Posted 2 years ago on Nov. 12, 2012, 2:08 p.m. EST by jrhirsch
from Sun City, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
The wealthy say that low skilled workers deserve low wages because there are more of them available than needed for each job. The law of supply and demand, or the free market, should determine price, not human need. There should be no minimum wage at all because the market will shed them as their wages increase. Better to have all employed at a low wage than to have a few employed at a high wage. (Of course they always fail to mention in their argument that a low wage also means higher profits for them).
Since the wealthy think there should be no limit set on the lower boundary of wages, it would be logical to say that there should be no boundary set on the upper limit of taxation. If the market should determine one, then shouldn't the market determine both?
So to be fair, since the wealthy favor letting the wages of the low skill workers drop just above the point that they will refuse to work, let's raise the tax rate on the upper wages of the high skill workers just below the point that they will refuse to work. This takes out the arbitrary nature of setting taxes rates and depends entirely on the free market to decide. Surely the wealthy would welcome the wisdom of such a system!
The health of any economy is dependent on the rates of both labor and taxation. Labor should be priced just above and income should be taxed just below the point that harm is done to the economy. To set limits depending on the selfishness of a few to determine the health of only the upper part of the economic body and not the lower eventually results in the collapse of the entire body. We tax the rich not just for our benefit, but for their own.