the french government set a goal to introduce a 75 percent tax on wealth. there are demonstrations in several german cities calling for a redistribution of wealth.
the question of wealth and welfare divides people and parties all over the world. it is an easy way to take from the rich and give it to the poor – robbin hood makes it seem as if it was the best thing in the world and no effort at all. in a cartoon movie, or within the scenery of hollywood casts this might in fact be true. but in a world, where job creation is the main force for a growing economy, the picture might just look a little different. (taking into consideration, that job opportunities and a stable economy do not only support the economic system, but also stabilize the political system of a country.)
taxation is the holy word, for people recognize this as the only way to reallocate money. without realizing, though, taxation includes the assumption that the government is not only given the resources but also the trust of people to be the one institution able to manage common money. being questioned in many cases, the trust when it comes to governments knowing where and when to spend money wisely, is outstanding.
efficiency and sustainability – these are, in my point of view, the two main values, on which job creation should be pursued. and while there may be governments, taking these facets into consideration, it is to be questioned, whether, with the strong focus on legislative periods and upcoming elections, representatives are in fact prioritizing the common interest over their parties image.
granted, there is more to be done with common money, than creating jobs – streets need to be built, schools need to be supported and a guarantee for people, to not be without help, when needing medical assistance or support in the case of unemployment, has to be given. also, the state argues, that resources need to be spent in military assets, to prevent the country and its people. but the question that remains is, whether the government is indeed the only institution able to do this job?
yes, there should be a system, that supports you when you are in immediate life danger. yes, there should be a system, to help when you lost your job and have to support yourself or a family until you find something new. but, first of all, increasing taxes on businesses, does not necessarily mean that this money gets spent on those issues that people, demonstrating for the increase, might want. and, second of all, even if the money would be used on a more generous welfare system, would it not make more sense to put people to work by giving them new job opportunities? would it not make more sense, to invest in peoples education? would it not make more sense, to foster peoples creativity and allow them to create something? would it not make more sense, to give incentives to businesses to spend some of their revenues on projects for employment and education, than discourage them from doing so, by seemingly taking away money they earned?