The Instigator
Politician
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
AgnosticRadar
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Minimum 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...
Politician
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/29/2014 Category: Economics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 401 times Debate No: 44851
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

Politician

Pro

Rules

1. No plagiarism. In other words, don't copy someone else's work and claim it as your own.

2. You may only troll when things get completely out of hand.

Failure to follow these rules will result in a 7-point forfeiture.

Presentations

1. There is an owner of a company, where people can employ and work for the owner. If there was no minimum wage, an employee can work for months and only earn a dollar because, it belongs to the owner. The government doesn't really have any business in that.

2. The minimum wage would be higher than it currently is if an employee didn't deserve, say, 10 dollars for working, say, an hour. However, apparently, they do deserve it.
AgnosticRadar

Con

I wish the Con part is still open. Going against this topic will be hard. But I accept the challenge.

Argument #1:
If every worker in the U.S. made more than minimum wage there would be layoffs across the board. Due to the fact that the more their workers make, the more they have to downsize so they don't have to close the doors.

Argument #2:
Although I do support raising the minimum wage limit, I disagree on drastic increases. It just can't be done without whiplashes in the corporate world and in the working sector.

This concludes my first argument. I am eager to hear my opponents arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
Politician

Pro

Rebuttals

Argument #1:
If every worker in the U.S. made more than minimum wage there would be layoffs across the board. Due to the fact that the more their workers make, the more they have to downsize so they don't have to close the doors.

Yes. An employee can be taking advantage of their work by only working say, an hour, and make say, $20 (Which for now, we'll assume is more than our current minimum wage). Since they don't deserve it, they'll be discharged, either temporarily or permanently, because of the suspicion of taking advantage of work. So yes, indeed, there must be a minimum wage. Expecially the fact that like said, an employee can work for months and only earn a dollar because, it belongs to the owner. The government doesn't really have any business in that. However, now, out of curiosity: Is this even supposed to be a rebuttal?

Argument #2:
Although I do support raising the minimum wage limit, I disagree on drastic increases. It just can't be done without whiplashes in the corporate world and in the working sector.

My 2nd argument wasn't supporting increase in minimum wage. My 2nd argument was that if a person worked say, an hour, and minimum wage, at the very least, was earned by working an hour, that person deserved that amount.

I await my opponent's next set of arguments.

Also, I thank Con for accepting this.
AgnosticRadar

Con

First of all I thank Pro for a quick response.

"Yes. An employee can be taking advantage of their work by only working say, an hour, and make say, $20 (Which for now, we'll assume is more than our current minimum wage). Since they don't deserve it, they'll be discharged, either temporarily or permanently, because of the suspicion of taking advantage of work. So yes, indeed, there must be a minimum wage. Expecially the fact that like said, an employee can work for months and only earn a dollar because, it belongs to the owner. The government doesn't really have any business in that. However, now, out of curiosity: Is this even supposed to be a rebuttal?"

As in the argument above, In actuality, no company would ever schedule an employee for 1 hour. We'll assume that the minimum wage is in fact $10.00, if this were to happen, then the company would be forced to fire people, because if they spend more money paying their employees than taking in during that expense period, they would have to fire people to make up the loss.

"My 2nd argument wasn't supporting increase in minimum wage. My 2nd argument was that if a person worked say, an hour, and minimum wage, at the very least, was earned by working an hour, that person deserved that amount."

As for the argument above. Although the worker most of the time deserves the wage they receive depending on their performance. But in many cases employees that work their asses off and barely make enough to fill their gas tank don't make enough. Then in that case they do need a wage increase. But you still have to keep in mind equality. If one worker that works the same position, and started the same time as the other, and works the same hours, but makes more than the other employee, this is wrong. Lets say that we do raise the minimum wage, what would be the backlashes? If any?

Thank you, this concludes my second argument. I am eager to hear my opponents response. Thank you

Here is a supporting link.

[1] http://www.forbes.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Politician

Pro

Rebuttals

"Yes. An employee can be taking advantage of their work by only working say, an hour, and make say, $20 (Which for now, we'll assume is more than our current minimum wage). Since they don't deserve it, they'll be discharged, either temporarily or permanently, because of the suspicion of taking advantage of work. So yes, indeed, there must be a minimum wage. Expecially the fact that like said, an employee can work for months and only earn a dollar because, it belongs to the owner. The government doesn't really have any business in that. However, now, out of curiosity: Is this even supposed to be a rebuttal?"

As in the argument above, In actuality, no company would ever schedule an employee for 1 hour. We'll assume that the minimum wage is in fact $10.00, if this were to happen, then the company would be forced to fire people, because if they spend more money paying their employees than taking in during that expense period, they would have to fire people to make up the loss.

Maybe, sometimes, the owner of a business schedules their employee for 1 hour for something. Alright. Let's assume that the minimum wage is $10,000. The company may have to discharge employees becauuse if an employee works even more than that, it would exceed $10,000, and a company may not have that much. However, you can not use this as a contention; Why would the government set the minimum wage up to that?

Also, apologies for the misunderstanding.

"My 2nd argument wasn't supporting increase in minimum wage. My 2nd argument was that if a person worked say, an hour, and minimum wage, at the very least, was earned by working an hour, that person deserved that amount."

As for the argument above. Although the worker most of the time deserves the wage they receive depending on their performance. But in many cases employees that work their asses off and barely make enough to fill their gas tank don't make enough. Then in that case they do need a wage increase. But you still have to keep in mind equality. If one worker that works the same position, and started the same time as the other, and works the same hours, but makes more than the other employee, this is wrong. Lets say that we do raise the minimum wage, what would be the backlashes? If any?

An employee can work his/her *ss off, and in return, earns money, however, that is not the amount they need for something. However, that's not the owner of the business's fault; You HAVE to earn it; If you deserve a certain amount of money, that's the amount that you should receive. The owner can exceed that wage if he/she would be willing to do the favor.

That concludes my argument. I await my opponent's next set of arguments.
AgnosticRadar

Con

Thank you for the quick response.

Due to the fact that I have ran out of arguments, and I have a killer migraine from other debates. I forfeit my part of the debate. In the beginning I was still for raising the minimum wage. But not drastically due to the fact that it would have dire outcomes.

I thank you for taking part in this.

This concludes my part in this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
Politician

Pro

Sadly, this ends in a concession. But nonetheless, thank you so much for taking part in this debate, Con! With you, this was very interesting! If you would like, later on, we can restart the debate. :D
AgnosticRadar

Con

I apologize for the concession. And for sure. I would love to restart the debate another day.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 2 years ago
Krazzy_Player
PoliticianAgnosticRadarTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con conceded