(CNN) -- In the early 1980s when I served on the staff of the Joint Economic Committee, we invited the Republican deficit scourge, Peter G. Peterson, to testify on Reaganomics, but he wouldn't come. Somewhat understandably, he declined to sabotage his own team. This week, when I was asked to comment on President Barack Obama's proposed "Buffett Rule," I had a similar urge to duck. But it passed. The Buffett Rule would increase taxes on a handful of Mitt-Romney-like figures in today's America, raising a few billions of dollars in new revenues each year from the very rich. It is perfectly tailored to the Obama political style, which is to nod symbolically leftward while reserving big concessions for banks, venture capitalists and insurance companies.
@highlight
Democrats are making a case for the "Buffett Rule" to raise taxes on the very rich
@highlight
James Galbraith: While the legislation calls for tax fairness, it is a symbolic move
@highlight
Galbraith says the Buffett Rule won't solve any significant economic problem
@highlight
It's better if President Obama would focus on raising the minimum wage, he says
It would not add to the deficit -- since federal workers all make more than that anyway -- and would likely spur the economy and increase tax revenues -- by a lot more than the @placeholder.