Resolved: Just governments ought to require that employers pay a living wage.

I affirm the resolution that "just government ought to require that employers pay a living wage."Contention I: A living wage varies between communities, so a nationwide raise is not practical or effective.In the United States, the cost of living varies greatly between states and within states. A living wage, which in Hawaii is $13.74 [1] is $9.79 in North Dakota [2]. Even on a county level there are large differences in what can be considered a living wage. For example, the living wage in Mountrail County, ND is $11.99 [3], but is $9.26 in Grand Forks County, ND [4]. These inequities and variations in the cost of living make a nationwide wage floor an unjust proposition. In keeping with the resolution, the government ought to require that employers pay the living wage for their county. Contention II: Raising the living wage improves overall health and wellbeing. Subpoint A: Studies have shown that a raise in pay correlates to improved health.A study analyzing data from the California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) found that "people whose family incomes are below the federal poverty line are more than four times as likely to rate their health as poor or fair compared to people with family incomes of more than three times the federal poverty level [5]." An additional study published in the American Journal of Public Health predicts that an increase of the minimum wage to $11.00 would reduce the rate of premature death in individuals 24-44 years with an annual income less than $20,000 [6]. Low wages in baseline years have also been found to increase the risk of hypertension, especially in women and persons under age 40 [7]. Overall, a wage increase would decrease state healthcare spending [21].Subpoint B: Children of low-wage workers would be benefited. A wage increase would benefit 19% of all children in the U.S., as 27% of affected low-wage workers have at least one child [8]. These children and adolescents in the lowest socioeconomic group are 2.5 times more likely to suffer from mental illness than those in the highest [9]. Children who live in these low-income households are also more likely to drop out of school, become pregnant at an early age, and assume adult responsibilities than their higher-income peers [10]. Some of these elevated numbers can be attributed to the disproportionate number of single-parent households among the working poor [11], as children who live with a single parent are more likely to do poorly in school or drop out [12] which correlates to elevated rates of risky behavior [13]. Contention III: Wage increases have minimal to no negative effect. Subpoint A: Increasing the wage floor would have no detrimental effect on small business owners.Many people fear that an increase in the minimum wage would force small businesses to either layoff workers or close. Although this is a reasonable assumption, there is little merit to this claim. In fact, around half of small business owners support raising the minimum wage [14] [15]. Some may consider this a sign that there is a large portion of the community that is supposedly most directly affected who do not support legislation that would raise the wages of their employees. Yet nearly 75% of small business owners "do not employ minimum wage workers" [14]. s://lh5.googleusercontent.com...; alt="" width="550px;" height="397px;" />15]Contention IV: The current minimum wage is extremely low when indexed to worker productivity. According to the Department of Labor, in order for consumer purchasing power to be equivalent to the 1960's, the federal minimum wage would need to be more than $11 [16]. Although the nominal minimum wage has increased since then, the wage floor fails to account for the increase in consumer prices, so the real minimum wage fell [17]. In measuring the real minimum wage, economists use a regression-based panel method which indicates that the current federal minimum wage, in absence of a price adjustment, under compensates workers [18]. -----------------------------------------------------------------My opponent has fundamental flaws in his arguments. First, he contends that "a fair living wage in indeterminable". In my first contention, I disproved this notion by explaining that a living wage varies greatly between communities and that a living wage is dependent on location so a national minimum wage is unreasonable. As the resolution states that a just government ought to require that employers pay a living wage, it is necessary to understand that a living wage varies significantly throughout the country [1] [2] [3] [4]. Additionally, my opponent states that the government should not have the authority to "mandate the lives of others by forcing employers to pay a wage that is unjust". This is fundamentally untrue, as the government regulates all aspects of business, including worker and food safety. These regulations require employers to spend more money to uphold these standards, so the argument that the government should not have the authority to mandate a wage increase also encompasses regulations that ensure both community and worker safety. In response to the claim that raising the living wage increases unemployment, studies have shown that it has little to no effect on the employment rate [15] [19] [20]. My opponent also cited a Seattle Times article to support his claim that the wage hike in Seattle resulted in restaurant closings. The full article, however, explains that many factors contributed to the closings: old-timers who "were simply ready for a change", facing tough odds (60,000 restaurants open and 50,000 close each year), and basic supply-and-demand principles [22]. The article also discloses that "none of our local departing/transitioning restaurateurs who announced their plans last month have mentioned this [the impending minimum wage hike] as an issue" [22]. Thus, my opponents claim that wage hikes result in small business closures and higher unemployments rates are refuted.[1] http://livingwage.mit.edu...[2] http://livingwage.mit.edu...[3] http://livingwage.mit.edu...[4] http://livingwage.mit.edu...[5] http://www.humanimpact.org...[6] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...[7] http://www.epi.org...[8] http://www.nytimes.com...[9] http://www.jstor.org...[10] https://www.umb.edu...[11] http://www.dol.gov...[12] http://scholarworks.wmich.edu...[13] http://jama.jamanetwork.com...[14] http://blogs.wsj.com...[15] http://www.ocpp.org...[16] http://www.dol.gov...[17] https://www.fas.org...[18] http://www2.gsu.edu...[19] http://edq.sagepub.com...[20] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu...[21] http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu...[22] http://www.seattlemag.com...