Seattle Times publisher Frank Blethen must not be feeling well this morning. How can I tell? Well, every time Frank catches a cold, he blows his nose all over the editorial page with yet another op-ed attacking the estate tax.
A new death tax, rising to 16 percent of assets, is levied on children who inherit businesses and property from parents who have died, which will unfairly force heirs to sell family businesses they had hoped to operate.
Translation: Frank, and the rest of his family, are mortal.
The Times likes to remind us that it is a “family owned” newspaper, implying that the extended Blethen family’s 50.5 percent stake (the rest is owned by media giant Knight-Ridder) somehow makes it a more honest guardian of community interests than the apparently evil, corporate drones over at the Hearst-owned Seattle P-I. But their unrelenting obsession with the estate tax shows that the community they care most deeply about is that which gathers around the Blethen family’s Thanksgiving Day dinner table.
Indeed, in a February 2003 interview in the Seattle Weekly, Frank was quite blunt about the family’s priorities:
“We have–and this is part of the governing documents–equal responsibility for perpetuating the family ownership and for practicing independent journalism.”
And what happens when these responsibilities conflict with each other? Well for one, you get the Time’s cynical adoption of the term “death tax.” A truly independent journalist would wince at the thought of using such a shamelessly loaded piece of Republican sloganeering. And then there’s the Times’ OCD-like focus on the issue itself, editorializing against the death estate tax six times in the past six months.
The Times’ eligiac lament for the days of family-owned newspapers is also misleading… evoking a romanticized image of three generations of Blethens bravely pounding away at their Underwoods as they fend off the sudden assault of a faceless, out-of-state, modern media giant. The 142-year-old Seattle P-I has been published by Hearst since 1921, and the paper’s editorial board and staff are just as much a part of our community as that of the Times. Indeed, the Blethen family’s holding company is no mom-and-pop shop itself; its assets include a number of online news, information and advertising web sites, printing and distribution subsidiaries, plus nine newspapers in Washington and Maine, including the Yakima Herald-Republic, the Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, The Issaquah Press, and Maine’s largest circulation papers, the Portland Press-Herald and Maine Sunday Telegram.
While the Blethen family’s holdings are dwarfed by those of Hearst, both the Times and the P-I are in fact, family-owned newspapers… the Hearst Corporation having been privately held by the Hearst family for its entire 118-year history.
I actually empathize with the Blethens, and wish them the best of luck in transferring the business intact to their fifth generation. But it is arrogant of them to ask us to eliminate a century-old tax, shifting burden to the already over-burdened poor and middle-class, in the interest of easing the Blethens’ selfish — if admirable — goal of maintaining their family legacy. While millions of American children are forced to get by in substandard schools, and without adequate health care, it is hard for me to squeeze out a few tears for the children of wealth and privilege.
Three generations of Blethens have managed to keep their inheritance in the family despite a much higher estate tax than the Times now rails against. If the current generation proves unwilling to make the same kind of sacrifices as their elders, then the Blethen family should blame itself, not the tax code.
spending over the next two years by 12 percent. That figure, reached by saying yes to far too many appeals, is higher than the “private economy can possibly grow and will fall heavily on selected parts of it.
The previous budget, designed by state Sen. Dino Rossi and Gov. Gary Locke, raised spending by 4 percent. That was done by saying no to state employees, no to teachers and no to many others. That was painful to them, but it gave breathing room to the battered economy. The economy has improved. State revenue in the new biennium will be up 7 percent. The state can now begin to say yes, selectively. It cannot afford to triple the growth rate in state spending all at once.”
He is not against taxation he is just against, frivelous
taxes like we are getting hit with repeatedly.
“There will be another billion-dollar gap two years hence. Legislators know it and ignore it. One party has power, and it wants a Yes Budget. It is a painful lesson in the risk of one-party government.”
Yet another great point. You are shooting in the dark Goldy and guess what… you aren’t hitting anything.
Let’s not lose sight of the fact Gregoire CUT the estate tax in half. She doubled the exemption, and estate tax revenues will fall by 50%. What more could the rich ask for?
The estate tax has put no small businesses out of business. It’s a lie fabricated by the ultra wealthy. Beware.
The other question to ask is how much was Mr. Blethen’s stake worth when he got it and how much it is worth now…successful family businesses grow and increase in value over the years, which the family isn’t taxed for, obviously, so when the transfer takes place, it is the time for collection. When even somebody like Mort Zuckerman (US News & World Report publisher, and certainly not a liberal) comes out in favor of the estate tax, that’s saying something.
I wouldn’t object to getting rid of the estate tax if they stop adjusting the inherited property to current value when it is transferred. Then, when it is sold, capital gains tax would be due. But you don’t have to sell until you want to. Of course, the tax should be indexed to inflation as well.
I actually empathize with the Blethens, and wish them the best of luck in transferring the business intact to their fifth generation.
Yeah, is it too much to ask for the wealthy to pay at least some tax for the funds they get.
I think the argument is stronger to make income from wages tax free as it encourages work. Lets eliminate wage tax and tax inheritance at 40 percent like wages are now.
I wouldn’t object to getting rid of the estate tax if they stop adjusting the inherited property to current value when it is transferred.
That’s about the most reasoned post I have ever read. I agree with it. Right now 5 generations in a family could pass along billions of dollars and never pay any taxes on it. Zero. Nada.
To some extent this reminds me of the Washington lottery winner from a few years ago who won $10 million and complained to the reporter interviewing him about how much income tax he had to pay. There are some people who always want a little bit more.
bottom line economy is 7% better than it was, therefore we should raise taxes no more than 7% or risk stunting it’s growth.
Goldy:
I suspect you are committed to taxing the remaining posessions of the recently deceased, and that there are no arguments that you will find persuasive. Ever the optimist, I shall try.
We come into this world with nothing, dependent upon our parents for everything. They attempt to teach us, but we also come with a genetic makeup they produced but cannot alter.
We mature, they obsess, and a workable compromise is rerached.
You work for 50 years. You buy a home with after-tax money, and make payments and pay taxes and insurance with after-tax money. You invest in stocks or land or housing or a business with after-tax money. Some things like 401-Ks and similiar things are pre-tax, meant to be taxed upon distribution. And you accumulate a substantial current net worth. These are rewards for your work over many years.
You have paid every tax demanded for your entire life. And you die. And you have a substantial range of owned assets.
Question. What portion of your life’s work is the government entitled to?
All taxes normally due hae been paid. The money is legitimate.
The only source of untaxed wealth embobied in an inheretance is capital gains, or an increase in the value of already held asetts. The capital gains tax s relatively low, and is trigggered by a sale at a price greater then the acquisition price.
A more pressing question may be why the government would have a greater claim then the family, since all applicapable taxes have already been paid. Why would any tax be due? Ahh, it is because you died.
A tax that is enforced only upon your death and only upon what you own when you die you claim is unfairly called a death tax. When a tax is triggered by a sale we caklit a sales tax. When it is triggered by ownership of property we call it a property tax. So what is the problem calling a tax triggered by death a deathe tax?
Make the case that that the death tax shuold be more than the states’ or federals’ capital gains rate.
Erik @ 6
As a practical matter, the descendants usually manage to go through it all by Generation 3 or 4.
Terry @ 9
Well crafted rationalization for paying no taxes on windfalls people didn’t work for while taxing the shit out of wages, but thoroughly illogical. Why are you complaining? Gregoire and the Democrats just cut this state’s estate tax in half.
Goldy never met a tax he didnt like, his trouble is that the state cannot figure out how to take ALL the money and redistribute it “properly”!
Oh good grief…from the article:
*The tax would apply to estates of $1.5 million or more this year and those of $2 million or more beginning next year. It would raise an estimated $135 million over the next two years, affecting about 250 estates.*
If these 250 families haven’t been able to hide their worth to the tune of $2mil then they deserve to get taxed on it.
16% of the unguarded $2mil is $320,000 leaving the poor heirs only $1.68mil to quibble over…how will they ever get along?
Eat the rich. They are high in fiber and healthy Omega-3 fatty acids.
I recommend a wild greens and rasberry vinegret salad and a red wine with a spicy bouquet.
Some cuts may be stringy and tough, a tenderizer of your choice is optional.
G Davis @ 13
You’ve got a point. Redistributionist tax schemes are unnecessary to prevent excessive concentration of wealth and power in a few families. Fratricide will accomplish the same thing.
RDC,
Response is in the other thread.
9. Terry J. : great points. trouble is, libs like Goldy think government should get ALL your money. there are just so many “troubles” they think they can, but don’t, “fix”.
RDC,
Still around?
Marks…cogito ergo sum.
I hadn’t imagined that Goldy would move so quickly during a nice spring weekend. Back to a few ideas on FP: economic, energy, physical, intellectual security…globalization, resource demands, relative decline, and bad guys realities…and domestic policy as a base for foreign policy, and the interconnectedness of all of these. For example, globalization. What are some of the problems we need to overcome if we want to prosper in this brave new world? One problem is ignorance. While much, perhaps most, of the rest of the world is getting more knowledgable about almost everything, we seem, as a people, to be becoming less knowledgable. My premise is that if we are to deal successfully with the world, we need to know as much as we can about the world. All of us, not just a few leaders in business, politics, and academia. This is based on the belief that an informed citizenry is necessary to maintain a democracy and quite possibly the freedoms in the Bill of Rights. As a part of domestic policy, foreign language study should be a prerequisite for a college degree. For every college degree. The irony is that this used to be a common thing, but as it became more and more important, it became less and less required. If you have studied another language, you know that it is not only that language you are learning, but also more about your own. The study of language necessarily entails the study of other cultures. I won’t go on about this, but dispelling ignorance about the world among all groups of Americans is an important task for all levels of government, and in a world where we are increasingly dependent on other countries, necessary for citizens to understand and support or reject FP initiatives. Language study isn’t of course the only way to enlighten the public. My point is that education about the world outside our borders must become an important objective for government, labor unions, trade associations, you name it, if we are to coninue to be a vital force in the world. Military might alone won’t suffice. That should be enough to get started.
The badly worded last sentence has no link to military might; just a reference to some thoughts to start a discussion. The weekend was good, but tiring.
Fairly or not, I am attributing my lack of eloquence in 19 to fatigue. An additional comment on eradicating ignorance as a part of foreign policy, I think a reasonable goal is to try to achieve among the citizenry here a level of sophistication about what is going on in the world similar to that in western Europe
(old Europe, as the disgrace at Defense puts it). Opinions here may still differ from prevailing thought there, because our history, heritage, and interests are different, but my reasoning is based on the observation that the world today is as tightly knit for most purposes as Europe was as recently as 40 years ago. Except for military action and surface shipping time, the oceans have become no more than rivers flowing through our commercial and intellectual worlds. Somehow, we have to break out of the intellectual smugness our relative geographical isolation has fostered. If we don’t, someone will write a non-fiction series of books that really are scary, and title them the Left Behind books.
RDC,
Before I get into the new world order according to me (there is not much I can add, but I will try to keep up with you, at least), E.J. Dionne had an interesting, and mostly accurate column (IMO, of course):
The party’s agenda on Social Security, judges and the Terri Schiavo case is out of touch with where moderate voters stand.
While I do not typically subscribe to E.J.’s usual view of the political world, I would say that on two of the three above, I agree. The jury is still out on SS reform, since I have little clue as to what the actual proposal is beyond the speculation dished out as news. Tierney at NYT was quite bullish on accounts today.
I honestly never gave globalization any thought before, so when I am confronted by my own ignorance, I usually ask questions. Occasionally I find the answer really is in the question:
I am not about to defend the person on the street who gets stopped by the Tonight Show crew and when asked a simple question like “Who is the Secretary of Defense?” fails to respond correctly (I will laugh derisively, thus keeping me from crying). For many people, why would they care who Rummy is? Does he feed them or pay them? It is simply not something a “regular” person does (making me weird, I guess). Is this good, or better yet, does this speak to the nature of our citizens, that we are either so lazy or uncaring that we would just as soon look to our next iced tea as pay attention to the wide world?
To put it one way, it seems we are a nation of snapshot taking tourists in a world full of video cameras. This is proven daily in our news programming. If there is a story in Rome that does not involve a dead Pope or his successor, I would not be able to find it, since I do not know Italian (and my Latin is paltry beyond e pluribus unum and cogito, ergo sum). Has Berlusconi’s government fallen? Why should I care?
The trend I am getting at is that we don’t care enough about the world at-large in the same way we don’t care about our Federal Government. We elect people to take care of the day-to-day operation of it, but once we delve into minutia that does not seem to affect us anymore, it becomes a chore. Hence, Rummy becomes “that guy on TV that everyone says bad things about.”
To reverse that would be great, but as I recall from my US and World History classes a couple of decades ago, keeping people awake in order to teach something is not likely to succeed unless the phrasing is on the level of “Will this affect my paycheck?” The answer should be “Yes.”
Glad you enjoyed your weekend. Now, what did I do with my iced tea?
Goldy, how ’bout that preview function?
Sorry…
Tierney’s article was a propaganda piece. The WP weekly edition for last week ran articles on the Chilean and British plans. The Chilean plan is apparently a hot item in their upcoming election; raising the retirement age is one option to reduce the spiralling costs. The guy Tierney used as his model does not represent the “typical” Chilean pensioner, nor has the Chilean economy resembled ours. As the economy there is maturing, growth is slowing, as would be expected. The British system, which was put in under Thatcher, is more like what Bush is proposing (I think…as you note, he’s not been very clear about his plan). It has not been successful, and the government there is now trying to modify it to be more like ours, as I read things.
If I had read your comment “Who Cares?” forty years ago, I would have largely agreed. But the times they are a changin’..or already have. Perhaps I erred..no, not possible…perhaps you misread my comments. The key isn’t up-to-the-minute knowledge of political affairs in all the legislatures in all the capitols of the world. The key is in understanding the cultures of others and understanding that our position relative to the rest of the world has and continues to change in dramatic ways. As a people, we need to be better informed, not with minutia, but with developments that can affect us. To demonstate that we are a nation of overfed and indolent sheep one need look no further than Vietnam and Iraq.
Your point about not caring unless one is directly affected is a good one. There are likely many now displaced from employment Americans who never cared about Indian economic trends until the pink slip came. This is where I think leadership has failed; leadership in labor, busines, and government. Market forces will not save us any more than our military will. Education is the responsibility of those in leadership. We recognize this with the very young and make schooling mandatory. I know that you can’t make a horse drink when you get him to the water, but leadership can at least get him to
the water. Or iced tea, as the case may be.
BTW, when this gets close to burial, bashing gays at MS might be fun.
In today’s NYT is an article on page A8 with the headline US Considers Toughening Its Stance Against Venezuela. This would make a good vehicle for transitioning the discussion on engagement with the world. Have I mentioned that the NYT is the world’s best newspaper? With middle-of-the-road views, to boot?
bashing gays at MS might be fun.
Shame! How intolerant of you…
On Latin, I forgot about veni, vidi, vici and semper fidelis…
I do not think I was too far off the reservation. It is simple enough to say we should understand the people we interact with, yet the opposite would be the case when it comes to implementation, I think. Just how large in scope is your vision for engendering cultural understanding? It seems it may be a generational transition, from my point of view. Leadership is difficult to find, nowadays, and there are plenty of people who will refuse to adapt. I guess they would be amongst the first left behind…
With your knowledge of East Asian history, however far removed it is, I would surmise that you may see the present situation in China a bit differently than I. I see the Chinese leadership allowing protests against Japan and think Beijing is losing the grip it had on its populace. Perhaps you see it differently? Is it nothing beyond a gambit at keeping Japan off the UN Security Council?
The Chilean government, democratically elected, has launched a major long term initiative to make the country bilingual, in the sense that all students in all schools will be taught English. We waste billions for useless military battleships; we certainly can spend money on educating the populace about world affairs. We currently have national leadership with a vested interest in keeping the people ignorant, so the first order of business is to change the leadership.
The Chinese government is very corrupt, but in control. Don’t think of the government as communist. The Chinese have never been big on ideology; think pragmatism. The singular goal of the leadership, which fits in well with the ancient notion of the Middle Kingdom, is to become a world power to rival or exceed the US. The government there doesn’t have to do much to get people to protest the Japanese..the Japanese were quilty of horrendous crimes against the Chinese in the 30s and 40s. The protests are a kind of shot across the bow. More on this as we move along. I’m out tomorrow, but should get something posted in the evening.
A change of plans finds me here (briefly). Apologies for an almost incoherent post at 28. The lesson is, never write more than two sentences when rushed.
Re leadership and education…although not entirely analogous, the change in attitude and habits about smoking in America is an example of what can happen when leadership from a number of organizations commit themselves to a concerted effort. Of course, there are still people who smoke, and some who even dispute that smoking is harmful, but overall there has been a massive shift to the good in the last 25 years. Lobbying for the good is a legitimate government function…check out the preamble to the Constitution.
An article in the NYT this morning speculates that the anti-Japan protests in China may reflect a power struggle within the governing group there. An editorial in a state run Shanghai newspaper yesterday condemned the protests, while other factions in the government seem to have encouraged the protests. I wouldn’t consider this a sign of the government losing control, though. If there is a massive uprising in the making in China, it is much more likely to come from the rural interior than from the urban east, because of the great disparity in benefits reaped from China’s adoption of and adapting to capitalism. But the government has the firepower to quell any foreseeable rebellion. The civil war that brought Mao to power occurred in circumstances which do not exist today. More later.
Instead of gay-bashing, I think I’ll have a drink when this thread runs out.
I had read about the rape of Nanking. I also read not too long ago that Iris Chang had taken her own life. She had authored a book on it in the 90s. The horror of the crimes conducted and her research of them has lead to speculation that she could not deal with it.
No, I never think of China as communist in the USSR sense. I think of them as totalitarian more than anything else. Oligarchy is the better term, perhaps.
On engagement, which seems to tie in closely with knowledge of the culture you are dealing with, I would gather that one size does not fit all. Engagement with Canada is not the same as Mexico, yet we have NAFTA. The EU’s conglomeration of nations poses some interesting questions, such as what use is NATO?
I have to cut short here. Got things to do, but will try to post before I go to sleep.
I must have found another word to stay away from: r@pe.
Maddening, isn’t it? I’ve never gone into the archives, but if this thread runs out before Goldy releases your comment, I’ll give it a try. Otherwise, after your reply appears, I’ll meet you for a drink.
Interesting that engagement with other countries was what I was also thinking about. I am out all day tomorrow; may comment in the evening…very likely a liberal drink will be on order by then. BTW, China is not totalitarian; rather, it is closer to authoritarian. I’m not sure that that really matters much, but there is a distinction.
Marks…David Brooks today in the NYT has a different take on China. He’s wrong…a not unusual event. I’ll elaborate later.