A trending topic in America, the minimum wage debate is sparking many movements from each side across the nation. Although at first glance the question is simply put as whether we raise the federal minimum wage or keep it the same, there is more depth and many possible outcomes than how it is simply put. Much of the public is not properly informed on the issue and simply put the minimum wage debate as whether or not Congress should impose a bill to increase the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. There is a stark majority of lower class citizens and Democrats that are in favor of this outcome because everyone likes more money and they believe it will help the impoverished class get out of poverty. These individuals believe in the simple economics principle that increased spending will increase gross domestic product, thus benefiting our economy instead of hurting it. However, opponents, comprised of mainly Republicans argue that it will disrupt our economy as it sets a very high artificial price floor, which will increase inflation to an abnormally high rate and will hurt businesses severely due to much higher payroll costs. With the divide amongst the nation on this topic, nothing has been done on a federal level and it is up to the state legislature to determine to raise the minimum wage in their cities and states or keep it as is. 

The minimum wage debate is a timely issue as there is a presidential election approaching fast in November and primaries undergoing now. This is an issue that Democratic candidates are including in their agendas and many people are concerned about the measures that will be taken by both parties regarding plans for the minimum wage in the future. Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders plans to incrementally raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2020, while Hilary Clinton supports a raise to $12 and hour. With a Republican majority in the House, if either is elected, one will have much resistance passing such a bill. Both of their campaign platforms, especially Sanders's relies heavily on raising the minimum wage, but it will be impossible for them to pass it if Congress doesn't agree to his terms, thus making his presidency useless. It is important that every individual to be familiarized with the topic in order to cast a properly informed vote for who they will want to be president, representing and leading our country, for the next four years. Republican candidates share the belief that the government should leave it up to the states to determine what is best for its citizens and keep things how they are now. Although raising the minimum wage is unnecessary and unfeasible at such a high amount, Democrats and Republicans must find a middle ground in order to help the impoverished class get a healthier, more stable life.

A higher minimum wage with such a sharp increase will have unpredictable outcomes to the economy. Even though the intent to raise wages to help the poor become less poor, the one certain outcome by a higher minimum wage will be job losses and higher unemployment rates. If the government sets a minimum wage above the equilibrium price point for the economy, thus creating an artificial price floor, there will be a much larger demand for the wage than actual supply by the businesses. This simple economics principle is seen in Seattle where the city implemented a $15 an hour minimum wage. Mark Perry's studies show that the city's restaurant industry saw 700 job losses since January 2015. On the contrary, food services jobs outside of Seattle, where a higher minimum wage has not been implemented, have increased by 5,800 (Worstall). Fewer jobs available in the city resulted in workers looking elsewhere for employment where there was no forced increase in wages. Now consider this at a bigger scale, if the entire state of Washington was to implement the higher minimum wage. The 5,800 job increase outside the city of Seattle would not have occurred and the unemployment rate would resemble of that which had occurred in Seattle. However this minimum wage debate is being discussed on a national level; every job, in every city, in every state would have a minimum wage set at $15 an hour, just as Seattle does currently. The job loss would not be 700; instead hundreds of thousands of Americans would be out of jobs. In Saul D. Hoffman's "Are the Effects of Minimum Wage Increases Always Small? A Reanalysis of Sabia, Burkhauser, and Hansen", he discusses how the increase in New York state minimum wage from $5.15 to $6.75 an hour caused a 20% decrease in employment of unskilled workers under the age of thirty (Hoffman). When presented with this information, we must evaluate: is it worth risking other citizens' livelihoods for the sake of a fraction of our economy? Our intentions of helping the poor to be less poor is good will, however putting strain on business leading to even more people out of jobs, essentially puts more people in poverty.

Businesses are savvy and they will find ways to cope with a higher minimum wage in order to keep their costs low and their profits high. A Wal-Mart store shutdown in Chinatown, LA due to the pay increase enforced upon them. This mega store that had enormously cheaper prices for everyday household items compared to its small shop competitors shut down, leaving the residents in this poor, low income-earning area clueless on how they will put food on the table to feed their families. Although Wal-Mart was only forced to pay their employees $10/hour starting January 1st and the $15/hour was only proposed and still pending approval, the fact that they had to increase workers wages and possibly double their wages in the future would cost the company so much that it would be better to shut down, even though this store was recently built in September 2013. If this occurred on a national scale the 15% unemployment rate amongst people with a high school diploma or less is estimated to drastically increase, putting low income families in more of a conundrum: "The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office ...  estimated ...  wage increase from $7.25 to $10 an hour would raise wages for 16 to 24 million people, but would also kill 500,000 existing jobs."(Street) Raising the minimum wage solves a problem by creating another problem, however we cannot value unskilled jobs over degree specific ones. If we follow this course of action we are also creating burden on our government spending as unemployment welfare costs will increase. Although liberals say it is a "reasonable" tradeoff worth embracing, many Americans believe we need to minimize our deficit and debt not increase it. 

The biggest threat to unskilled workers if wages must be increased is the switch to technology: man-made machines. Already seen by Amazon, robots are being used in production and shipping of inventory and have much lower costs and are more efficient than humans. However in New York, a simpler, milder approach is seen in fast food joints, such as McDonalds in which self-service ordering kiosks are being placed so that fewer cashiers are hired. One franchise justified the switch, sharing, "With minimum wage for fast food workers potentially increasing to incredibly high levels, we are facing a crisis situation." (Peterson) Businesses are run by profit, and when forced to pay higher wages for an unskilled position, their profits decrease and they must look to make cuts. Machinery has a high start up cost to the company, but in the long run it is cheaper than paying a high wage for an employee, who may be a disinclined worker. 

Disinclined workers are a problem to businesses as they fluctuate between jobs because there is no signed contract that obligates them to stay. If a federal minimum wage increase were to occur, there would be no contract upon hire that would bind the employee to maintain his position. Disinclined workers are comprised mostly of teenagers and individuals with a high school diploma or less because they either need a temporary job for spending money, or if they are older individuals they are working for who pays the most. I have been a disinclined worker for my past two jobs that I have held as I just needed them for spending money with no intention staying with the company. While working for PopCulture LLC, I started at minimum wage as a salesperson, however within 6 months, I had raises that accumulated to $10 an hour. Now the company planned for me to stay with them long term and the raises were meant to entice me to stay with them, however I left because I came to study in Columbia. Although this may sound as a reasonable excuse to leave, the company paid me to stay, but I still left, meaning that they could have hired another individual for cheaper, which is in fact what they did shortly after. Another example of me being a disinclined worker is when I worked for Papa John's as a delivery driver during Christmas break. My boss hired me with the belief that I would work all break long and come back and be a seasonal worker for her, however as soon as I made the amount of cash I wanted for the spring semester I quit, unexpectedly. She had just made the schedules for the week and I told her I can make it and the very next day I told her I quit because I was tired of working and wanted to enjoy the rest of my break. These minimum wage jobs I held resemble that of many others, and my actions resemble that of many other disinclined workers.

Those working at minimum wage are not what advocates portray them as. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that only 3.9 percent of hourly workers earned the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, with almost half of that working population being under the age of 25 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 1-2). This shows that those in poverty are making well above the minimum wage and the evidence used in the media is the small fraction. Only about 3 percent of the working population over 25 is receiving minimum wage (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 1-2). Raising the minimum wage will not directly influence the individuals we need it too, but will instead impact teens- disinclined workers. 

The minimum wage had been designed by FDR to keep the workingman able to survive the harsh economic conditions. It was created to allow him to be able to house himself, feed himself, warm himself, clean himself ...  the basic necessities in life. However, "In the past 30 years, wage inequality has increased steeply while real minimum wages have fallen." (Barany) Prices have gone up, but minimum wage has remained the same and there are workers that are not getting adequate raises to survive because mega corporations are profit driven. These workers are older adults, not kids trying to earn weekend pocket money. These workers are unskilled yet determined and inclined to earn an honest dollar. These workers compose the impoverished low class of our social structure in America today. These workers cannot get themselves out of this never-ending bondage of poverty and grow to become stable. The push for a $15 and hour minimum wage is not so these individuals become well off, it is so that they do not have to worry if they cannot feed themselves the next day, or even make rent next month. John T. Harvey puts it best, "The goal of the minimum wage law is not to raise or lower unemployment ... Its purpose is social. It is meant ...  to protect those who might not have the power or resources be able to protect themselves." (Harvey)

However, if it is the government's obligation to protect the impoverished class, is it the business's responsibility to pay them a higher wage even though the job description does not resemble that of a high paying salary? There are teachers and paramedics that do not make $15 an hour, an uneducated cashier for a fast food joint surely should not be making more than they are. Even though an increase in wages will mean more pocket money in consumers' wallets, increasing spending which will boos our economy, it is unjust for one to go get a higher education and be paid equal than one who dropped out. 

The solution to the problem of poverty is not by raising wages, but instead creating a gateway to get out of it by making higher education more available to them. Education is crucial in this day in age in America; getting a college education will help an impoverished person be able to escape from poverty; education equals bigger bucks, bigger bucks equals more spending, more spending equals a better economy. However, a college education is not easy to get as it is so expensive and not many poor individuals can afford such large tuition amounts, even for an associate's degree. Some say that the government should make college free; that is a debate entirely its own. However another solution, one without much government intervention and making those that really strive to create a better life to get that life is business paying for college. Many think that will cost the company a fortune, however each employee that works forty hours a week at $15 an hour will approximately cost the company $32,000 a year, and each employee working the minimum wage will cost $15,000. The $17,000 increase in salary can be put towards the worker going off to study at a community college, or even a university. Whether they choose to be full time or part time students is up to their choosing, however this method allows for the individual to develop into a better being and casts away the issue of disinclined workers as only the motivated individuals' educations will be taken care of, through grade requirements that should be set. 

Several companies have already implemented such program, but it needs to be more widespread. Community colleges offer factory-specific training programs with a number of automotive manufacturers. By the time the student graduates, they will have a job waiting for them as they replace a retired worker at the plant. Mercedes-Benz partnered with Shelton State Community College and Volkswagen with Chattanooga State Community College in order to place students on a clear pathway from college to employment at the partner's factory (Kelly 11). Kelly's research shows that the initial investment to create these programs cost $1.6 million and $16 million for Mercedes and Volkswagen respectively. Although Mercedes did not disclose their job placement, Volkswagen hired all 13 of the students that took the job-specific course. 

There were some requirements that the students had to abide to in order to receive funding for their education. Kelly shares, "At Shelton State, the amount of a student's tuition paid by Mercedes-Benz varies each semester. In a student's first term, Mercedes-Benz pays 65 percent of tuition. By terms four through seven, a student with a GPA above 3.0 receives 100 percent tuition assistance, while a student with a GPA below 3.0 receives only 50 percent tuition assistance." (Kelly) These workers in training were not allowed to goof off if they wanted to stay in college for free and get the job they set out to get. The same principle should be seen in all companies that will implement this form of creating better workers by making education free. 

To make education be easily accessible for all, the government should offer tax breaks to companies that pay tuition costs for developing workers. The tax cut should not be meant to incentivize the business to follow the course of action, but instead compensate for it. When more individuals are sent to college to get a better education and get better jobs, they positively influence the economy. They not only increase consumer spending, but they increase the intelligence of the community, and increase the socio-economic conditions of that community as well. The government has used tax breaks to incentivize companies to do things before and business did not follow through as planned, however just as the student must meet the requirements to get college funding, the business must provide that funding in order to get the tax break. 

The American dream is not worrying everyday about the struggle to provide for yourself or your family. It is not worrying about having enough money for food, for housing, for bills. It is not watching your child grow up and face the same conditions that you faced every step in your life. There is a class of people that are struggling to make ends meet and the government and business need to work together to protect these individuals. It is the government's responsibility to protect those that cannot protect themselves from harsh economic conditions, and it is the business' obligation to hire and properly pay workers. Businesses should pay employees' tuitions in order to create better workers and government should compensate the businesses for bettering the economy by offering tax breaks to those that do pay for higher education.

