Controversy over the gender wage gap and the redistributive tax implementation

According to Chandra, the gaps in gender wages result in income inequality. The income inequality among minority groups in America causes a decrease in asset ownership (Kochhar and Fry). Besides, the wage gaps result in more significant gaps in the participation of men and women in the labor force. These gaps lead to gender earning inequality, hence creating as well as exacerbating inequality in income. Many women are most likely to work in the informal sectors which pay low wages. The lower earnings in the informal sectors imply that women in the informal sectors will have lower earnings compared to men in the formal sectors. As a result, the gap in gender earnings widens whereas income inequality tend to exacerbate. The other factor linked to income inequality is the inequality in the different type of opportunities.

For instance, the inequality in opportunities such as education, finance as well as health services is common between the two genders. Failure to offer women with equal opportunities to enroll for tertiary education programs reduces their chances of securing good jobs in the future. The decision by the policymakers to implement redistribution measures such as taxation has caused a lot of controversies. The policymakers suggests that men “ should be taxed and those proceeds be distributed to women in order to eliminate the persistent gender wage gap. ” Borrowing ideas from the concepts of redistribution tax, taxing men has pros and cons. I believe the redistributive tax is unfair and should not be implemented. Firstly, it denies people the exclusive rights of owning and deciding how to use their properties. The natural law provides every citizen with the right to own properties. The redistribution tax is, therefore, a violation of the natural law. The other reason as to why I oppose the redistributive tax is that it is coercive. It tends to punish citizens for their hard work. Those who work hard and generate wealth are taxed more than others. Lastly, the tax can discourage investment when the rates are too high. Wealthy individuals while avoiding investing in expensive projects to evade tax. As a result, the economy is likely to growly.

My Position

The government should not tax men as a way of ensuring social justice. It should use some other more effective ways of tackling the controversial issue of the gender wage gap. I oppose the tax because it will not be effective in reducing the gap. Instead, the policymakers should come with other strategies to ensure equality in wage and income distribution between men and women. Ensuring equal salaries for women for a similar position held by men will reduce the gender wage gap significantly and promote justice. Organizations, therefore, need to raise salaries for women to ensure justice and equality.

Other Solutions to the Controversy Issue of Gender Wage Gap

Apart from increasing the salaries and wages for women, there are other solutions for the controversial issue. Some of these solutions include reducing the tax burden for women, providing women with income supplements, removing gender-based legal restrictions, improving infrastructure, increasing women’s enrollment to universities, and implementing well-defined family benefits. Reducing the tax burden for women can help to reduce the gender wage gap. This will require the policymakers to revise the tax policies. Fiscal disincentives limit the participation of women. Many women are secondary earners. The fiscal disincentives, therefore, to lower the involvement of many women on the labor force.

The government needs to replace family-based taxes with individual income-based taxes to eliminate the disincentives for women. This will increase the number of women in the labor force. Providing women with income supplements will also help to reduce the gender wage gap. The income supplements are weekly payments made to support women who work but have low incomes. To be eligible for income supplement, the parent must have a minimum of one kid, and the kid(s) must be below 18years old. The governments, especially in the developing countries, need to improve the infrastructures in rural areas. There is a need to ensure water accessibility in the rural areas and improve the transportation systems to minimize the time that women spend doing domestic tasks. Besides, improved transportation systems will enable women to work outside their homes. Increasing enrollment for women to universities will help to reduce the wage gap between men and women. Education will provide women with better opportunities in the job market. Chandra notes that if the Indian government increases the investment in education, the participation of women in the labor force will rise by 2% and the gross domestic product will rise by 1%.

Lastly, the implementation of well-designed family benefits will also help to minimize the gender wage gap. The government should ensure mothers access maternal leave easily and have access to high-quality as well as affordable childcare. This enables women to look for employment. In 2015, the Japanese government has boosted female participation labor force through the expansion of childcare leave benefits from 50%-67 %( Chandra). Conclusively, there has been controversy over the legitimacy of redistributive tax. The proponents of the redistributive tax argue that it helps the government to raises revenues and to reduce income inequality.

However, the opponents purport that redistributive tax is unlawful and it violates the citizens’ exclusive rights of owning properties. Besides, the opponents argue that the tax discourages investment because it is coercive in nature. The government should not tax men because the tax will not have a significant impact on the gender wage gap. Instead, the government should come up with other ways of tackling the controversial issue of gender wage gap by using ways such as raising wages for women, reducing the tax burden for women, providing women with income supplements, removing gender-based legal restrictions, improving infrastructure, increasing women’s enrollment to universities, and implementing well-defined family benefits.