In some countries, a few people earn extremely high salaries. Some people think that this is good for a country, while others believe that the government should control salaries and limit the amount people can earn. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Income

disparity is very high in some of the countries around the world. Government control on

such

disparity through

income

ceiling enforcement is expected by some, while others believe ceiling free

salary

is more beneficial to the nation. Both views have their own merits and demerits. In my view, having no ceiling on

income

is better for the country as a whole, as higher

salary

results in higher economic gains. When a nation has no ceiling on

income

, it can attract more talented individuals, both from home and abroad. The person drawing a higher

salary

will

also

feel encouraged to make investments in interest bearing mutual funds or fixed deposits.

This

will result in the money going back into the economy.

Also

, higher revenue means higher taxes and a higher net gain from other indirect taxes.

On the other hand

, a nation choosing to impose a ceiling on the revenue of individuals, will discourage talented individuals. Someone who is able to draw a higher

salary

will eventually decide to move abroad.

This

may cause significant brain drain from the country, leading to a situation where there is no longer available workforce suitable for the growth of the economy. Ultimately the country will suffer economically and will

also

have a negative social impact. In the end, based on the above discussions, I feel the positives of having an open

income

ceiling is more than that of having any sort of control over it by the government. Ceiling free revenue encourages optimism among the workforce and act as encouragement for striving for their own betterment.