The minimum wage increases teenage and minority unemployment

Since there is not a lot in your last argument I won't take as long on rebuttal. Taking your graphs, they do appear to show that teenage unemployment rises with increases in the minimum wage but I see two problems with this. Firstly that you seen to have forgotten that the financial world was brought to it's knees around the time where both the minimum wage and unemployment figures went up. It was not solely due to an increase in the minimum wage and all unemployment figures sky rocketed around that time and I think it is an important fact to remember. The second thing I see wrong with using this graph in this debate is that we are not debating whether a rise in the minimum wage increases teenage unemployment we are debating whether having a minimum wage is better for teens and minorities or not. There are limits to what price this will be effective but at the times in the graph you deem important the world was on it's knees and I don't find this a valid case for this debate. The part of the graph that I do find interesting however is the information prior to January 2007 where the minimum wage was held constant (but there was still a minimum wage in place) and the unemployment figures actually decreased. I will look into this more in my substantive. I also have a few problems with your next point. But before I discuss it I would like to ask you for clarification on your sentence : "ALso the first source shows that if you raise it buisness lay of teenagers and minorities forst." I'm having trouble following what you mean. I also believe that your point, "their earnings probably don't affect the family's standard of living very much" actually supports my argument as you have failed to realise that most women who are working at the minimum wage will not be married to someone who is in a much greater financial situation to themselves therefore the family's standard of living is very much reliant on both incomes. Also if we assume that you are somehow suggesting that we take the view that simply because a women is married then her husband can support her you are actually damaging the minorities case. As I have said before minorities are at risk of being used as cheap labour and this statement makes it sound like you think this is something that is acceptable. I shall explain. The minimum wage is not in place and a married women applies for a job, if we are to assume that this women is being financially supported in a sufficient manner by her husband then they company looking to save a few dollars decides to hire her for a ridiculously low wage (being British I am not sure how many dollars this would be but in Britain I would say ï¿½3 an hour) instead of what the skills and labour of the job actually requires, ï¿½7 an hour. Since we do not have a minimum wage in place there is no stopping this from happening and the women is discriminated against in her pay which the state does have a duty to stop as this is the role of the state. On to my substantive now. I will discuss in more detail reducing stigma and will then discuss minority education. Going back to the graph, there are a few reasons that can explain this decrease in unemployment which shows how important the minimum wage is. The first one is stigma. teenagers are seen in society as having less experience therefore being less able to work (I am discussing from a personal view). When this happens teenagers are generalised and paid less simply for being of a certain age even though you have the skills required for a higher wage. Teenagers are then more likely to think a job isn't worth it because they are not going to be paid according to their skills and they pay they do receive is mostly likely to be unworthy of the time they sacrifice for the job. In this case less teens are going to have the incentive to go out and get a job. When a minimum wage is introduced teenagers have to be paid a reasonable wage (though still less than adults in Britain accounting for lack of experience due to age) and so a job therefore becomes worth it. When more teens apply for jobs they become a bigger available work source for employers meaning they will more likely look to teenagers for work in specific areas. Stigma is also combated here as teens are now a valued work force not just kids looking for more pocket money. Combating stigma for minorities also works in a similar way. For my second point about minority education I would like to clarify that I think this applies mostly to ethnic minorities so that is how I am classifying "minority" for this point. Especially in American we tend to see many poorer areas dominated by minorities. These areas do not have the best services and tend to have higher crime rates. This means that it is very difficult for people living in these areas to get a good job and break out of this life of near poverty. For those minorities that are trying to break away they have to have the same chance as anyone else at getting a job and starting a career. A minimum wage does not guarantee a job or a career but it levels the playing field by ensuring that minorities are treated equally. The problems you discussed about the lack of education stem from many of these minorities living in poor areas because of the way they bad were treated and are sometimes still treated today. This rises from stigma and racial hatred which the minimum wage can do some good in combating. It also arises because many of these minorities have immigrated in search of a better future. Those initial immigrants were not given the best chance of a new future but that can be changed now for their children and grandchildren because the minimum wage is the governments way of saying that everyone has the right to be treated fairly and not be discriminated against. To recap, because the minimum wage helps combat stigma in society and gives everyone a level playing field in their work then it helps teens and minorities more than it hinders them.