The Obscurer

Month: August, 2006

Gone Skiing

The news over the weekend announced that more people than ever are having to pay inheritance tax. It is a subject that invites strong opinions, with, apparently, very little in the way of middle ground.

I think that there may be some good arguments about what the threshold for inheritance tax should be, but other than that I don’t see there being any criticism of inheritance tax that doesn’t equally apply to other taxes. A popular complaint is the fact that with inheritance tax money is being taxed twice; but most peoples’ income is taxed the once only while it stays in the bank; it is taxed a second time the moment you go to the shop and pay VAT on your purchases. I have also read people attack inheritance tax because a bequest in itself is supposed to assist in social mobility, and so taxing it reduces this desirable outcome; but this is a counter intuitive argument if ever I heard one. Many supporters of the tax argue in favour of it for redistributive reasons; and whether or not you feel this is just, inheritance tax surely helps iron out some of the inequalities in wealth that can be passed down through the generations to those lucky (or unlucky) enough to have had rich (or poor) parents.

Personally I’ve never really seen the problem with inheritance tax. The government is going to have to take money off us at some point to pay for services; what better time than when we are dead, when we don’t know anything about it? It seems pretty painless extracting government revenue from me when I am six foot under, and once there are no longer any concerns about marginal rates of tax leading to a disincentive to work.

But I think most complainants about inheritance tax are not the ones paying the tax, but rather the ones planning on receiving the inheritance; or what’s left of it following the state’s “smash and grab”. Normally, if one were to argue against a tax that you don’t personally have to pay it would be a seen as a selfless act; but on this occasion it can seem entirely selfish and self serving, a grievance that the government is interfering with your projected revenue stream of the macabre.

For myself, I remember a few years ago my parents telling my brother and me that we needed to get together sometime with their financial advisor to arrange a trust fund to avoid paying the tax. My brother and I responded in the same way; ignoring the requests, keeping on changing the subject until it was eventually dropped. In short we thought that it was my parents’ money and they should do with it as they wished; if they wanted to set up a trust and needed something signing then we would do so, but that was about it. I don’t especially like thinking about my parents dying, but if I am around when it happens I’m pretty sure I won’t be thinking about the dosh. They can leave me something – or nothing – for all I care; I wouldn’t mind if it all went to the cats’ home.

It all reminds me of a news story a few years back about the tendency for retired people to be Skiers; Spending the Kids Inheritance. There was criticism in some quarters that retirees were having the nerve to spend their pensions on holidays and cars, when they should have been thinking of leaving a nest egg to their offspring. Incredible; surely the only reaction to the news that people in their twilight years are spending their own money on themselves is “good on you, have a great time, you’ve earned it”. All the kids should expect is a post card from St Tropez.

I can understand why some people resent giving money to the government, but not why inheritance tax specifically should be such a bogeyman. The reality about complaining that the government is taxing your inheritance is that you are looking forward to the day when your parents are deceased so you can grab their money; that you are frustrated that you won’t be getting your hands on even more of this unearned windfall from beyond the grave. It is an attitude that I find very, very odd.

PostScript: Two posts in two days! Welcome to the new look, frequently updated Obscurer? Not likely. I’m off to the Lakes for a wee break. No more posts here until Saturday, at the very, very, very earliest.

Spamalot

I was delighted yesterday when I discovered I’d received an email from Jason Alexander, the actor who played George in Seinfeld; until I noticed that he was trying to sell me Viagra and I decided that it wasn’t that Jason Alexander after all. In fact not only was it not from that Jason Alexander – I think he’s busy – but it wasn’t from any Jason Alexander, just an e-pistle from a random name generated by a computer that has been spitting out spam emails recently to no good effect.

A brief history of email spam; I used to get stuff allegedly written by Mike, or Stephen, but recently that has changed. To be more realistic I guess the spammers started sending emails from people with a forename and a surname; but if it is unlikely that I will be fooled into thinking an email from Tony is really for me, how more unlikely is it that they will stumble upon a forename/surname combination of someone I actually know; or who is even likely to exist?

I’m reminded of an old Alexei Sayle sketch; the world, he said, was being dominated by people who’s names are made up of either two Christian names (like Jason Alexander), two surnames (Cameron MacKintosh) or two non words (Meryl Streep). I think the new spammers have taken this idea too seriously.

So, looking in my deleted box I see I have received emails from a Josh Matthews, a Wilson Porter and a Hallam Curry; but they are some of the more believable names. I am fascinated by the possibility of a Jeruvis Giles, a Moises Brown, a Brett Sherpard and a Trying Whitley walking the earth and writing to ask me if I want to buy a restaurant paging system, even though I don’t own a restaurant. My favourite email comes from someone called Guy Ransom who has surely just wandered out of a Martin Amis novel. I have also received stuff from a whole slew of unlikely Hispanics; Ernesto James, Enrique Bailey, Colton Lopez, Ashton Diaz and his/her brother, Sven.

With my more recent spam, however, I think the name generator has blown a gasket completely; perhaps aware that it has created some unlikely name combinations it has gone back to single names; but with a crazy twist. What are the chances that I know a Marumi, an Ernestine, a Winfred or a Fidel, and so be suckered into thinking they have personally emailed me asking for cash? What about Lupe, Cobb, Boggs, Darnell and Moran; do you know them? If so then I may have received your advert for Windows Office in error. And I really don’t know what it was thinking of when it churned out emails from Diary, Butter, Discriminant and Nautical Chassis.

I hanker for the halcyon days of old, believable spam; will we ever see their like again?


What have I been up to recently, you’re not asking? Some readers may be under the impression that I’d started my paternity leave way early, although regular readers will not be at all surprised that I haven’t written anything here for a week or so. There are all manner of things that can keep me from blogging; being busy at work, catching rays in the fine weather, popping away on a short break, being drunk (or recovering from being drunk), messing about with my brand new mobile phone. All these and more have applied over the past few weeks, as well as the fact that I don’t really want to write just for the sake of it, whatever you may think. However, I have also been in one of those moods where I feel jaundiced and disenchanted about blogging. While I have previously said that I will never quit blogging because I will always shout at the telly, so on the contrary when I find myself shouting at blogs via the computer monitor it puts me off the whole business.

Sometimes trips around the blogosphere (someone please come up with a better word!) can be very rewarding, as you discover new blogs and great examples of well-argued writing that you think you should keep tabs on. Recently however my journeys have been depressing, unedifying descents into the bowels of the ’sphere, reading posts so insane that you can’t argue back because you don’t know where to start ; and I haven’t even bothered to visit Devil’s Kitchen.

I think one day a couple of weeks back was the nadir; try as I might I couldn’t avoid stumbling upon blogs written by moronic trolls spouting their ill thought out prejudice and bile, with even more repulsive views in the comments. As in the real world, it seems, the whole crisis in Lebanon seems to bring out the worst in both sides. Whatever side of the fence the blogger stood, he or she thought that their side was entirely justified in acting as they chose, while the other side was wholly to blame and deserved what they were getting, and obviously moaned about the media – and of course the BBC primarily – as being either a leftist front or Zionist propagandists* (*delete according to stupidity).

But the nasty, one eyed spite and bigotry wasn’t confined to the middle east situation; that day I also kept encountering stuff written by the same authors that showed they could be just as idiotic when discussing other subjects. The terrible case of Jean Charles de Menezes was back in the news at the time, concerning the CPS’s decision to charge the Met under Health and Safety laws, and with the vigil held to mark the first anniversary of his death. I found it (and still find it) quite incomprehensible that sentient beings can respond to his death by questioning his innocence due to him “being an illegal” and to bemoan his family mourning and demanding answers to what happened a year ago; but that day everything I read was either of that opinion, or else viewed the police as laughing butchers who knowingly pumped (always pumped) seven bullets into an innocent man’s head for a laugh because he “looked a bit foreign”. I came across no middle ground. I could also see no sensible connection as to why it was that the Israel supporters were anti-de Menezes (can anyone really be “anti” the poor bloke? Sadly it seems so) while those most critical of the police were also the most stridently anti-Israel; but that was the way it seemed.

I am not suggesting of course that everyone who is pro-Israel is anti-de Menezes, and so on, and I know there are many thoughtful and reasonable writers out there covering Lebanon and other situations; this fed up feeling will soon pass. One of the best antidotes I’ve found is to read Tim Worstall. It can be refreshing to read the opinions of someone with whom you disagree and yet don’t think is a complete cunt.

Call me naive, but it is grim to realise there are so many apparantly intelligent people out there who subscribe to such nasty views; but are there, really? My one hope is that the offensive drivel hurled out recently is in fact just another development in the spam industry; that the posts are not intentionally evil, just nonsensical, generated by the same computer that believes Varette Fake is a likely name, and all part of an effort to screw money out of Google AdSense. What do you reckon?

Let’s hope so; keep thinking happy thoughts.