Minimum Wage Should Be Abolished in the United States

Whether or not most countries have minimum wage laws is hardly relevant, and considering the fact that most of the world's nations are doing poorly economically, it doesn't really strengthen your position. You ask me to prove that the Negative Income Tax is not communist. Seriously? You obviously need to look up the definitions of words before you use them, namely the word communism. Communism is the political ideology advocating that all property be shared by the people and/or owned by the state. How you manage to come to the conclusion that the Negative Income Tax is communist is beyond me. In fact, the fact that the government is GIVING money to individuals, as opposed to SHARING it, automatically makes it NOT communist; it doesn't fall under the category of money being shared by the people, and it involves the government giving up ownership, not holding it. In addition, I think it would be useful for you to better understand the definition of money, which is "a circulating medium of exchange". The whole reason money exists as a system of "exchange" is to enable people to purchase and obtain personal and individualized ownership of products, and not shared ownership. So in fact, under true communism, there would be no need for money. Aside from that, the way that you throw the term towards the concept I brought fourth as freely as you do, without justification, is astonishingly cheap. First and foremost, you take for granted the fact that people, most of whom have an extraordinarily superficial understanding of what the word even means, automatically discredit something as soon as they believe it's communist. They do so because their minimal knowledge of the word's meaning only allows them to understand the fact that its bad. Most know nothing more beyond that, so it's easy to convince them that something you don't like is communist, simply by labeling it as such. In terms of how you point out my example of $3.00 versus $6.00, I'd first like to point out that my example actually involved $3.00 and $5.00. But all things aside, it doesn't matter what numbers are used in the examples. The example is merely intended to make a general point, not to declare that the variables of that example are or would be the same in all situations. The same goes for the numbers I used for both the tax percentage and the fixed payment amount in my example for the negative income tax. It doesn't mean the numbers HAVE to be $10,000 and 25%. In other words, it doesn't have to be set up so that 45% of Americans fall below the break-even point. It can be adjusted accordingly. Besides, if you mean to imply that this percentage would mean that the government would not be taking in enough taxes to sustain itself, you're forgetting the fact that government expenses such as social security, welfare, and food stamps would become obsolete under the system. I never said anything about negative income tax NOT increasing taxes. I never even said I'm in favor of lowering, or even maintaining our current tax rate. And to be frank, you're doing roughly the same thing you were doing with the word "communism." You're essentially throwing the phrase "increased taxes" around, taking for granted the fact that people don't like paying taxes, yet they ignore the fact that taxes are how our society functions. You claim that minimum wage decreases insourcing, while a lack of minimum wage increases it. In order for this to be true, you'd have to rephrase it in the following way: insourcing remains roughly the same with or without minimum wage laws. Under minimum wage, more immigrants are attracted into the country due to the increased wage, yet things ultimately balance out, due to the fact that more jobs are available within their country of origin, and therefore, roughly the same amount of people are willing to stay. Without minimum wage, more immigrants are attracted into the country due to the fact that there are less jobs available in their country of origin, yet others remain home because the amount of income received would be more or less the same. The negative income tax would not encourage illegal immigrants to enter the country (illegal immigrants, by the way, account for the vast majority of insourced jobs that work for the lowest wages). Essentially, in order for a person to receive their fixed payment from the government, they would essentially have to go through a process that would reveal whether or not that person had documented proof of citizenship. Any illegal immigrant attempting to go through this process is ultimately asking to be deported. As for anything else you've said in your second round, I suggest you go back to my previous arguments; they already explain why the rest of these are incorrect. Besides, I've just about run out of characters.