Should Minimum Wage Be Raised To 15 Dollars

Point A2: "My opponent seems so ignorant to the fact that if we increase our wages even more more people in the manufacturing industry will be laid off and their job will be done in a 3rd world country for cheaper."I assume my opponent thinks I am ignorant. However, I'm not quite as ignorant as he might think. I've provided, in two consecutive rounds, a source from a credible author and report that explains how outsourcing can be combated, or even solved, by using higher wages. Yet my opponent calls my stance "ignorant." The only source he's used in this entire debate doesn't specifically relate to outsourcing, and is more like an opinion column than a comendable source backed up by conducted studies. In case my opponent has not yet grasped this truth, I will attempt to explain it once more. Basically, outsourcing is where governments the contracts to other places, so they don't have to do the work. As the market is highly competitive, these private firms offer lower and lower wages, so the government doesn't have to spend so much money. As a result, people work from little to nothing with current wages. However, these people wouldn't even be in the contract work situation had their jobs payed enough to sustain them. With more money in their pockets, they don't have to search for work that promises high wages but then pays nothing. Instead, they will be able to support themselves with a job. He/she then brings up that this makes America less competitive. However, it can also better supply free market and free trade between country because of the heightened money flow I explained earlier.Point B2: "15,580 dollars a year is enough for one person and if you have a family of three there is likely two incomes "I would first like to point out that my opponent repeatedly describes low-wage workers with words such as "lazy" and "lethargic," both of which are stereotypical and disrespectful. Regardless, I will attack his/her points just the same. My opponent claims that 15k is enough for one person, and a family, because "there is likely two incomes." However, most of the time, they cannot get two jobs, especially for single mother's with two kids. Once again, my opponent stereotypes the situation. However, single mothers cannot get two jobs that pay enough to support her family and take care of her children with adequate time. Furthermore, this mother cannot be lazy or lethargic if she intends to survive. Because these situations are prevalent, we need to compensate for these problems by raising wages and providing sufficient funds for individuals in need. Working, in basically any form, is earning of a living income. Point C2: "College can result in a better job and many people are seeking college loans which would be a practical means of getting a real job that will actually give back to the economy."My opponent basically says that everyone should go to college. I would more or less agree with this. However, total agreement with this assumes the premise that everyone can afford college. This premise doesn't exist, becuase not everyone can afford college. But calling the people who cannot afford it lazy and greedy as my opponent does is simply wrong. Furthermore, a burger-flipping job is an honest job, one that a young or unskilled worker should be proud of. Discriminating and bashing these individuals just because they cannot afford college to receive the necessary skill for a "better" job is immoral. Furthermore, not all students are eligible for the scholarships. Beyond this, fast food workers can benefit the populace by providing food for people to eat at a cheap price.Point D2: "If you want to "ensure a quality job" you should go to college and get the job that deserves the higher wage."This is once again undert he assumed premise that people can afford college. The simply fact is that poverty exists, and until that is solved, college isn't always an option. Thus, we must allow those people who can't afford college have two things: a job, and secondly a pay that will suffice for survival and basic needs. Without raising the minimum wage, neither of these things can be achieved in a utilitarian facet. Furthermore, as I have explained time and again, stereotyping fast food workers as lazy is immoral, wrong, and disrespectful. In reality, these individuals are just trying to live life, which they should be allowed. In regards to risk taking, there is always potential danger. By raising wages, we not only give the person enough money to sustain, but decimate the chance of danger or harm.Point E: "My opponent says I refuse to argue the points..."First of all, he has still not directly attacked any points, but simply generalized a reason why we should not raise the wages. Secondly, my opponent concedes that higher wages ensure quality jobs. However, if "burger-flipping" is the only job you can get, then so be it. Individuals are deserving of pay if they do any work or service for society that benefits society. This, fast food chains do, by providing quick, cheap, and delicious food for citizens. My opponent's next claim is logically contradictory. He continually bashes fast food chains and their supposed worthlessness, but then brings up a success story of dedication and motivation from McDonald's. This contradicts his ideals that fast food chains are "worthless," "lazy," and "lethargic." Instead, he contradicts his points by representing part of McDonald's as "driven" and "dedicated." Thus, this point has been refuted by both myself and my opponent. Lastly, my opponent asks me to respond to outsourcing, and claims that I have yet to do so. However, besides this round, I mentioned it in my original case and in argument three of his point D in round. Thereby this claim falls without merit, as the point has been successfully refuted.Conclusively, we see that all of my opponent's points have been refuted, and points of mine still stand, as my opponent has not directly attacked any of these points. They include the following:1. A living wage hosts vital economic benefits.a. Living wages bolster the economy and doesn't result in unemployment.b. Higher wages ensure quality jobs2. Inflation is not a reasonable counter to higher wages.3. Higher wages will uphold societal welfare and is pragmatic.