1. What would writer A (Surowiecki) say to writer B (Saltsman)?
Surowiecki would say to Saltsman that raising the minimum wage is just part of the solution. He would further say that the workers in low-wage jobs today are different from the workers in those jobs from the past. For a solution, we need to change the fundamental way employers like Walmart and McDonald’s do business. He would also say that in addition to raising minimum wage we need to have all kinds of social programs to prop-up the low-wage workers. We need a “strong economy and a tight job market” (34).
2. After I read writer A (Surowiecki), I thought . . .
Surowiecki was wrong because he blames the employers such as Walmart and McDonald’s for paying employees such a low wage and I did not agree with him about making more social programs; however, after I read writer B,
…show more content…
What new, Significant question do these texts raise for me?
Is it too late to depend on the government to fix this problem?
If minimum wage is increased will it put many lower-level wage employees out of a job (Saltsman 40)?
Is it true that there is “little connection between a higher minimum wage and reductions in poverty” (Saltsman 40)?
What are the real numbers regarding households in poverty in the United States and what is the best way to help those people and families out of poverty so they can stay out?
Should creating good paying job while upgrading our infrastructure be part of the plan to reduce poverty?
7. After I have wrestled with the ideas in these two texts, what are my current views on this issue. It seems that Surowiecki is writing more about minimum wage and laying blame for the situation as it is now. He talks a lot about the change that has taken place in who is employed in the low-wage jobs. At least part of his solution plan is a socialistic one such as that in Germany and the Netherlands where there is a huge government social welfare system and giving handouts. I am sure, I don’t agree with that