When it comes taxing, some people argue that the richer segment of
the population should be required to pay much greater taxes when they avail of services
that they are able to manage without government assistance.
Do you agree or disagree
with this view?
A uniform tax regime is not seen
anywhere in the world, but a separate taxing formulae for the rich and poor in
terms of services is contentious. I find it, however, right to impose higher
tax on the well off who can forego government-given services.
Though it may sound discriminatory,
in any populace that is heterogeneous in income counts, not all are in a
position to shoulder all taxes for services. For example, medical care is a
service sector where various interventions are for the people to pick from; but
the poor are not up for such bigger services. Naturally, the rich have to pay
greater taxes so that the generated funds could be channeled to the welfare of
the poor.
Let me take the case of services
like supplying essentials like cooking gas, oil and water or be it insurance or
banking instruments, there may be a system in place to make the rich bear
greater taxes. This is a must to have democracy in place. For example,
expensive travel services and high-end education are availed more by the rich,
but the poor too, at times, may have to make use of such options. Obviously,
they should be exempted from high taxes.
There is another argument to
cement my position. Government as a machinery has huge fiscal burden every year
serving people. But the rich, in their own ways, are at a greater advantage and
can do without government-aided services. This will be a great breather for any
rule.
My position on the topic stands
proved, and there may be many other arguments than what are seen here to
justify the fact that taxing need not be uniform for all; rather the rich could
be made to bear a little more than the poor. The time for such a tax regime is
around.
No comments:
Post a Comment