Quote:
Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen
But the government should not be trying to reduce poverty? We should leave that up to the good nature of the community?
The same community that will cry if their taxes go up a couple bucks? The same community filed with people who think that poor people having children is a personal responsibility mistake they should have to endure to teach them a perverse leasson? Yeah, no. I'm good with the minimum wage going up to fight poverty and provide (somewhat close to...) a livable wage.
|
They do through working condition / safety / labour laws, through socialized healthcare, through public transportation.... Which are all paid for by taxpayers.
Taxpayers that are made up by buisness owners that provide jobs for people to work. So why impose a cost on a buisness that is going to reduce their taxable income of income AND reduce the number of people working who would have otherwise paid taxes on their income.
Private charities are also incentivized to operate more leanly than a government agency meaning a higher percentage of the capital invested in programs aimed to reduce poverty will go towards effective results. This is because private charities exist on the basis on the funding recieved by individuals and corporatations, if results are not achieved the individuals and corps will not want to allocate their charitable donations to that charity and move it somewhere else that is. Compare this to government agencies which get funding from taxation and it's at the discretion of a small group of individuals.
So with relation to the minimum wage, as a government mechanism to reduce poverty it may not be the most efficient way of utilizing capital and resources.
Tax dollars have to be respected for what they are, a % of the collective labour within the jurisdiction.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk