If an opponent rated 1325 beats an opponent rated 1700, don't you think that the player should be automatically moved up to the same rating floor? It seems only fair. Or the case should only apply if there are a set number of wins against stiff competition.
Why do you assume the 1325 should move to 1700 but not that the 1700 should instead drop to 1325?
He wouldn't be a 1700+ rated opponent if he was in actuallity rated 1300+ would he?
Well where else has it got it wrong ?
Everything.
Give me an example please.
I don't really get the point of this discussion to be honest...
If you regularly play OTB Chess your USCF/ELO should be approximately at a level that represents your abilities. If you as a 1900 player are able to beat IM's on a consistent basis like you say then you either had the luck of your life or you took a timeout from the game for some years studying chess 24/7 while your old rating is still in place 
Either way you will experience a big boost in your rating after such a performance. Getting instantly to the same rating floor as your opponents would only make sense if you really are as strong as them. And if you are you will get there anyway. It only takes a bit longer...
If an opponent rated 1325 beats an opponent rated 1700, don't you think that the player should be automatically moved up to the same rating floor? It seems only fair. Or the case should only apply if there are a set number of wins against stiff competition.
Why do you assume the 1325 should move to 1700 but not that the 1700 should instead drop to 1325?
He wouldn't be a 1700+ rated opponent if he was in actuallity rated 1300+ would he?
Well, how can you argue with "logic" like that?
If an opponent rated 1325 beats an opponent rated 1700, don't you think that the player should be automatically moved up to the same rating floor? It seems only fair. Or the case should only apply if there are a set number of wins against stiff competition.
Why do you assume the 1325 should move to 1700 but not that the 1700 should instead drop to 1325?