Re: [OT] Iraq
- From: docdwarf@xxxxxxxxx ()
- Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 09:36:36 +0000 (UTC)
In article <5mgj5jFcn9f7U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Pete Dashwood <dashwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<docdwarf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:fdtsd6$j15$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[snip]
All righty... given that the 'generally accepted concept' of 'an unjustWell, we won't argue your premise, 'It is unjust for a government to tax
situation' includes 'It is unjust for a government to tax citizens into
poverty'...
... then consider the case of those who earn 10%-above-poverty wages.
citizens into poverty'... even though there may be valid exceptions to it...
let's run with it and see where it goes.
Hmmm...OK, I've considered it.
It seems to me the unjustness arises not from the tax rate, but from an
employer who pays such a wage.
I did not offer to determine the source of the injustice, Mr Dashwood, but
merely to point out that it exists. This I believe I have done.
Given that a worker is working in such a job,
said worker is still contributing the same proportion of his/her income to
the general good, as everyone else. That is patently fair.
Given that the same worker, by doing 'as everyone else', is being driven
into poverty, it is demonstrably unjust. Funny how things work out that
way, eh? Replace a tax-structure that allows for exemptions with one that
is 'fair' and an injustice results that requires an adjustment in wage
laws to compensate.
The fact that
said worker may now be descending into poverty, might be an incentive for
said worker to withhold labour, or get another, better paying job from a
more enlightened employer.
The fact that said worked would be taxed into poverty is an injustice...
so now one needs to find another employer or line of work in order to
avoid injustice. Curious system of government arising from that.
When the laws of supply and demand kick into the
labour market, employers requiring such labour can become enlightened
overnight...
That they can... and raise the prevailing rate... or automate the jobs
right out of existence or offshore them to another country. It does not
change the fact that the flat-rate tax, in that it drives low-end workers
into poverty, is an act of injustice... which is what was required to be
proved.
I've been on a few picket lines in my time (usually in support of other
workers at the same place (computer people have rarely had problems getting
a decent living wage)). Almost invariably (certainly in the cases in which
I've been personally involved) the end result has been a satisfactory
increase in wages, and no noticeable pain to the organization.
I am of two minds about strikes, in that the only strikes I've seen have
been the result of union actions. On the one hand there have been
marvelous gains made for the workforce made by such, despite the wails of
'but it'll drive us out of business!'... on the other hand, unions are
now, themselves, big businesses, with all associated benefits and vices.
[snip]
I don't believe the tax rate in your given scenario causes unjustness, Doc.
There is obvious injustice in an employer offering a derisory wage, and it
is up to the market place to correct that.
How's this, Mr Dashwood? Paying a wage is a matter of both parties'
participating; one to offer, one to accept.
It is up to the employer to offer a wage as low as possible in order to
get as much work as possible, just as it is up to the employee to demand a
wage as high as possible in order to give as little work as possible. As
long as demands fall within the bounds of law the fact of an injustice -
not an illegality but an injustice - remains.
DD
.
- References:
- Re: [OT] Iraq
- From: Pete Dashwood
- Re: [OT] Iraq
- From:
- Re: [OT] Iraq
- From: Pete Dashwood
- Re: [OT] Iraq
- Prev by Date: Re: Taxes
- Next by Date: Re: [OT] Iraq
- Previous by thread: Re: [OT] Iraq
- Next by thread: Re: [OT] Iraq
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
