Joseph Britt, Arthur Stock, and Will Vehrs
Arthur and Joe,
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUponHandmade sign in a tobacco field on my way to Danville: "No more taxes and bans on our tobacco."
I'm happy to report that Danville is looking good. I met with a group of manufacturers who want to expand their use of electronic commerce. I also met with the leaders of an Internet business incubator, a halfway house between a company in one's garage and a big office. Existing businesses strengthening themselves and public-private partnerships nurturing small business is a good formula. I always wondered why one promise of the Internet Age never came to pass--the feeling that businesses could and would locate anywhere because the Internet connected them to everything. I would have thought that the lure of open spaces, small communities, and reasonable cost of living would have made many rural areas attractive to the high-techs and dot-coms. Instead, everyone coalesced in high-density areas like Boston, Northern Virginia, Austin, and Silicon Valley. Just as well, I guess. When a company goes belly up in a small community, it really hurts. Nobody much notices in a big metro area.
I worried that I was missing some great controversy by tending to my day job, but you two were on your best behavior. Thank you for not calling an election with a Survivor butterfly ballot. Let me try to throw a little fuel on Joe's sulfurous tax and spend discussion and play with matches. First of all, I lean toward some version of a flat tax. I find it incomprehensible that our taxation system acts as a giant advertisement for the tax preparation industry and their usurious early refund loans. I reject all the "targeted tax relief" schemes because they inject too much complexity and offer dubious benefits. I make out like a bandit at tax time because of the child tax credit, for example. But how does the government know I'm using that money for my kids? Maybe I act like some rich guy and buy a Lexus. Who is the tax man to decide "correct behavior?"
I'm with Joe on taking a hard look at all the items on his "hit list." Nobody wants to give the "rich" a tax break, but we have no trouble giving Lee Iacocca a social security check or Medicare. Why not means-test some of these entitlements?
I am not a reflexive government-spending basher. I pay taxes at three levels: federal, state, and local. I understand where my tax dollar goes much more thoroughly on the local and state level than at the federal level. It seems to me that most Americans feel the just the opposite. They protest local and state levies much more strenuously than federal income taxes, and our schools and parks suffer for it.
It's good to be back.
Will
What It Will Cost You To Deny Illegal Immigrants Health Insurance
Stupid Drug Story of the Week: NBC's Today Show Discovers Huffing
Can the Government Call God Jesus? What About Allah?
How Twilight Made Goth Fashion Mainstream
Is Disney's The Suite Life Making Your Child Into an Evil Lothario?
The Blind Side: Illegal Use of Sandra Bullock
Reader Comments From The Fray:
[Notes from the Fray Editor: Hey, guys, wotcha doing up there? Is the air different? We're glad to see you haven't forsaken the Fray. The board is jumping: we are having to send out to the icon sweatshop for more stars, checkmarks and Slate signs, as we are using them up so fast. (For an explanation of the symbols, please click here.) And WillV, we have been known to describe the Fray as a dress-down-Friday kind of board, but now we find you don't wear make-up to post here…there's such a thing as too much informality.
Bluto says it's the end of the Fray as we know it: because all the posters will be writing solely to get checks and stars. That'll be the day Bluto. Helen Weber asks whether there are any women star posters. The answer is no, not right now. There are very few star posters (and if you have read the various explanations you know that the star is for the poster, not for individual posts: it recommends someone who has made good posts in the past), and as it happens no woman has been chosen so far. We hope to change that soon.]
Strut that stuff but watch out…
When History Guy announced in this Fray that he was going to propose to Slate a "Breakfast Table" made up of posters on the grounds that most of the BT chatter sent everyone back to bed, I chimed in that it was a terrific idea, since the Fray usually has the most interesting material on Slate. I didn't really think Slate would buy it, but it has and the editors deserve a modest round of applause.
Congratulations, Will, Joe, Arthur. But beware: now that you've been plucked from among the unwashed masses to become card-carrying members of the media elite, agents of the left-wing media conspiracy, lackeys of the right-wing globalist-corporatist masters of the media, uncounted numbers of ordinary folks who have their piece to say already are drawing a bead on you. By week's end, you may feel like an Afghan statue after the Taliban artillery have passed by.
--Publius
(To reply, click here .)
[Tuesday notes from the Fray Editor: History Guy's sister, we salute you. The Mendelsohns of blessed memory would be proud of you. Jennifer Mendelsohn , as WillV says, came into the Fray and said this "Can I viciously flame one of you for no reason? Anyone wanna get married?" Amber is proposing some more unholy alliance with Zeitguy. She also called for more viciousness in the Fray here (ever agreeable, Fray posters called each other names). She is obviously a trouble-causer, argumentative and high maintenance. Just the kind of poster we like, in fact, welcome Amber!
This "Breakfast Table" certainly worked the magic in The Fray. The enigmatic Dola, a sadly-missed poster, re-appeared. There was endless discussion of women posters, for example here: a subject we have never seen mentioned before but which is now a hot topic. There were absolutely stellar discussions, for example on military training and campaign finance, here, and on estate tax, here. The "Breakfast Table" participants did not disdain their spiritual home: they are to be congratulated for answering critics and friends and encouraging discussions in the most good-humored way.
We're just mentioning this: there is a very very bad taste set of jokes about military training accidents here: don't read if you are easily shocked or a Yankees fan.]
Full disclosure here: Arthur Stock is my brother. And though I would be stretching the point to say, as does the junior Senator from New York, that my brother "saddens me," I must say about this stance on the inheritance tax: enough! I am certainly as knee-jerk a liberal as anyone else in my family (who can forget mom's explanation in the voting both: "you can vote for whomever you like, but if you pull the Republican lever your arm will fall off?"), but must you be quite so adamant? Did our loving parents sweat and toil their 3-day-a-week jobs as professors so their hard-earned money could buy oversized berets for an armed service with astonishingly poor aim? I think not. I offer constructive advice: if you find the law unjust, just hand over your share of the inheritance to me. I'll take care of it. You're welcome to pay my taxes on it. As the junior Senator of New York would surely deny saying: That's what family is for!"
--Lil sis
(To reply, click here .)
[Final notes from the Fray Editor: Arthur Stock really got quite enough exposure this week, but we can't resist his leftovers post, here (and after all, he is a friend of both Marty Peretz and Scott Shuger, apparently). The idea of the peasants with pitchforks representing the Fray will amuse us in some long working day ahead.
This has been a great "Breakfast Table" and a fabulous Fray, interaction at its finest, and more stars, checks and icons than you could shake a stick at. Well done all round: for this week you all deserved gold stars. (You're not getting them, but that's another matter. Oh, except for WillV…)]
A wonderful conversation, easily the equal to anything we've seen from the "pros".
One thing that is particularly heartening to me is that although these three fellows claim to have different political affiliations and tendencies; their thoughts, suggestions, and exchanges abound with common sense and good-faith. Given the posturing that is common among professional pundits, and given the histrionics of the average webboard poster, this week's "Breakfast Table" is far and away better than anything I might have expected. This reflects well on the participants, of course, but it also says something complimentary about Slate's editorial staff.
Good job
--Keith M. Ellis
(To reply, click here.)