CAN ANYONE PLAY THIS GAME!
THURSDAY, JULY 7, 2011
Nicholas Kristof, in from the cold, sets the bar quite low: Every so often, Nicholas Kristof returns to this country from the third world. Typically, he then offers half-baked pensées about what’s wrong “over here.”
Many liberals will be inclined to cheer his column in today’s New York Times. We think they’ll be wrong in that reaction. But first, let’s savor a clue about press corps culture—a clue which appears in the fifth paragraph of Kristof’s piece.
As he starts, Kristof says that he’s going to show us the worst tax loophole of them all. But wait! First, he feels he has to tell us not to go away bored:
KRISTOF (7/7/11): The House speaker, John Boehner, suggests that the Republican threat of letting the United States default on its debts is driven by concern for jobs for ordinary Americans.
We cannot miss this opportunity,” he told Fox News. “If we want jobs to come to America, we’ve got to give American businesspeople the confidence to invest in our economy.”
So take a look at one of the tax loopholes that Congressional Republicans are refusing to close—even if the cost is that America’s credit rating blows up. This loophole has nothing to do with creating jobs and everything to do with protecting some of America’s wealthiest financiers.
If there were an award for Most Unconscionable Tax Loophole, this one would win grand prize.
Wait, wake up! I know that “tax policy” makes one’s eyes glaze over, but that’s how financiers have gotten away with paying a lower tax rate than their chauffeurs or personal trainers. Tycoons have bet for years that the public is too stupid or distracted to note that in many cases they’re paying just a 15 percent tax rate.
Fascinating! In paragraph 5, before proceeding, Kristof feels he has to shake us awake. Something tells him that our eyes are already glazing.
Who knows? Kristof may be right! But here you see a striking clue about the way the mainstream press corps makes its news judgments. Kristof goes on to say that “financiers and tycoons” build their strategies goes around the idea that the public is just too “stupid” to focus on serious topics. But in paragraph 5 of this morning’s column, he seems to build his own strategy around that same idea.
Plainly, Kristof thinks his New York Times readers will find his topic boring. He may be right, or he may be wrong, in that Collinsesque judgment (see below). But we’ll guess a large clue is lodged in that passage—a clue about the way a news org like the Times selects its topics and points of focus.
Are New York Times readers really so “stupid” that they would be bored by those first four grafs? We don’t know, but let’s move on to Kristof’s actual column:
Many liberals will think that Kristof is smacking the GOP good in this piece. That may well be his intention—but in our view, the overall thrust of his half-baked column is really quite different. Wow! As he continues, Kristof names the worst tax loophole of them all—and he sets a very low bar for the GOP to step over:
KRISTOF (continuing directly): What’s at stake is the “carried interest” loophole, and President Obama is pushing to close it. The White House estimates that this would raise $20 billion over a decade. But Congressional Republicans walked out of budget talks rather than discuss raising revenues from measures such as this one.
The worst tax loophole of them all? It’s only worth “$20 billion over a decade!” In the end, the GOP could agree to close a dozen such loopholes. Their action would have a tiny effect on the overall budget problem. Beyond that, their action would have little real effect on the overall incomes of the truly wealthy—and the loopholes they agreed to close could easily be replaced or reinstated in the near future.
(Loopholes are easy; tax rates are hard. A loophole can be taken away quite dramatically, then reinstated quite quietly.)
Closing loopholes of this size doesn’t really address the overall budget situation. But Kristof’s column sets up an easy endgame for the GOP—establishes a very low bar by which they’ll be judged in the end. By this column’s dramatic but trivial standard, the GOP can emerge as heroes without doing any real damage to the real interests of its very wealthy base.
Our budget situation doesn’t turn on a few loopholes, however egregious they may be. But so what? Kristof glosses the larger budget picture, restricting his focus to a few minor outrages. By his standard, the GOP could make a minor concession on revenues and emerge as budget heroes—as masters of mature deal-making. By then, Kristof will be back in the cold again, reporting on outrages in the third world, building the reputation of the Times op-ed page for its lofty values.
Over on today’s letter page, a reader with a wonderful name is pretty much buying the con. Commenting on Tuesday’s column by David Brooks, he says this about the debt limit debate: “I hope that the president holds his ground.” But by all accounts, the president isn’t even asking for major concessions on revenues. If the GOP even meets him halfway, little will have been lost by their wealthy base—and little will have been gained in the effort to reduce future deficits.
Dramatically, Kristof focuses on the most egregious loophole—a loophole that doesn’t amount to squat. He fails to show us the larger picture—to show us what really may be required.
We think Kristof sets a low bar. But then, he’s been out of the country.
About Lady Collins—and Seamus: For decades, the Lady Collins has voiced the view that reporting and opinion must be entertaining or the rubes will wander off bored. (These judgments precede her stay at the Times.)
Who knows? The high lady may even be right! But we pay a very large price for her view. It’s measured in her endless citations of Mitt Romney’s poor abused dog.
No comments:
Post a Comment