The minimum wage should not be raised to $15/hr for fast food workers

Summary My opponents case rest on the notion of correlation being causation. For me to meet by BOP here, I must either show that with a MW hike, jobs either remain the same, or increase, while my opponent must show they will decrease. I have shown that they have correlated with increase, but have other benefits as well. (Such as less paid on welfare, or a de facto stimulus effect as well). The Card and Kreuger Studies Are Sound While my opponent might claim that I based my case on one study, this is false. I noted that the C&K studies not only went state to state, but tested it at the federal level as well, and also with the state of California, they were then verified in 2005 by T.D Stanley, and meta-analysis also shows that my opponents study ignored variables, were designed with publication bias, and failed to show that MW harms jobs. This is not a hasty conclusion, this is an economic reality. Meta-analysis takes all the studies done on MW and tries to show a general trend in those studies, those trends showed a correlation with job increases, or no impact on jobs confirming the soundness of C&K studies. Furthermore, as with the fact that 90% of the world has some form of MW legislation, and the meta-analysis showing overwhelming evidence of error for those studies against MW, showed that again my opponents study was designed to fail (no moving t-score means junk science, as more data you get the t-score MUST change otherwise your ignoring variables). That's great that he cites a study that showed MW costed jobs, but again correlation is not causation, and furthermore as my previous link noted on the meta-analysis states: “Hristos Doucouliagos and T.D. Stanley conducted a similar meta-analysis of 64 U.S. studies on dis-employment effects and concluded that Card and Krueger's initial claim of publication bias is still correct. Moreover, they concluded, "Once this publication selection is corrected, no evidence of a negative association between minimum wages and employment remains." My opponent simply claims this is bogus, and dismisses my evidence asking for more, this is the moving the goal-post fallacy. I provided evidence, and my link was fine. Here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org... I Did Not Make an Ad Populum Fallacy My opponent is factually wrong, I noted that in some places (Latin America, Africa, etc...) MW is simply customary, which is an exception for the Ad Populum fallacy. Furthermore, appeal to popularity is valid only when the questions are whether the belief is widespread and to what degree. I had noted that MW was in over 90% of the world, that was it. Therefore, this does not qualify for the Ad populum fallacy, as it's impacts are debated, however, factually it is used internationally, and thus ample data exists. http://en.wikipedia.org... McDonald's Has Been Around Since the 1940's And Has Seen MW Increase. Their Tech Went the Opposite Way My opponent continues to claim that automation would steal jobs, but this does not make sense for several reasons as I noted earlier: 1) McDonalds has gone the opposite way, from a self-serve resturaunt to a more “factory” like one (as noted in their history) and 2) They've been around for years and seen MW hike about 15 times, yet they still have not completely automated like my opponent claims. What makes now so different? Even then, technology innovation is excellent for the economy, and as I pointed out earlier is a case for MW increases, not against it! (Due to time constraints, this is the last of my argument) Thank you Roy, I accepted this to assist me in an essay for Minimum wage Legislation! I'm happy we had this debate and hope to battle it out again another time!