The effects of a minimum wage on an economy are bad

To start I would like to point out a very important flaw to my opponents case for ‘a minimum wage has bad effects on the economy’. Even if you take every contention he made at face value and consider them standing un-refuted by me, all he has amounted to showing is that ‘Raising the minimum wage has bad effects on the economy’. All of his arguments are based on the history of what happens when it goes up, which will might speak volumes for keeping it keeping it were its at or even trying to decrease it some but not strait up remove a minimum wage all together. C1: Teenage unemployment. Pro has tried to pass off Teenage unemployment off on an increase in the minimum wage. “the M. W. goes up, and we see teen unemployment go up too” so ergo its totally the M. W.’s fault. But this ignores the other factors wich I would even make the case are the primary reason for drop in teenage unemployment, the extended age of adolescence that has infected Generation Y. http://www.joshuakennon.com... http://www.thedailybeast.com... http://www.christianpost.com... http://www.leadershipnow.com... fact is for teenagers in our new generation which I am a part of, opportunities for jobs or not their just not taking them seriously, wanting to have fun and put off responsibility until later in life. This has been attributed by Tim Elmor to lots of things like our connected to some kind of tech lives, or being told lies of ‘we can do anything if we try’ by our helicopter parents, and the new role of women in societies effect. C2: Minority unemployment Although the coincidence of what ethnics are already in poor area’s that are affected by what hurts the economy the most, I fail to see how observing they are minorities adds to the case. We do not owe the ethnics of the majority employment more than the minorities or vice versa. What matters is that employment goes up period. To give any special attention anyway to help the minorities in poorer areas would require working on cultural changes not….money regulation changes. C3: Overall unemployment I’m going to use this contention as a chance to address the ‘your worth 5 dollars for your skill’ thing, though my initial case this round was enough to negate it from affecting the resolution (just means don’t RAISE the M.W.). That employers would naturally want to put a figure they like on how much they think your service, your time, and your talent should be worth like $5.00, is exactly the reason a M.W. is needed. That you might be low skilled is irrelevant. As inflation occurs and the cost of living go up causing workers to HAVE to work for more for it to be worth there valuable time, high skilled use of it or not, the cost of employing a worker has to go up too. Employers should have the freedom to offer wages higher or lower as they see fit, but they cant be allowed to drop them soooo low. There has to be a minimum. Now setting the minimum too high Pro has shown results in adverse effects, but don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. If my boss thought she could get away with only offering to pay me less than 7.25 an hour for working at the convenience store she almost certainly would especially if the economy drops. They cant set there tax’s but they can set my salary. While I understand only paying the minimum amount you have to for employing me to give up over half of the time in my week to keep her place of business operating at all is a rational choice for her especially when anyone could qualify for the job skill wise (my work ethic cant be so easily replaced though) it does not change that I or anyone else need to be paid at least a minimum amount. If I spend 38 hours a week at that place and just make 100 bucks, something is very wrong for all hours I have lost serving their customers and operating their store. The best case that you make involves the simply math problem of if it cost more to employ me because of federal payroll taxes then what they make by my dedicated service keeping the store running then its literal charity on their part to employ me at all. While that sounds like a compelling argument on the surface but upon closer examination it really only logically supports the resolution “Payroll tax’s at their current rate are hurting the economy” or even “Tax’s are bad”. Change the tax’s not the M.W. doing otherwise would be like treating the symptoms and not the disease of that is this problem. C4: Drop outs. I agree fewer drop-outs help the economy, but after reading your source again and again I can’t see how it connects High School drop outs to no teenage job. And it goes against all of my common sense to think there can be any connection. I did not have a job going through high school or college with the exception of one lower than minimum wage summer job at camp. It paid as much as a union does to have you stand in a picket line for way less hours and work. I graduated High School with an advance diploma and I have two degrees from College now. (if your wondering why I have a minimum wage job, its called ‘adding work experience to the résumé). Not having a job while you’re in high school makes it easier to focus on homework and classes, not make it harder causing you to drop out. That there are correlating rates between drop outs and the teen unemployment is almost a sure sign both are connected to the extended age of adolescence with our generation and not the M.W. Because there is such a lack of logical reason employment status would directly affect (or indirectly) staying in public school is probably why its not talked about very often. I await my opponents response.