Livin' the high life...

I’m not usually one to attack specific articles I read, but when it’s The New York Times, and it’s such a blatant illustration of that paper’s leftish angle (previously noted on this blog), I feel the urge to comment. Because, really, it’s so unnecessary to create stories using the pop culture of the moment to push against right-wing economics and the like, when merely reporting the facts is more than enough.

With the overrated Mad Men bringing its swanky 1960s milieu back to TV after a long hiatus, the Times’s Ginia Bellafante took advantage of the event to pen “Not-So-‘Mad’ Ideas About Taxes,” drawing from the show this lesson: The era’s higher taxes didn’t ruin the economy, and higher taxes today wouldn’t do so either. “In a certain sense, wealthy people could live with a justifiable guiltlessness in ‘Mad Men’ New York,” she writes. “Not because they were blind to the city’s mounting racial crisis or to the perils of smoking or sexism, but rather because, fiscally speaking, they were paying their due.”

That’s right: Even though income tax rates were much higher back then, this fictional TV show proves that “high taxes won’t constrain the rich” from living the high life (a life that’s often said to dribble out economic rewards to the rest of us, though with scant proof).

And how does the show demonstrate this lighter side of higher taxes? “The new season has Don Draper living, at least in real-estate terms, very enviably, in a sweeping, modern apartment.”

Well, QED.