Comments welcome - even to say that I am totally wrong.
[It's on the main page now, but I provide the permalink below.] NYT Editorial Demolishes "U.S. Imposing Its Minimum Wage" Strawman. Can They Name One Democrat Who Advocated This? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-weisbrot-and-robert-naiman/nyt-editorial-de_b_40268.html A New York Times editorial today on trade policy says: "To win Democrats' support, the White House will have to accept some of their demands for stronger labor provisions in future trade accords. Bans on forced labor and child labor, and similar mandates, are laudable goals. But Democrats who propose minimum-wage rules have to recognize that what is low pay for Americans may pull a family out of poverty in a less-developed country." This is sophistry - the well-known debating trick of the "strawman" argument. Pretend your adversary is advocating something ridiculous they are not advocating, and then demolish the argument, implying your adversary is really out to lunch, since "their" argument is demolished so easily. I challenge the New York Times Editorial Board to name one Congressional Democrat who doesn't "recognize that what is low pay for Americans may pull a family out of poverty in a less-developed country." If they can't name even one, then they are making a strawman argument.
