Joseph Britt, Arthur Stock, and Will Vehrs
The Moral Dimension
By Joseph Britt
Posted Wednesday, March 14, 2001, at 5:04 PM ETArthur and Will,
The moral vision of government, Arthur? The practice of law must have done very well by you; you certainly have a taste for luxuries.
Arguments for morality and fairness can be very useful. However, since everyone's definition of fairness differs from everyone else's, and is moreover strongly influenced by material self-interest, arguments that revolve around fairness rarely get settled. Arguments not settled lead to decisions not made, and in government this is often a bad thing.
I'm not on the ramparts with Will about stripping entitlement benefits from today's retirees not because I think this would be unfair (although I do) but because it is manifestly impractical. I did not say yesterday that we ought to consider means-testing entitlements because I think well-off future retirees don't deserve Social Security benefits; under the rules of the program, of course they do. I made the suggestion because I believe that in government, necessity trumps fairness.
Cuts in discretionary spending, even on the scale I discussed yesterday, can't be counted on to keep the cost of the baby boom generation's retirement from swamping the federal budget at some point in the future. Since a federal government capable only of writing checks and keeping a peacetime military is unworthy of the country, and since a government that can't even do this without continually raising taxes is even less appealing, we need other options. Of those available, means-testing entitlements is the least painful thing I can think of.
I don't know whether I should even get into the whole Second Amendment thing, Arthur. If we were starting from scratch, having firearms in every other American home is not the way I would go, but we aren't. The fact is that most Americans who own guns don't use them to hurt anyone; confiscating even handguns would involve a more sweeping expansion of government authority than Americans are prepared to accept. We can nibble around the edges of the issue by restricting commerce in guns, but basically this horse is out of the barn, over the fence, and well into the next county.
I grew up on Long Island, where even in the 1960s the nightly news usually led with two or three shooting deaths. Also, my own experience with firearms is pretty limited. I am nearsighted, physically somewhat clumsy and in a recent job had to deal with heating contractors on a daily basis for several years. These are all excellent reasons not to own a gun.
So I don't dismiss the arguments of gun control advocates at all or your points about the Second Amendment either. I just don't see where they lead in practical terms. Not to an argument about morality and fairness, I hope.
Did a pretty good job of staying off that subject, didn't I?
Best,
Joe
The Moral Dimension
By Joseph Britt
Posted Wednesday, March 14, 2001, at 5:04 PM ETThis 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. 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
SPONSORED CONTENT
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUpon
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.)