since to me. If anything you should get paid more.
Overall 10.10 minimum wage could reduce the following:
reduce overall hunger (The price of food would go up but, also food stamps could because they would have less amount of people qualified for it)
would increase the overall economy (reduce much of america's debt)
increase the amount of teenager's to work and not sell drugs or fee like they could never get a job due to social class, ethnicity, sex, family history
benefit the economy causing more people to come to america to work and the economy would be better so more businesses could be created which would allow more people and the small business to hire more people.
for places such as WALMART (owns 45% U.S, wealth) they could also hire more people and wouldn't have an issue due to how much money they (walt family) pay themselves with that they could lower some of there prices to get more revenue eventually paying their workers more than 10.10
But, places as Aldi's which already pay their workers above minimum wage wouldn't have to change anything


You say that so many law students have to get money by working jobs to pay rent. My view on that is this. For people who are going through college and working hard they should be rewarded for this. That is why I think it would be a good idea for the government to support people in college more than they would a person in their 40s. As a country we have to make sure the future generations are not in a hole they cannot dig themselves out of. I would prefer the government helping out the kids in college rather than raising the minimum wage for the people in college because it would be unfair to business owners. If we give this assistance to people throughout their whole lives then as I have said before there is no motivation. We should get our people in their 20s off to a good start and then let them run on their own. I did say that raising minimum wage for young would be good but the government should be the ones helping out the kids not business owners.

As for you saying it is hard to make it in America you are right. You have to work hard to make it here. If we raise minimum wage then it will be easy to make it here. Our motto has always been if you work hard you will be successful. If we raise minimum wage our motto will be you will be you are successful no matter what.

You keep saying raising minimum wage will benefit people who are poor and on minimum wage. Of course it will but all we would really do is take money from successful people and give it to the poorer people. How would raising minimum wage reduce our debt? Please explain that to me too.

Raising minimum wage will just force businesses who use minimum wage workers to jack up their rates. If these businesses have to pay out thousands of more dollars to their employees then they will raise their prices.

Raising minimum wage will not create more jobs either. If anything it will reduce them. The company will either raise their prices or cut jobs to make up for the money lost because of the increase. If such a big jump in minimum wage occurs some companies will not be able to afford to pay their workers $10.10 an hour and therefore will have to cut jobs. Many businesses will take a major hit if we increase minimum wage.

Raising minimum wage is just another step closer to socialism and communism. In communism everyone is equal. Raiding minimum wage would make us more like a communist nation.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Dr.Intellegent 2 years ago
Okay thank you
Posted by Taylur 2 years ago
This website often replaces certain characters with other ones. That's why you can't get the 'French e' on here. They really ought to fix this issue...
Posted by Dr.Intellegent 2 years ago
Sorry, It doesn't seem to allow me to say touch"
Posted by Dr.Intellegent 2 years ago
Posted by Dr.Intellegent 2 years ago
Posted by Actionsspeak 2 years ago
Actually 30 hours a week qualifies you for full time, which = Obamacare
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Kleptin 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: I would say that this debate was fairly evenly matched throughout, with a stronger lead from Con at the beginning that carried over slowly. Con used a better collection of sources to validate his points. Pro demonstrated a fair understanding of the issue, but seemed to hop and flip-flop throughout the debate. I would have liked to see more defined arguments from Pro, and a lesser quantity of them.