Minimum Wage Laws In The USA Should Be Abolished

Thanks for a punctual response, Con. On to my rebuttals. Primary Objectives Of Minimum Wage Laws It seems like you don't agree with me on what the objectives of minimum wage laws are. You cite a paper that offers an opinion on the purpose of the Federal Minimum Wage when it was first enacted: “The purpose of the minimum wage was to stabilize the post-depression economy and protect the workers in the labor force.” There are 2 problems with this. First, the Great Depression was long ago, so this is no longer relevant; your source says that was the purpose, implying that it is not the purpose today. Second, your paper effectively admits that this may not actually have been the true purpose, since it goes on to say that: “Others have argued that the primary purpose was [something else]” Since you have not offered an alternative explanation for what the primary goals of minimum wage laws are, only what they were, we are left with the same 2 objectives that I listed in the previous round: decreasing unemployment and poverty. You say that minimum wage laws aren't directed at reducing poverty. This is incorrect. In his 2013 State of the Union Address, Obama supported raising the Federal Minimum Wage by arguing that full-time workers shouldn't have to be poor: “[L]et’s declare that in the wealthiest nation on Earth, no one who works full-time should have to live in poverty, and raise the federal minimum wage to $9.00 an hour.” The Employment Policies Institute also calls the minimum wage “a program intended to reduce poverty.” (my 4th source from Round 2) You say minimum wage laws don't entitle the unemployed to reaping benefits, but that's kind of a strawman because I never argued that they do. You also say that minimum wage laws “specifically target” workers to make sure they have the wages required “to live and be in satisfactory health.” First, let me point out that this is basically saying that reducing poverty is a primary goal of minimum wage laws, which contradicts one of your earlier statements. Second, I've already demonstrated that minimum wage laws do an awful job at targeting. If you look back to the previous round, I referenced a study which showed that increases the Federal Minimum Wage from 2007-2009 targeted those who were already well above the poverty threshold! If a primary goal of minimum wages is to protect workers from wages that are below what is “required to live and be in satisfactory health”, than it is immensly wasteful. This is just another reason to support abolishment. My opponent cited the minimum wage and unemployment rate of San Fracisco, California. Since he didn't base any argument on these statistics, I'm still wondering why he posted them... “Historically, minimum wage has been increased in the United States on multiple occasions. Each time, people argued that raising it would be catastrophic - however, decades later, the United States still has the largest GDP in the world.” This appears to be another strawman. I never argued that minimum wage laws are “catastrophic,” nor that they must be to warrant their abolishment. Neither did I argue that increasing the minimum wage requirement would drop the USA down a spot on the GDP leaderboard. What I said was a law should be abolished if merely fails to meet it's primary objectives. You agreed with me: “It is, indeed, quite true that a law should be abolished if it doesn't accomplish, or works against its primary objective.” Effects On Prices You spent a lot of your time arguing that increasing the minimum wage wouldn't dramatically affect prices. I'm just going to leave those bits alone for now, since my burden of proof doesn't depend on it. Further Rebuttals You said that “raising minimum wage would[...] bring many already-employed workers out of poverty.” The study from my 4th source in Round 2 addresses this: “While an increase in the minimum wage will lift the families of some low-skilled workers who remain employed out of poverty, other low-skilled workers will lose their jobs or have their hours significantly cut, dropping their families into poverty.” In other words, there is no net reduction in poverty nor unemployment; in fact, their may be a net increase. “A low minimum wage effectively discourages workers to work, so even if many corporate jobs were to open by the abolition of such laws, many people would refuse to take them out of feelings of entitlement to a living wage.” Those are incorrect assumptions. Increasing the minimum wage raises the cost of labor at about the same rate. This means that any unemployment due to unsatisfaction with the minimum wage will remain the same regardless of how many times you increase the minimum wage. Back to you, Con.