Above his pay grade

Motor Trend’s Frank Markus introduces a luxoboat comparo (3/11) with a snide reference to how purchase of these is made possible by the extension of the Bush tax cuts:

We hear the extension saves you rich folks $103,535 per million of annual taxable income. What better economic stimulus for you to spend it on than a shiny replacement for that tired old barge you’ve been driving since the credit-party music stopped?

Lighten up, Frank. This is an extension of an existing cut: nobody is getting an extra $103,535 over and above last year. Unless, of course, you’re prepared to argue that the government has first claim on someone’s earnings, in which case I’m prepared to argue that ripping my subscription-renewal form in two — which I did on Thursday before I even read this piece — was one of the smarter things I did this week.

But he goes on:

Restraint is still called for. Pop for a V-12 and your Tea Party pals will tsk disapprovingly at your liberal-elite profligacy. Better to demonstrate some “shared sacrifice.”

Better still to pay attention. I don’t know what kind of quasi-rightist nimrods Markus thinks he’s BFFs with (if any) in L.A., but my Tea Party pals, such as they are, believe you should drive whatever you damn well please, and if it costs you a ton in fuel costs, so be it.

And let’s face it: were it not for those horrid upper-income individuals who can actually buy those luxoboats, poor Frank Markus would be spending his days sliding around skidpads, not in 7-series Bimmers, but in Nissan Versas and such. Farging ingrate.

Addendum: See also this deserved denunciation of a whole phalanx of idiots.







5 comments

  1. McGehee »

    29 January 2011 · 1:41 pm

    It doesn’t seem to occur to some people that luxury items for the ultra-rich are built and maintained by working shlubs who would otherwise have to go on welfare.

  2. Bill Peschel »

    29 January 2011 · 1:50 pm

    This sort of farcical writing is what I call an unforced error. Why deliberately go out of your way to insult at least part of your readership to score a political point, in a decidedly non-political arena?

    On the other hand, the writer’s lack of judgment shows that his opinions aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on, so it’s a great benefit to the reader.

  3. CGHill »

    29 January 2011 · 1:59 pm

    Now and then, the automotive press veers off in a direction like this. There was a time when Car and Driver seemed decidedly right of center: race driver-turned-columnist Patrick Bedard was clearly an O’Rourkian of the P. J. variety, and aggrieved readers called him out on it in the letters column, usually beginning with “If I wanted to read somebody’s third-rate opinions…”

    One could argue, I suppose, that the auto industry is no longer a non-political arena, given recent government initiatives/intrusions (take your pick), but regardless of the background music, it’s easy to spot someone with a tin ear.

  4. Jeffro »

    29 January 2011 · 7:47 pm

    One always suspects the automotive press of shilling for the advertisers, but Motor Trend really brought it home when they declared the newest version of the Chevrolet Caprice Car of the Year in 1991. Now, I’m a Chevy guy through and through – if I were to get a tattoo, it might just be the Chevy emblem.

    But Motor Trend proved they were hypocritical prostitutes. Haven’t subscribed since.

  5. no »

    30 January 2011 · 2:54 am

    And people wonder why “journalism” is going the route of the dinosaur.

RSS feed for comments on this post