The Instigator
Sweg123
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Scots_167
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Should the minimum wage be increased to the proposed 15$ ?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/5/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 648 times Debate No: 90739
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

Sweg123

Con

I think the minimum wage should not be raised to the proposed $15/hour! The minimum wage should be $8.50/hour.

Accept this debate if you feel that the minimum wage should be 15$+ /hour like proposed by Bernie Sanders and Hilary Clinton.
Scots_167

Pro

Dear Sweg123,

I'm glad to accept this challenge, and I shall begin my arguement in the second round(as I consider the first round always the Acceptance Round and 2nd Your Reasions and then 3rd and 4th Rebuttal and Conclusion). I would like to clarify that Hillary wasn't Pro-$15/hour, until after Bernie came along. But that is not the point goodluck! Have fun!

Typed,
Scots
Debate Round No. 1
Sweg123

Con

I'm going to put it simply, if the minimum wage is 15 dollars an hour than:

1. A lot of people will lose their job due to the employer not having enough funds to pay them.

2. Some businesses that need a certain amount of employees will go out of business due (in some states) to nearly or even doubling the amount they have to pay their employees. (losing more jobs)

3. Inflation. Employers have to pay employees higher so to compensate they raise the price of their product/service thus creating inflation.

Those are my three main reasons why you should NOT raise the minimum wage to 15 dollars an hour.
Scots_167

Pro

Before I begin, I would like to restate I'm glad to have accepted my challenge, and glad to see this be something worth challenging.

Minimum Wage - the lowest wage permitted by law or by a special agreement (such as one with a labor union).

Here in this argument of mine, you shall see why and in fact a raising of the minimum wage wouldn't hurt, but help stimulate and benefit the economy.

Here is a simplified version of my argument, shortish maybe...:

First step is over a time of several years, the minimum wage would be increased $15(€13.15), this would allow for a livable wage instead of the current poverty level wage of $7.50(€6.36). This would mean that the standard of living would increase from being able to just afford food(or not even that much). To being able to provide for a family and provide food, shelter, and clothing.

On the other hand, this would help for a currency increase within the nation, by allowing more money to stay in the US, rather than going to foreign stockholders(great example would be China's stocks in the US).

Final thing is, the Business Benefit of a $15/hour, would help them have a stronger business. Businesses will benefit from this as an increase of higher-paid workers strongly grounded in that area, reducing worker exodus and costs for training new workers. As Daniel Flaming said, "It costs an estimated 30 percent of a worker’s annual salary to replace that worker, so reducing the frequency of worker turnover results in significant cost savings for employers."

Remember to Vote Pro, and good luck to my opponents questions and rebuttal to me next round!

Sources:
- https://berniesanders.com...
- http://economicrt.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Sweg123

Con

Sweg123 forfeited this round.
Scots_167

Pro

All Points Extended. Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 3
Sweg123

Con

Sorry for not responding, I was in an accident and went into a coma for multiple days. Fortunately, now I am back and able to respond.

Rebuttal to your first point:

Your point is that you will raise the minimum wage over years.( I would call this point idiotic but I was told not to insult my opponent.) This point does not make sense for many reasons, including (1.) that would simply not happen. (2.) That isn't the proposed change. (3.) My point against the minimum wage changing to $15 still stands.

Rebuttal to second point:

You think it will keep more money in the U.S. meanwhile it would actually cause more people to go over seas for employees.

Rebutal to third point:

You say that it would help make business' stronger but as I stated in my argument that it would obviously destroy a ton of jobs and businesses.
Scots_167

Pro

Scots_167 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: SirMaximus// Mod action: Removed<

2 points to Pro (Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Con used no sources, but Pro used the sources of Bernie Sanders's website and Economic Roundtable to back up his claims. Since Pro actually provided sources but Con provided no sources, Pro wins for reliable sources.

[*Reason for removal*] The voter fails to establish why the sources Pro provided were reliable. It has to be clear how they contributed to the debate, not merely that they were good sources.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: K-Lew// Mod action: Removed<

4 points to Con (S&G, Arguments), 2 points to Pro (Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Although Con had great arguments, he simply did not have sources to back up his claims. Pro used Bernie Sanders's policy of minimum wage on his website to back up his claims. Even though I sincerely disagree with Pro, he still technically used a reliable source. Con wins for spelling and grammar, considering Pro spelled reason wrong, (reason, not reasion).

[*Reason for removal*] (1) A single example of a spelling mistake is not sufficient to justify S&G. The argument must be difficult to read in order to award this point. (2) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter only restates the decision, without explaining why those arguments were "great".
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: DebaterGood// Mod action: Removed<

2 points to Pro (Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Since both forfeited a round, conduct goes to none. Point goes to Pro because he/she was only one who provided any sources.

[*Reason for removal*] Sources cannot be awarded solely on the basis of one side having more than the other, even if the amount is 0 to some. The voter is required to establish the relevance of those sources as well.
************************************************************************
Posted by Sweg123 1 year ago
Sweg123
I think it's obvious who won this debate, vote con.
Posted by K-Lew 1 year ago
K-Lew
Stop pretending to be in a coma Adam, you scrub lord.
Posted by K-Lew 1 year ago
K-Lew
Thank you Adam, for being con on this subject. Thank you....
No votes have been placed for this debate.