| HappySqurriel said: Do you have problems with understanding someones argument and responding to it appropriately? What is so hard to understand about this: "when taxes are low enough that companies thrive and unemployment is low the low wage earners have far more power to demand more equatible incomes because the companies cannot operate without their work." If you insist on always increasing taxes on the top 5% of income earners to what extent do 95% of people have on keeping control on government spending? the economy is better when the tax burden of everyone is minimalized to only cover the services that the government can provide more efficiently than the private sector. Why can't people look at Seattle'slight rail transit system... |
Wage earners dont demand more income, their income is decided by the free market. It doesnt matter if you tax a company $100,000 or $1, if the free market values a software engineer at $60,000 a year that is how much he is going to make.
The government has to provide Seattle's light rail system because it the free market would never provide such a service. There are public goods and private goods, and it so happens that the government is more efficient at providing public goods and the market is more efficient at providing private goods. This is a simple economic fact, and if you think otherwise I ask you how efficient do you think the army would be if they depended on the free market to provide them with finances, or if you'd like paying a toll booth at every street corner?
Your idea that making people pay more or less taxes will change how they view government spending is a huge and incorrect assumption. If someone pays $4,000 in taxes and you increase that to $5,000, a light bulb isnt going to flash in their head and change their view on government spending.
