Minimum Wage Should be Abolished

Video + Unemployment "Your video makes the “key observation” that min. wage increase is.... the key point in this video irrelevant." I was responding to your first argument, which was based on a raise in min. wage. I wouldn't have talked about any raise in min. wage had you not made your argument dependent on it at the start. In the video, he makes the observation that any min. wage is a problem. As he said, "I don't think the gov. should have any min. wage, because it restricts the freedom of contract." The freedom of contract is a very important idea. Through freedom of contract, individuals entail a general freedom to choose with whom to contract, whether to contract or not, and on which terms to contract. The freedom of contract causes mutually beneficial agreements, while minimum wage is a forceful decision. Increases the standard of living for the poorest and most vulnerable class in society "The principles of good economic practice should remain timeless." I was pointing out that your sources were from 1998 and 1999, and the data was from 2005 and 2006. This doesn't make sense. "I know that my rebuttal... counters this argument." You didn't counter the idea that the 14.5 million who earn above the min. wage aren't the ones that need help the most, it's those who make the min., under, or nothing that need it. The number you attempt to help in poverty from min. wage (380k) is much less than the number that could be helped without it (millions of unemployed). Business exploitation and the Anchoring effect "Finding people overseas that are not only willing... small and medium businesses will have little chance pursuing this." You bring up the point that small and medium businesses can't outsource jobs. This is important, because these are the very ones that are hurt most by min. wage. It's not the big business owners that will lose their jobs, it's those that can't afford to pay for gov-generated, high cost workers. Nonetheless, more outsourcing is a direct result from creating high-cost workers in America. You conceded to this in your summary. "Having a less than min. wage job is illegal in a country with min. wage... can’t pay above the poverty line, as these are slave labour rates." Why shouldn't businesses generate profits if they can't pay above the poverty line, when the people accept these wages? People would only accept the wages if they believe this is their best option. Whether it be for some extra money, the experience, deciding if the career is right for them, networking opportunities, apply classroom knowledge, gain confidence, or transition into a higher job, they should be able to make the decision without the government telling them no. This is about having the freedom to make decisions for oneself. Why do you think you could choose for them better? "1. This prevents businesses from driving down the min. market wage to slave wage levels. 2. Unemployment benefits can be given to those whom are actively seeking a job" What prevents businesses from driving min. wage to levels that people don't want is the fact people would not take the job, if there is a better option. You claim that unemployment benefits can be given to those whom are actively seeking job. I think you mean seeking a min. wage or above paying job, as you prevent lower paying jobs from being available. Also, I'm not debating against giving unemployment benefits in this debate. In fact, we could still give unemployment benefits while having no min. wage. People need not take a less than min. wage paying job if unemployment is a better option. They could wait until they get a job that pays above the poverty line, if they need such a job to live. For those that don't, such as many young workers, they could take those less than min. wage jobs for all the benefits that come with it. "There are far too many variables that generate business revenue.... This conclusion is consistent with the Anchoring fallacy." I think this is irrelevant as you concede that a standard can be set between companies. But when there is normal work conditions, prices could be gauged for the entire industry. Of course it won't be perfect, but it's better than a flat rate across all industries for all jobs, which min. wage creates. "Okay, the standard can be set by the competition... level for businesses to generate profits." What ensures wage rates are not lowered further beyond what people want is decided by the people themselves. They choose whether to join or not. They don't need to take job if they have better options. Acceptable levels for profit generation is set through competition between companies. "When there is a highish unemployment rate... There needs to be a floor price which will stop businesses from dropping their wage rates too low." When there is high unemployment, the worst thing the gov. could do is prevent job creation. This is what min. wage does. Your solution to business exploitation is preventing people from taking jobs by their own choice. This solution causes more unemployment. Causing zero income is not a solution to poverty. Who determines what unacceptable rates are, are the people that either take the job or don't. As I said, unemployment benefits could be given to those who couldn't afford to have such low paying jobs. Not taking the job is a bargaining chip for the employee. "Min. wage can be set lower than the market average... the average market rates towards slave labour rates." The problem with min. wage is it's a flat rate across all industry sectors for every job. The market average varies depending on the job. For example, the market average for windshield cleaners at gas stations would be much lower than many jobs that are currently at min. wage. Exploitation of those higher paying jobs would hypothetically occur either way. What actually stops this exploitation is a person's ability to choose whether to work or not. Also, the lowest rate would be min. wage. That isn't helpful. Not even a minimum wage of $.01 would be useful because people wouldn't take the job without a good reason. People would not take wage rates significantly below market wage rates. Slave labor rates wouldn't form. The only way this would form is if people decided to take this because it is their best option. If it truly was the best option for them, then let them take it. The gov. shouldn't prevent people from taking any willful decision that doesn't infringe on someone else's rights. "Unless I’ve misread this, 33,606... to 50% of working parents fall below the poverty line of 2006 in terms of wage income." The poverty line for families is not in proportion with individuals. "Even the vast majority of older adults who earn the min. wage live above the Poverty line. They have an average family income of $33,600 a year, well above the Poverty line of $19,806 per year for a family of four. The average older min. wage-earner simply does not fit the stereotype of a worker living on the edge of destitution."(2) My statistic of 23% stands. Alternatives to Min. Wage The biggest contention you have made is that exploitation will be a bigger problem without minimum wage. There are various solutions that solve the issues min. wage wishes to, without the huge drawbacks. These include the basic income, guaranteed minimum income, refundable tax credit, and collective bargaining. Conclusion The benefits of minimum wage do not outweigh the disadvantages it brings. If your goal is to help people get out of poverty, consider the options I gave. The min. wage hurts more in poverty than it helps. It prevents them from getting the benefits of having any job. It takes away the benefits one would get from an internship, while also getting pay. Poverty and unemployment are major issues in our country today. I hope I have showed you and anyone who read this that individual freedom can make things better. Vote Pro 1. http://www.heritage.org...