That Paul Krugman is an ideologue really doesn’t bother me that much. What bothers me is that he a wholly unoriginal, boring, and mean-spirited ideologue, and he occupies prime real-estate at the NY Times. If Krugman wants to dampen some of my criticism, he might take a cue from this Michael Kinsley piece on the flat tax:
The so-called flat tax is another hobby horse of the right that swept the nation, then got swept away. But someone forgot to tell Steve Forbes, the amiably blank-faced magazine heir, who ran for president on the issue in 1996 and 2000. Now he has a book out: “Flat Tax Revolution.” It’s getting the full fair-and-balanced treatment — that is, unashamed open-throated puffery — on Fox News and other conservative outlets. So even though the idea looks pretty dead right now, a stake through its heart might still be prudent.
The flat tax is a game of three-card monte that deliberately confuses the issues of simplicity, fairness and the total tax burden on society. A simpler tax system would be a very good thing: good for the economy, and good for everyone’s sanity. But contrary to what Forbes would have you believe, progressive tax rates — higher taxes on higher incomes — aren’t what make the current system so complicated. It’s as easy to multiply by 40% as it is to multiply by 17%. Even Republicans can easily do it — or hire someone to do it for them, if necessary…
Forbes figures that almost everybody would pay less under his proposal than under the current system. And just to make sure, he would let you opt to calculate your taxes under current rules, if you prefer. So everybody would pay less. That is swell. But it has nothing to do with the flatness or otherwise of the tax system. You could just as well combine a tax cut with a proposal to release all the animals from the National Zoo. People might like that too. A simpler tax system would be very nice. But find me some folks who would choose a flat tax over the current system even if it meant that they would pay more, not less. Then I’d be impressed.
That was, at least, fun to read.
(via the Washington Monthly)
Blue Neponset
Need a scorecard.
What does Paul Krugman have to do with the flat tax?
I am not sure why you mentioned him.
rilkefan
The truth is never boring or ideological. And this is funny:
“Of course, some people still deny that there’s a housing bubble. Let me explain how we know that they’re wrong.”
Truman: “I never did give anybody hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell.”
John Cole
Umm. The point being that this Kinsely piece was a far more effective and interesting piece of advocacy against the flat tax than anything Krugman could produce on anything.
Nikki
Did Krugman write a piece on the flat tax recently?
ppGaz
Note to self: Kinsley, better writer than Krugman.
rilkefan
“a far more effective and interesting piece of advocacy”
Umm, Krugman’s exposure of the Enron-administration energy scam?
Nate
*mean-spirited*??? John, you are completely off your rocker. I suppose you prefer “gentle” and “civil” “journalists” like Matt Drudge who is going after Cindy Sheehan and Rush who went after Army vet Paul Hackett. What company you keep!
rilkefan
Oh, if we’re talking about writing ability, sure, Kinsley’s in a whole other league. Intellectually he can’t hold a candle to Krugman’s halogen bulb, but he can string the words together nicely.
Brian
Eh, speaking of econopundits, I’ll complain about Krugman when he gets an hour a night on CNBC to spout his nuggets like Larry Kudlow does. I realize CNBC is just stock-market based infotainment but still.
Don Surber
Kinsley: Good writer, poor editor
KC
I actually appreciate Krugman for his writing. He writes just like most of the economists (and mathematically endowed folks generally) I work with–matter of factually. There’s a time for wonderful prose, and there is a time to get to the bottom of things, Krugman likes to get to the bottom of things. I may not always 100% agree with him, but I have to say I always know where he’s coming from, what he’s saying, and most importantly, why he’s saying it (you notice, he almost always mentions where he gets his facts from). If more people wrote like him, I think we’d be better off. It’s a rare thing to have in a newspaper.
J. Michael Neal
Kinsley: Good writer, poor editor
This is certainly true now. Back when he was editing The New Republic and the early days of Slate, though, he was very, very good. I noticed that his editing was slipping not long before he was diagnosed with Parkinson’s. I have no idea whether this was coincidental or not, but it is a possibility.
Doug
But see, I could go for a flat tax if it had a high enough initial exemption. I figure you exempt the first dollars necessary to live on. Then tax every single dollar after that at the percentage necessary to fund the government.
I’d propose something like tying the initial exemption to Congressional compensation to make sure it kept up with the actual cost of living. Make it something like 1/3 Congressional pay.
So Tax=
Flat tax percentage * (gross income – 1/3 Congressional Pay)
Aaron
Wouldn’t you like to be the guy sent in to fire all those IRS workers?
and of course, the writer ignores the distorting effects of high marginal taxation on people…for example, my uncle chose to retire rather than keep on working, because he would take home more after taxes by doing so.
Kimmitt
So what you’re saying is that we don’t tax investment income enough? ;)
Mr Furious
I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m intrigued… So, exactly how close is the National Zoo to Congress?
Mr Furious
Seriously, Kinsley is certainly a better writer than Krugman, but he should be. Krugman is an egghead economist, and Kinsley a seasoned wrier and editor.
It’s nice to see column that so neatly disembowel its target, it might have been written by Hannibal Lecter…
demimondian
I assume you’re asking for the standard “at the other end of Pennsylvania Ave.” comeback? (smilie)
Seriously, it’s a few miles away, in Northwest DC. It’s actually in a very beatiful neighborhood — if you ever get a chance to visit the Capitol, take a day and do the Zoo and the National Cathedral.
Mr Furious
Nah, I was actually envisioning a Jumanji-like stampede of wild animals down the streets of Washington in which the “non-existant” wildlife of the arctic (and elsewhere) get to exact revenge on their antagonists in Congress.
ivan
Krugman’s quip that if President Bush said that the Earth was flat, the headlines of news articles would read, “Opinions Differ on Shape of the Earth”, is a rather funny one though. But generally i agree with you characterisation.
washerdreyer
Some of Krugman’s early work (esp. for Slate) displayed better authorial craft then his current (still in general quite correct, just angrier and less fun to read) work for the NYT.
James Emerson
Before or after they opened the moonbat exhibit?
demimondian
Hey! Don’t go trashing BugMa…I mean, DeLay. He does belong in Zoo. He’s got endangered specie.
(Hats off to anyone who realized that the last word wasn’t a typo…)
Rusty Shackleford
Krugman tells the truth – that’s why Republicans dislike him.
J. Michael Neal
What, John has no love for Ziggy Palffy? He’s a better player than Gonchar.
jg
I’d take Gonchar over Palfy. Soft playing offensively skilled european forwards aren’t as valuable as an offensive defenseman. At least for the first few months there’ll be lots of power plays for Gonchar to show his worth.
Mike in SLO
Why shouldn’t he be angry? Aren’t you? I sure am. The reason I read your blog John, is that you are of the conservative vein I grew up in and you are one of the few conservatives who actually has to balls to critize the direction of the GOP. So you hate Krugman, big deal. Do you deny there is a housing bubble? If so, you certainly don’t live in California! Krugman doesn’t have the writing sytle of Kinsey, no, but he does back up his arguments with sources and facts. I rarely see Brooks or the WSJ editorial board do that.
Mike in SLO
Okay, so I can’t spell!
Bob
Every couple of days John Cole can’t help but spill his bile against another figure on the Left. Writing style, former membership in the KKK, whatever, but I always get the feeling that the anger is more about how these guys intrude upon your version of reality than anything to do with style points.
Speaking of flat taxes, when you take all their tax breaks into account, how much is Exxon paying?
John Cole
Mike in SLO- If spelling mattered, this blog would not exist.
Bob- If Krugman’s columns lived up to his academic creds, I would never say a thing. Well, that is a damned lie, but they would at least be more readable than a Carvillesque screed.
Randolph Fritz
The Kinsley piece appears to draw the same conclusions as a rather libertarian 1996 Krugman piece: “The reason the electorate likes tax-reform schemes is that they always end up being tax-cutting schemes, based on the premise that the voters pay taxes but someone else gets the benefits — even though anyone who looks at where the money actually goes quickly realizes that Pogo was right: we have met the enemy, and he is us.”
The Kinsley piece is punchier, but Krugman got there first, by nearly ten years, and there’s a lot more facts in the Krugman piece. I think you are valuing rhetorical skill over knowlege, which seems to me rather wrong-headed.
You can read the whole Krugman piece at http://www.pkarchive.org/economy/TaxReformObsession.html
demimondian
Really? I’m curious what you mean by “lived up to his creds” — do you mean he should write better (a conclusion which I would largely share if I didn’t write so badly myself) or that he makes false statements? When I’ve gone to look at the various Krugman pieces out there, I have typically found sound economics wrapped in loud-mouthed polemic.
Nate
Well, at least we can all venture onto this blog secure in the knowledge that John will hit out against the Creationists and anti-gay movement (the same?) with the same violence as he launches himself against the anti-war and liberal left factions. He must enjoy wearing eyeglasses with only one lense!
rs
okay,you think his writing reflects a “wholly unoriginal,boring,and mean-spirited idealogue”(a description some(not me,but some)may think apply to partisan internet commentators who make one or two sentence observations on current news items),you may disagree with his conclusions,you may think his column for a popular newspaper isn’t journal worthy,but,can you point to where his statements of fact are wrong?By the way,to see how Krugman compares to a real mean-spirited idealogue,him and O’Reilly were on a Russert hosted show on MSNBC a year or two ago where Wild Bill had another one of his temper tantrums while Krugman sat there like a deer in the headlights
Nash
If Krugman wants to dampen some of my criticism, he might take a cue…
I have it on good authority that Krugman is shattered at being criticized by Mr. Cole. He may never write again.