On the authoritative minimum wage.

Regarding my opponent's assumptions, this debate concerns the general application of a minimum wage policy. Otherwise, nothing truly matters. The current situation in the United States can be referenced, but it is not the focus of the debate. In my opponent's introduction, she claims that outsourcing is a reason to be PRO minimum wage, when, in fact, minimum wage is the ultimate cause of outsourcing. If the minimum wage is high enough, then it then becomes more practical to move means of production to a place with a cheaper labour market. She also claims that the recession is a reason to be PRO minimum wage, despite its harmful effects on employment, and that undocumented workers are an argument to be PRO minimum wage, when in fact, they are not. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ MY OPPONENT'S CONTENTIONS: 1a) My opponent claims that companies will still employ workers at a high wage. While this is true (as I have said in my first argument regarding when wages can be effectively risen), it leads to price inflation: The natural price of a product is based on many factors and among these is labour. When the costs of labour increase, the price of its products increase as a result. When this happens market-wide (as it would with a minimum wage), it leads to this price inflation. This price inflation increases until the nominal value of labour is essentially what it was before [1]. 1b) My opponent's following argument is based in logical fallacy. Workers are typically paid less when there is a greater supply than demand [2]. The influx of labourers should naturally lead to a decrease in the value of said labour. Workers earn less as a result. The claim that a minimum wage would help said labourers is logically flawed, as the nominal value of their work would be more likely than otherwise to sink below this value. Cheap labour is always temporary. As labour is cheaper, it is easier to effectively start a new business. This should lead to an increase in demand of labour, resulting in the increase in value of labour [2]. Then, wages rise again. My opponent argues that the economy would suffer "GREATLY" if people made less money; however, with cheaper labour comes cheaper products. Essentially, they live as before. 2a) My opponent has a political argument here. By saying that people work for the minimum wage and that said minimum wage would disappear, she creates fear for the labourer. This is actually how the minimum wage was instated. In this contention, my opponent argues that dependants would bid their labour down to compete with other workers for low paying jobs. Apparently, without a minimum to not bid below, labourers will bid their labour down infinitely. I have already shown how this ends itself (as it makes business cheaper and employment less preferable, more businesses are created, and the demand for labour rises back above the supply). The said cycle works out fine for all involved. Simply, to say that people would not be able to afford "basic necessities" is silly. 3a) My opponent claims that "families would be forced to receive government aid". My opponent claims that this aid will include unemployment benefits. However, eliminating the minimum wage will not destroy any more jobs than it creates. In fact, it will create jobs formerly outlawed. Further, the system in question is not particularly revolving around the United States. The question of welfare is irrelevant. 3b) My opponent claims that price inflation occurs when there is less demand. However, price deflation occurs instead. Rather than putting a burden on Americans, the market naturally eases them until prices return to their natural values. Further, there will not be less demand because there will be more employment (which then leads to higher wages, etc. ) 3c) My opponent makes an economically silly argument again saying that the cost of American goods will increase (false); therefore, the economy will be destroyed (which wouldn't happen anyways even if prices rose). Further, outsourcing would be cut as it would be more practical to keep production within the United States. 4a) My opponent claims that increasing employment rates and costs of labour would lead to a sudden increase in the income gap. However, making small business more practical would only help the economy. Increasing the demand for labour will only increase wages for labourers. 4b) See 3a. My opponent repeats herself. 5a) My opponent is correct in saying that higher wages would help the economy. However, a minimum wage will only cut jobs out of market plausibility. My opponent also says that 80% of business owners would not suffer from an increase in the minimum wage. My opponent's statistic is a drive-by statistic in that it groups those who would benefit with those who BELIEVE that they would benefit with those who would not. And as I have shown, none would benefit from an increase. My opponent claims that some Fiscal Policy Institute has defended the minimum wage. However, there are many such institutes and her source is unverified. I have already covered the effects of having a minimum wage in my opening argument (which my opponent merely laughed off and didn't respond to logically). 5b) Jared Bernstein is hardly nonpartisan. . http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com... C_) My opponent claims that "economists" agree that increasing the minimum wage is good for America. She sources ONE economist (not plural) from the left. her source is hardly reliable. However, the Wealth Of Nations, a book that effectively details every aspect of the capitalist system, is much more objective. Had my opponent sourced John Maynard Keynes, then her source would have been relevant. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ A minimum wage is illogical from the arguments above stated and from the still unrefuted truth in the first round. My opponent's logic is based in economic fallacy and statist propaganda. [1] The Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith. Chapter VI: Of The Component Parts Of The Price of Commodities. [2] The Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith. Chapter VIII: Of the Wages of Labour.