Blog Editorial Critique

A CounterPunch article published on October 14th, 2019 entitled, “The Economics and Politics of Financial Transactions Taxes and Wealth Taxes” by Dean Baker gives some insight into the debate between enacting a financial transactions tax or a wealth tax.  The author’s intended audience is clearly liberals/democrats that are up-to-date on the upcoming presidential election in 2020.  The author uses a very generic title that does not appeal to any particular side of this debate between a financial transaction tax (FTT) or a wealth tax more or less than the other.  However, this title is still intriguing to the reader as this editorial is published in a liberal (left-wing) blog, drawing a well-educated audience that would like to further their knowledge on the upcoming presidential debate.  While this technique is less grabbing than other title-framing styles can be, the author ultimately uses its audiences’ political knowledge to select a hook, drawing the reader in with a topic that they would like to learn more about.  The source itself gives the author credibility, aligning with the same ideals as the target audience.

    Baker makes the argument that “while there are good reasons for wanting to tax the very rich, an FTT is almost certainly a better economic policy and would have much better political prospects.”  By using a concession and rebuttal to introduce their claim, the author shows that there are benefits to both arguments, but ultimately that an FTT is better for certain reasons.  Through the use of words like “us” and “we,” the author shows that he shares the same liberal values as the audience and is part of their community, giving him a sense of ethos that carries on through his claim.  In addition, the rhetor frequently uses hypotheticals throughout the article, making a complex topic much more understandable to the common reader, being certain that everyone understands the negatives and positives of both scenarios in order to convince them that an FTT is the way to go.

    While the author definitely inserts his values and assumptions in the article, he also uses a large amount of evidence to back up each of his claims.  Shortly after introducing his main claim, he uses logic and reminds the audience of the purpose of taxes: to “free up resources in the economy to allow the government to spend on other priorities.”  Using hypotheticals to back up his claim, the author eventually circles back to the fact that the wealth tax can be avoided by the small wealthy population in the United States through the use of skilled accountants and financial planning.  However, an FTT will only affect the financial sector, with the rhetor convincing the audience that the financial sector will be fine after a major reduction in trade, relating to the audience that “we know this, because we lived through periods with a much smaller financial sector.”  The author continually uses a variation of ethos, pathos, and logos throughout the article, convincing the reader of his claim by connecting himself to the audience and their views, using inflammatory words against Trump to unite the audience as liberals, and inserting factual information to convince the reader.

    While the conclusion is very brief, it is also very convincing, coming full-circle by restating the author’s main claim.  In addition, it shows a call to action statement, with Baker noting that “the enormous rise in inequality over the last four decades demands a serious response.”  The last sentence truly resonates with the reader, envisioning the FTT as the right decision and that will positively affect our government in the long-term.  Even though we as citizens may believe that the wealthy deserve to be taxed since they have the most individual income in our society, but articles such as these show us that this instinctive decision may have some fatal flaws.  We must continue to educate ourselves on matters involving our national government in order to truly achieve success.