This weekend the New York Times (6/13/10) reminded me once again that I am not the paper's target audience.
While supporters say the estate tax affects only the richest members of society and helps counteract the concentration of wealth, that million-dollar limit would seem to ensnare many people who consider themselves decidedly middle class–especially in the Northeast and California where home values are high.
What is the dividing line between wealthy and upper middle class? Or between someone who owns an estate and someone lucky enough to have bought a home decades ago and watched its value grow to seven figures?
Since the next paragraph acknowledges that less than 2 percent of estates would be affected next year (United for a Fair Economy says it's less than 1 percent), how can the Times publish this stuff with a straight face? If some two-year-olds don't consider themselves to be young, would the New York Times write about that seriously?
I wonder how many Times editors have homes worth more than a million bucks. I'm guessing more than one.