Minimum annual income for families?

[general_kill]

Oopsie, sorry about that.

Anyway, methinks that child would have been killed by her parents no matter what the government did.
Maybe. But you've never heard someone say, "He grew up in the projects," or something similar?

I doubt a minimum income would be more cost effective, because the poor generally aren't very effective in managing their money. That's (partly) why they're poor, and that's why we're helping them.

so you are proposing that the government spend money organizing, building, and upkeeping millions of homes rather than to give the people a little money to rent an apartment?

the poor isnt good at managing their money? it doesnt make sense. people who are bad at managing money are not poor because they have money to manage, poor people with a few bucks a week doesn't have much to manage.

 

[Yom]

man u write too much.

I try to refute your statements fully.

your whole first section doesnt even seem relavent to your original argument which is that people dont want to work hard if they can work 10 hours a week and live just above poverty.

It is relevant. I show how there's a difference between incentives today and under the system proposed.

of course minimum wage is needed, what is stopping mcdonalds from paying its employees $2 an hour?

The market.

there will always be poor imigrants who would take that job.

Which means that they want to take that job, and they prefer it to not taking it. Minimum wage isn't the issue, though.

how is it a good thing to let these people work the same hours we do but live in almost poverty? they should at least be able to enjoy some luxuries if they are working this hard.

Working hard alone isn't the determinant of one's wage. The scarcity of the skills that you possess are a prime factor. If I worked 70 hours a week as a doctor who went through 10 years of schooling after high school, then shouldn't I get more than a high school dropout that works 70 hours a week? Yes, because my skill is rarer and therefore the market price is higher for it.

Letting the migrants work at that rate is simply allowing them to do what they choose to do (since they choose their jobs voluntarily). I did say that a minimum wage is good in ensuring income for poor adults and elderly people, while increasing unemployment more among the youth, who have less need of the income.

 

[general_kill]

btw, willj, thnx for the housing project argument, i'm gonna use that

 

[WillJ]

i'm simply saying that we should not rely on the private business because look at the great depression, most workers for private factories and businesses were laid off. so without jobs and without government help, how would these people survive?

So if I'm not mistaken, what you're saying [just for the sake of debate, I know] is that we should have a minimum income of, say, $20,000 (just a random number, not necessarily what you're thinking), and that way, when another depression rolls around, everyone will at least be making $20,000.

I'm sure you're smart enough to realize that's just ********.

 

[WillJ]

btw, willj, thnx for the housing project argument, i'm gonna use that

You're perfectly welcome.

 

[general_kill]

So if I'm not mistaken, what you're saying [just for the sake of debate, I know] is that we should have a minimum income of, say, $20,000 (just a random number, not necessarily what you're thinking), and that way, when another depression rolls around, everyone will at least be making $20,000.

I'm sure you're smart enough to realize that's just ********.

assuming that these families are working during the great depression, why not?

 

[Elrohir]

This is a moronic idea. People should get paid by how hard they work and how hard their job is, not how many people they have in their family. That's Communism, not Capitalism.

 

[general_kill]

alright i'm gonna take a break for possibly the night or at least an hour or two, i already got so much out of this so thnx to everyone who posted. I'm already almost done with my cross examination.

Btw, if anyone here have experience in debating, please share some of your ideas for possible contentions (arguments) i can use. and any traps for the cross examination will also be appreciated.

btw the full resolution is the following:
The federal government should guarantee a minimum annual income for each U.S. family unit

and i am the negative

so i am saying that we should not have a minimum annual income.

 

[WillJ]

assuming that these families are working during the great depression, why not?

Because what a depression is, is a dramatic shrinking of the economy: that is, there's less wealth to go around. Thus, during a depression, you couldn't possibly ensure that everyone makes at least $20,000, not unless these dollars become less valuable (inflation).