You don't understand what a fallacy is. A fallacy is the use of poor, or invalid, reasoning for the construction of an argument, Checking out whether a source is biased is NOT an argumentative fallacy. Fact is, in debate, it's a necessity....but we're not formal here. I have an academic list of fallacies here. Feel free to look through it and point out what fallacy I violated...you wouldn't find one. Most arguments reference facts to support conclusions. But an argument is only as strong as its weakest link. If the facts supporting an argument are erroneous, so will be the argument. Critical thinking skills demands looking for information sources which are credible, unbiased, and accurate. The "Heritage Foundation" is a biased as they come and your second source has adopted the right wing canard that government regulations that are in place to safeguard the public are unnecessary.
Both are very weak sources.
If you are unable to present credible, unbiased, and accurate sources then it's your failure. It is perfectly logical and appropriate for a person to ask;
- Does the information source have the necessary qualifications or level of understanding to make the claim (conclusion)?
- Does the source have a reputation for accuracy?
- Does the source have a motive for being inaccurate or overly biased?
- Are there any reasons for questioning the honesty or integrity of the source?
I would invite you to read my sources and offer a rebuttal as to their accuracy, bias and credibility but you haven't even read them and again, that's your problem.
I will state again, the arguments the conservatives/TP bring up against the raising of the minimum wage are false, especially the lie that it will hurt small businesses. I asked for proof from you and you supplied ideological talking points.
Again, please provide unbiased proof.