The current debate over taxes focuses a lot on how much employers will be hurt and that impact on hiring. With a 9.6% unemployment rate (as of writing this) the mere concept of some sort of “acceptable” level of ‘hurt’ in hiring itself is disgusting to even be contemplating! But, nevertheless, it is (which further goes to show how out of touch government is from reality, but let’s not digress on that).
However, MasterPo believes the term “employer” is way too narrowly defined.
An “employer” isn’t merely a business. Individuals are just as much employers as businesses.
Your car breaks down and you take it to a mechanic. You’re hiring the mechanic to fix your car.
Your home needs some sort of upgrade or repair. You hire a plumber or electrician or general contractor to do the work.
And, since the government loves to talk about jobs “saved”, you need to a new whatever so you go to the store to purchase one. Someone has to make it for you, transport it to the store, and sell it to you.
But what if you don’t have the money to hire the mechanic or plumber or general contractor or purchase the whatever? Those people don’t get paid unless someone hires them for work.
And “the rich” (defined however you want) are the greatest employers.
Do you think a “rich” person changes their own oil?
Or fixes a running toilet?
Or paves their own driveway?
Or catches their own lobsters?
In fact the argument is well made that “the rich” need employees far more than “the poor”.
That is why taxes on “the rich” do have a great impact on the employment market.
The two cannot be separated.
Perhaps not the kinds of jobs that you think should be paid to, but who are you to make that decision?
A nation can not have a growing healthy economy without someone getting wealth and keeping it.