HOME / the breakfast table: An e-mail conversation about the news of the day.

Joseph Britt, Arthur Stock, and Will Vehrs

Birds and Taxes

Posted Wednesday, March 14, 2001, at 12:35 PM ET

Joe and Will,

It's a beautiful morning in Southern New Jersey. The most exciting breakfast action today is at our bird feeder, where we have served a pair of cardinals, a small flock of orioles, and a single ornery blue jay. Others have dropped in also, but I can't say what they are since everything I know of species identification comes from the logos of major league baseball teams.

Joe, we agree on the good government can do, and we are also in agreement on most of your unnecessary government programs. Defense has too many expensive toys. The agriculture price support programs not only cost tax money, they make food slightly more expensive for everyone than would occur with a free market. Since food represents a higher proportion of the budget for those at the bottom, these subsidies are regressive in the worst way.

I disagree with your assertion that departmental bureaucracies can be cut without affecting the programs they administer. Cutting government bureaucracy was a campaign slogan for Carter, Reagan, and Clinton. Carter had some limited success but didn't achieve much savings. As you noted, Reagan's attempted reforms went nowhere, and Clinton's "reinventing government" also accomplished little. If none of these administrations could do something, it's probably impossible.

I'll add to the "bad government" list a state program in New Jersey affecting my township: former Governor Christine Todd Whitman's Farmland Preservation program. The state buys development rights to operating farms, mostly near the edge of the suburban sprawl engulfing the state. The landowners, millionaires all, receive additional millions and are required to do nothing with their land. Since most of the farmers don't own their land, they don't benefit from the subsidy. The farms remain in operation, reducing available land for new homes for our growing population. The effect on pollution? Fewer homes mean fewer cars, but the overall effect may be negative if you're left with a methane-producing chicken farm and scary if your kids play in a backyard abutting an orchard where crops are sprayed.

Will, thanks for the Danville report. Maybe Danville will benefit from the "next economy," scheduled to replace the Silicon Valley-based "new economy" any day now.

I have to call you on your support for the flat tax on grounds of "tax simplification." There is nothing simpler than figuring out how much you must pay under the current progressive tax system. After calculating income, you look up a number on a chart. Subtracting a dollar value multiplied by the number of children isn't difficult either. It's figuring out what counts for income that makes taxes complex. For a business, you have to account for the relationship between revenue and expenses in some manner. That's where depreciation, amortization, LIFO, FIFO, etc. enter the picture. We'd still have those pesky issues if we had a flat tax.

Until later,
Arthur

Birds and Taxes

Posted Wednesday, March 14, 2001, at 12:35 PM ET
Print This ArticlePRINTEmail to a FriendE-MAILShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Get Slate RSS FeedsRSS
This week, three "star posters" from "The Fray" (our reader response forum) visit "The Breakfast Table." Joseph Britt is a Wisconsin free-lance writer with over a decade of experience working for state and federal officeholders. Arthur Stock, who uses the cybernym "History Guy," practices law in Philadelphia. Will Vehrs, who posts as "WillV," is a Virginia businessman.
COMMENTS

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.)

What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
TODAY'S PICTURES
TODAY'S CARTOONS
DOONESBURY FLASHBACK
TODAY'S VIDEO
Christo and Jeanne-Claude's "The Gates."92/091120_TP.jpg
Cartoonists' take on health.15/091120_TC.jpg
The cutting edge.1/122939/2183724/DoonesburyPlaceholder.jpg