Inheritance Tax, No. 1

I am not in the habit of lobbying politicians, but have done so once in England and once in the United Sttates. The issue in Washington was the proposed gutting of Inheritance Tax. I happen to strongly support the Inheritance Tax, and at the time it was a hot button issue in Washington D.C. under a Republican President.

I joined quite a large number of interested people at the Capitol and we broke up into small groups to visit the offices of, mainly, Blue Dog Democrats, those who represented conservative constituencies but called themselves Democrats. You can’t expect to see the actual Member – Congressional aides handle all these representations – unless you are a trade association or, presumably, a big donor. Each of us had our say, and I had what I hoped was a bit of an unusual short speech ready for them with my English accent. It went like this:

“In 1776 you guys rebelled against good King George III. You rejected his system of rule, his taxation policies, the British class system and the lack of opportunity for enterprising young people. You fought for (more) democracy and the right of every generation to make the best of itself. You are now proposing to make the Inheritance Tax meaningless. What does this do? It passes wealth unencumbered to the next generation, regardless of whether that generation is capable, or whether it is gormless and spendthift. It re-installs in America the very self-perpetuating “aristocracy” that you rejected in 1776. Each generation should prosper or not depending on its own merits, not on Dad’s cash.

Aside from that, no one makes a fortune divorced from the advantages of living in a well- organised society. The rich benefit from the schools, health systems, policing, roads, laws, regulations and rules that offer a level playing field and minimal cheating. This has been created by generation of taxpayers like you and me. Without the institutions of an advanced economy you have only tribalism and bribery to help you get ahead. We should thank our sophisticated community when we die – and help repay the debt we owe it.”

Alas, the Inheritance Tax is now at a level in America where it affects only a tiny proportion of the population and is fairly derisory. Even so, it is perennially under attack by the short-sighted and selfish. Tomorrow I will return to this issue, which seems arcane, but is actually enormously important in the cause of equal opportunity, which os an Epicurean principle.

Oxytocin and you

Dogs win our hearts by staring soulfully into our eyes. Researchers have discovered that when dogs have prolonged eye-to-eye contact with their owners, it causes a rush – in both man, and his best friend – of oxytocin, the “love hormone” believed to promote maternal-infant bonding. For the study, reported in the journal Science, animal researchers from Japan’s Azabu University gathered a group of dog owners and their pets, and a separate group who had hand-reared wolves. They took urine samples to determine oxytocin levels in all participants, then asked the owners to interact with their animals for up to 30 minutes. A second set of urine tests revealed that the owners who gazed at their dogs for several minutes had significantly raised levels of oxytocin, as did the dogs. However, the wolves’ oxytocin levels remained stable, regardless of how long they stared at their owners. (The Week)

As you know, there is a difference between staring (rude) and gazing with a soulful, admiring smile. Women will profess to think that both are forward and intrusive. Actually, they are secretly flattered by the soulful look. I think. Anyway, it’s worth a try.

So that’s my tip-of-the-day. Please try it and report back about success or otherwise. Address your observations to the Oxytocin Effectiveness Study in Human Beings at this blog address.

Girls (and boys) made to marry

A joint British Home Office and Foreign Office task force deals with cases where teenagers are taken abroad and forced, usually without notice, into marriage. Some 1,200 British moslem children are forced into marriage every year, usually abroad and during the summer holidays. Sometimes, the perpetrator can be an older brother who is British-born, but clings to the old way of doing things. There is a government instrument called a Forced Marriage Protection Order that can be used against parents to ensure that, if children are to be taken overseas, they return on an agreed date and are not forced into marriage. They are helped by charities which deal with the repatriation of young people hijacked into marriage against their will. That this task force has to exist at all is quite shocking.

If one single teenager is made to marry someone they have never met before, whether in the UK or abroad, it should be a human rights offense, punishable by jail. If moslems, jews or anyone else, want to practice their religion and keep it to themselves, that is their affair. But when it comes to support for jihad, forced marriage, or clitorectomy – in other words, affecting or harming others – there should be no tolerance shown.

The latest news is that funding for the Home Office Task Force, and for the charities mentioned above, is being severely cut. What on earth is government for? Government should be there to protect actual human beings, especially young ones. This is not just about enjoying your life, as Epicurus wished; it is about having a life at all.

Thought for the day

To The Daily Telegraph
As far as I’m aware, pop concerts do not include some classical music to make sure that they satisfy all tastes. Why, then, do the BBC Proms seemingly have to appeal to an ever-wider audience?
Jacky Ellinger, Southampton

Note to non-British readers: The BBC Proms series is the biggest and longest music festival in the world, starting in July and ending in September. Almost every musician and/or orchestra of note in the world has been, or is being, featured in it at some stage. On the other hand, for those who prefer pop music, there are scores of events of every description all through the summer, that do pop music better and in venues preferred by the young. Over-reach?