Today Musgrave came to load the theme of the Graduate Tax.
is an interesting topic to discuss, especially because it gives more space to express their views to people who did not attend college.
see the issue as follows:
- Taxpayers pay taxes. According to the tax structure of our country, there is some bias in the regressive taxation, ie, the preponderance of taxes such as VAT levied on consumption, with greater force attacks on the poorest people (this is either because they spend all their income to consumption or because they spend a sufficiently higher than the rich).
- With those taxes the state makes expenditures including education. What interests us now is a college education.
- The trend of the labor market since the 90 is to increase the relative share of skilled workers (with complete or incomplete tertiary).
- On the other hand, the relative pay of skilled workers over less skilled workers also increased.
- In sum, it appears that the labor market "rewards" to have tertiary or university or, rather punishes not having them.
- Thus, if people with less education, are the poorest (an assumption realistic enough) and the tax system is somewhat regressive, then the poor guy is paying the price 2 times. Laburo not have or are underemployed or are in the informal sector and on the other hand, every time you buy something pay VAT as the best. Approximately 35% of the revenue of the nation is constituted VAT + "Excise Taxes" (whose main component is applied on cigarettes). Considering the National Collection + Provinces, these taxes account for 30% of the total *.
the foregoing, I believe that the people we educate in public universities are in debt to society. Some argue that when professionals contribute to the nation grows, then we generate the resources that society has invested in us by the mere fact of studying. Is an acceptable argument, but in that case we could say that companies that create jobs and increase production and enlarging the nation in the terms in which the past governments are considering which grew, they should not pay taxes.
is too naïve to argue that the professionals will return to society the cost is paid to solve their education. Anyone really believe that?
What are unwittingly supporting a continuous classism is endless. The finances of the rich and poor, if qualified students magnify the nation, but these fruits are not redistributed in the right way, then what good is it? Graves
professionals received in public universities and that this collection has a specific application for education and to create scholarships for the underprivileged. Or to create new tertiary and workshops that are accessible to people with little education and need to re-enter the market work.
If someone does not want or can not afford with money they pay in kind. If someone wants to leave the country to work elsewhere, no problem ... you decide what time before and if you can arrange to make a contribution in kind if it has no money and no one to lend it.
Fair enough. Anyone who can not make money, brings his knowledge or his work with a Community target
Finally, the obligation to give back to society part of what gave us, not only will make us more grateful people, but We also will teach value what we value and often do not give you another chance to take the opportunities we had.
Greetings,
MI
* Calculated based on data from address Research and Fiscal Analysis for the year 2009.
0 comments:
Post a Comment