Free Employees Working in the City Essay Sample
A thesis statement is a technical term defined as a contraction of both the argument and analysis contained in a particular text or research paper. It gives an insight of the logic contained in the whole paper just by reading two or three sentences. The statement assists in testing ideas by summarizing them into a single sentence. It also organizes and develops the argument of a given topic while giving guidance to the reader. A thesis statement should portray exigence by showing the urgency of writing. The reader is able to establish the critical purpose of an argument and understand where the writer basis his/her argument from.
The thesis statement in question has it that Columbia district should impose interstate tax to all employees residing outside the city. This is a sensitive statement that is more likely to attract mixed reactions from all the protocols involved. The person who is the source of this statement may have seen the need for imposing interstate tax to the targeted employees. Likewise, those in favour of the thesis might have seen the advantages of tax payments made by employees. Tax as it is well known enables the state government or the local authority to give back services to the community. In this sense, tax is vital and employees should with no doubt pay it accordingly.
Employees working in the city, but living outside the city of Columbia district should be required to pay interstate tax under certain circumstances. This tax should act as compensation since a member of the district is staying in a different place. Employees living outside the city render their developmental services to a different state at the expense of their own state. This is another form of brain drain and as they do that, tax should be paid as a form of service to their state. The development that such employees deny their district should be compensated by tax so that the money collected could stand for them.
Interestingly, those living out of the city are the real victims of this taxation. When people become permanent residents of a given region or place, they definitely make use of local facilities. They contribute to the rapid growth of local infrastructure and businesses as well as facilitating the regional developmental programs. This is what the district where they work misses. To compensate this, they should pay interstate taxes accordingly. Those in support of this argument are concerned with the affairs of their state and are against foreign exploitation. When employees work in a place and then live in another one is like living in one place, but working in a foreign land. This interstate tax will help discourage foreign workers and instead make them residents. Employees will find the need to reside in their places of work as a way of avoiding interstate taxation. If they happen to reside and pay no taxes, development will definitely be realized in the district.
Shifting our analysis to accommodate the other side, the thesis statement has opponents. To them taxation of employees makes no sense and it’s seen as exploitation. The main concern they have in mind is whether employees would be paying tax everyday they cross the boundary or will it be monthly, yearly, etc. Secondly, the amount of tax that is supposed to be paid by individual workers is a dilemma. The point of concern is whether all categories of employees will have to pay equal amount of tax regardless of their job status or levels of income.
The point of people working in one region and living in another may have two reasons behind it. One of them is that there might some unfavourable conditions such as insecurity, unaffordable accommodation, insufficient social amenities, etc. in their region of work thus making them to sought residence elsewhere. The second reason is that the region might have no qualified or skilled personnel to take professional positions in the job market. This might as well cause foreigners to secure such professional positions at the expense of the locals. Judging from these reasons, it is evident that the interstate tax imposed to employees is not justified at all. This is because it is not the fault of employees to be insecure or lack social amenities. If Columbia district wanted people to work and live in their state then they should have put enough security and improved social amenities. If foreign educated people seize from working in Columbia district, there would nobody to take their positions and therefore; imposing taxes on the grounds of their knowledge has no logic in it.
From the look of things, the argument has generated heated debates among different stakeholders. There is hardship in determining the rule of majority since the number is almost the same. The motion was moved long ago and could have been made law as per the moment. Unfortunately it met fierce resistance from opponents who attacked it with logic reasons that couldn’t be over-looked. This is the main reason why the motion has never been passed.