The possibility of increasing the national minimum wages is discussed in detail by the scientific community, introducing the potential advantages and disadvantages of this action. Although some scholars believe that improving the minimal possible salaries of the employees could benefit the economy, others dispute this approach, arguing that such changes might disrupt the stability of the corporations. To understand the problem in its entirety, it is essential to evaluate both positive and negative viewpoints on this issue, assessing the validity of the arguments and establishing committed fallacies. This work addresses the academic opinions in support of and against the increase of national minimum wages, ascertaining the quality of the arguments presented and introducing an individual position on the matter.
Supporting Argument: Inspiring the Increase in Minimum Salaries
The scholars who state the benefits of enhancing the workers’ minimal payments often refer to the increased employment rates and higher labor costs, the potential effects on the economy of the country. As such, Harasztosi and Lindner (2019) claim that offering the candidates a better-paying occupation results in heightened workforce demand, which is advantageous both for the corporations and their employees. While the workers receive improved working conditions, obtaining additional monetary reimbursement, the companies instill higher prices for the services and goods delivered, negating the potential financial losses and enhancing the affluence of the enterprise. Overall, these effects account for the improved state of the nation’s economy, increasing the productivity of the citizens and businesses. This argument can be displayed in the standard form as follows:
- Premise 1: Increasing national minimum wages establishes a higher occupation and workforce demand, presenting the corporations with additional labor supply.
- Premise 2: A substantial occupation demand enhances the financial standing of multiple organizations, additionally allowing them to substitute missing labor with capital through elevated product and service costs.
- Premise 3: Expanded labor demands and employment positions act as an improving factor for the economy, increasing the rate of economic achievements secured by the country.
- Conclusion: Increased minimal salaries are a beneficial practice for the economy of the state.
Opposing Argument: Negative Consequences of Higher Employee Payments
Several researchers present a contrasting argument that highlights the aspect of overestimated expectations. According to Meer and West (2016), there are considerable differences between the proposed beneficial models and the actual ramifications of introducing increased wages, meaning that the suggested positive effects might not be achieved. The scholars claim that real-life improvements require a substantial amount of time and are less efficient in the process. Therefore, the desired outcomes do not enhance the companies’ financial output, rather presenting additional challenges, namely increased salaries and the need to find a balance between the elevated prices and the consumers’ capabilities. The provided argument can be displayed in the standard form as follows:
- Premise 1: Increasing the national minimum salaries creates a discrepancy between the companies’ financial funds and the demand to fulfill the elevated expenses, compelling the employers to reduce the employment opportunities available.
- Premise 2: The corporations’ encountered complications cause a lack of involvement in human resources management, decreasing the labor demand.
- Premise 3: Elevated prices and considerable workforce costs detrimentally affect the economy of the state, hindering subsequent improvement.
- Conclusion: Increased minimal wages adversely influence the financial state of the organizations, reducing the rate of the nation’s economic achievements.
Evaluating the Quality of the Main Arguments
The opinions offered can be regarded as high-quality assessments produced by scientists with exceptional academic standing. Both studies implement a range of theoretical arguments and practical evidence to support their suggestions and develop a comprehensive explanation for the suggested premises. For instance, Harasztosi and Lindner (2019) strengthen each of the premises with existing theories and empirical findings from other credible research, which relates directly to the topic discussed. The conclusion for this argument derives from the hypotheses that were proven by the previous investigations and the current study.
However, it is essential to note that the changes in the economic state of the country are not discussed in needed detail, creating an inconsistency within the argument. It is possible that the scientists were influenced by a confirmation bias, as the majority of the evidence on this topic reflects the positive effects of the increased wages.
The second research also contains several fallacies that should be addressed. As the scholars use historical data for the subsequent analysis, a selection bias might be present. The lack of contemporary information significantly undermines the value of the results achieved. Another complication is represented in the hyperbole evident in premise one, which suggests a specific approach to resolving financial difficulties without consideration of alternatives (Hardy et al., 2015).
Enterprises might incorporate extra approaches other than decreasing the number of occupations available. Another pertinent complication is probability neglect, which can be seen in the use of supporting arguments. The authors view the creation of increased labor costs and elevated processes as equally possible events, which often occur independently from each other. Therefore, multiple complications can be observed in the construction of the premises and the final conclusion of the opposing viewpoint, meaning that the supporting argument, which only presents one fallacy, is substantially stronger.
Presentation of a Personal Argument
In my opinion, it is necessary to consider both opinions on the topic in order to create a reasonable and comprehensible argument that avoids potential biases. It is imperative to address the impact of the companies’ financial success on the economy of the state, clarifying their role in the future economic achievements of the nation. Therefore, I present my argument on the issue in the standard form as follows:
- Premise 1: Contemporary scholarly research emphasizes the demand for higher employee wages, an issue commonly addressed by modern organizations (Harasztosi & Lindner, 2019).
- Premise 2: A considerable workforce supply is essential for the affluence of the enterprises, which influence the national economy by creating a pattern of supply and demand and competing on the global market (Feenstra & Sasahara, 2018).
- Premise 3: Increasing the minimum salaries creates better opportunities for the candidates and allows the corporations to achieve a needed level of employment interest.
- Premise 4: Enhanced occupation demand, better employment rates, and improve workforce conditions account for the affluence of the national corporations, which advance the economic stability of the nation.
- Conclusion: The rise in minimum employee payments is advantageous both for the companies and the economy of the country.
Objection to the Individual Argument
A pertinent complication in the structure of my argument is manifested in the stated necessity of the workforce supply and the demand to maintain their salary expectations for the profit of the companies. Some researchers report that there is a significant distinction between achieving higher employment rates and improving the financial output of the enterprise. According to Feenstra and Sasahara (2018), although a stable interest from potential candidates is a prominent factor in the development of the organization, labor demand is only one element of such advancements. Other issues might include the state of the global market, occupied business area, and incorporated management strategies, which are not resolved by heightened employment interest.
To defend the individual argument offered, I would like to refer to the importance of the employment aspect of company management. Even though this attribute is not the only one impacting the success of the organization, its necessity is explained in a number of theoretical and practical studies. When devising an approach to enterprise advancement, it is strongly recommended to consider the tactics that will increase the professionals’ interest in obtaining a position within the company (Johnston & Mas, 2018).
Sustaining a constant level of attention that is slightly higher than the company’s needs ensures that the most suitable candidates will be found, aiding the corporation in resolving other pertinent issues. The lack of employee support negatively affects the business even when all other factors, such as management strategies and global market pressure, are accounted for. Furthermore, elevated employment rates are often associated with reliable and stable economies (Johnston & Mas, 2018). Therefore, maintaining a significant workforce demand is necessary to advance the financial success of the companies and the economic output of the country.
Conclusion
To conclude, supporting and opposing arguments regarding the rise of national minimum wages were discussed in detail in this paper, evaluating their credibility and potential fallacies. Although both the studies present valuable insights into the debate, the fallacies committed by the opposing opinion remarkably diminish its argumentative strength. The influence of increased salaries appears to be highly profitable for the national enterprises and the economy of the state.
Although increasing the employees’ minimal wages might be considerably challenging in the current economy, the research suggests that this endeavor is highly beneficial for the financial state of the country. Given the analysis conducted, critical thinkers should not only address controversial topics from the scientific standpoint but consider the logical requirements for creating a sound argument. Confirmation bias and probability neglect drastically reduce the validity of the statements and should always be accounted for in academic research.
References
Feenstra, R. C., & Sasahara, A. (2018). The ‘China shock,’ exports and U.S. employment: A global input–output analysis. Review of International Economics, 26(5), 1053–1083.
Johnston, A. C., & Mas, A. (2018). Potential unemployment insurance duration and labor supply: The individual and market-level response to a benefit cut. Journal of Political Economy, 126(6), 2480–2522. Web.
Harasztosi, P., & Lindner, A. (2019). Who pays for the minimum wage? American Economic Review, 109(8), 2693–2727. Web.
Hardy, J., Foster, C., & Postigo, G. Z. (2015). With good reason: A guide to critical thinking. Bridgepoint Education. Web.
Meer, J., & West, J. (2013). Effects of the minimum wage on employment dynamics. Journal of Human Resources, 51(2), 500-522. Web.