Randomly Selected Article or Link

I've just received another electronic communication from one of our South East European candidate hopefuls. It repeats Linda Jack's recent gripe about not being able to say who they are supporting for the leadership.

Apparently this is because such an endorsement by a Euro-hopeful might be interpreted as an implicit endorsement by the relevant leadership candidate for that Euro-hopeful and thereby possibly increase their chances of selection.

If it hadn't been made up by the powers that be it would not have been a conclusion I would have leaped to, I have to say. However, given that I do support a particular leadership candidate I would like the opportunity at least to consider giving extra weight to those Euro candidates who share my opinion of what would be best for my party in the leadership. It might very well not make any difference of course.

So, let's remove the gag. It's a bonkers idea. Sure, we did not know there would be a leadership election when the Euro selection process started, but now that we have one, it could very well be another factor in whether to prioritize one candidate over another.

Much discussion on the TV and in the press overnight about will-he won't-he George Osborne endorsing John Redwood's idea of abolishing inheritance tax. There has been a protracted discussion about this in Lib Dem circles over the last year or so as well.

The irony is though that many of those that want it abolished do so because it is usually the "family home" that pushes an estate into IHT liability. Ironic because of all the possible assets one might have accumulated in one's life, the value of one's property is the most likely to have been "unearned". Many proponents of abolition reckon that because they paid tax on the earnings they used to purchase their house, so any rise in the value of that property ought to be untaxed - that anything else is "double taxation".

The trouble is, you don't earn the rise in your property value. It happens because other people need what you have - a site in an increasingly popular location. A popularity most often created by expenditure on things like infrastructure that make that location better connected. It is monopoly profit.

Most of the other assets you might leave to your descendants - shares and so on - are productive assets that themselves help create wealth. Land values move wealth from those who don't own land, or own low value locations, to those who own better land, more popular sites, in a zero sum market.

So yes, abolish inheritance tax, but replace it with Land Value Tax, paid throughout the time you own that location, reflecting the value that others create at your location. Read about it: "Ricardo's Law: House Prices and the Great Tax Clawback Scam" (Fred Harrison)

On Thursday "The Insider" (a laughable conceit of sniping from behind anonymity mostly at people trying their best to do some good in local politics) in the Oxford Mail complained that a Green councillor had not updated his blog for a few months, describing a blog as a "self important forum to tell people what you have been up to".

Until I got into this I was extremely skeptical myself about it. And I did think blogging was a bit of onanistic self-promotion that probably nobody would ever read. Of course the Insiders gives the lie to that suggestion - since he, or she, obviously does follow them sometimes. We've seen how instant news from ordinary people on the scene - long before the news crews could get there - gave us insights into the July bombings, the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, the war in Iraq direct from a chap in Baghdad. How the BBC and other news networks are paying people for their camera phone eye-witness reports and images and so on.

All one can reasonably conclude is that it is in fact the media running scared. Blogging offers an opportunity for people to air their opinions for others to find and read. It threatens the monopoly of the "Fleet Street" scribblers in holding our attention for a few precious minutes every day. And of course they do it for money - whether the journalist or commentator getting paid, to the media giant continuing to attract advertising - if we all got our opinions from each other (and they're no less valid - often it seems more honest and truthful than opinion journalists in my experience) instead of from the self-important scribbler in a newspaper or television office, they have little else of worth to us.

Finally running scared of the power of the web are we, "Insider"?

I note with interest today a story that a company whose shareholders are 3000 dairy farmers accounting for primary production of 16% of the UK milk output is buying the cheese businesses of Dairy Crest.

What goes around comes around perhaps? Remember that company Associated Dairies, now known as ASDA. It was of course once upon a time a co-operative of dairy farmers. I hope they succeed in taking some market influence back from the supermarkets.