David Cameron’s tax credo may well be incoherent and economically illiterate but it is not immoral (“Cameron’s tax credo is incoherent, immoral and economically illiterate”, Comment).
There are, indeed, good a priori arguments, as well as a body of empirical work on ourselves as well as other primates, that suggest that, as Will Hutton puts it, there is a “fundamental human appetite for fairness”. But contra Hutton, a sense of propriety need not require “proportionality of contribution”: depending on the circumstances, it could well be that our sense of what is right is satisfied by other contributory principles.
In any case, even if “proportionality of contribution” did “represent” our appetite for fairness, cutting the higher marginal tax rates on the rich would better satisfy that appetite rather than run counter to it.
Dr William Dixon and Dr David Wilson
London Metropolitan University
London E1
Why guns must be outlawed
Three small words, in John Vidal’s otherwise excellent report on the world’s “murder capitals”, help explain the phenomenon of hyper-violence accompanying rapid social transition in the cities of the global south (“Murder capitals of the world: how runaway growth fuels city violence”, News). The estimated 480,000 people, he notes, are killed “mostly by guns”. As the UN also acknowledges, these rapidly expanding cities are among the most highly weaponised areas in the world.
A combination of profound inequality and small-arms proliferation, driving chronic insecurity, accompanied by state failure, cultivates a dangerous faith (no doubt fostered by US myths of individual freedom) in personal weaponisation for self-defence. Even one of the most privileged gun-toting citizens of a grossly unequal, high-crime society, Oscar Pistorius in South Africa, must now realise that the privatised use of lethal force is no contribution to public safety.
Peter Squires
Professor of criminology & public policy, University of Brighton
Limitations of speed limits
In Bristol, we have a 20mph speed limit throughout the city. This was recently introduced by our mayor on the grounds that it will reduce accidents and make them less serious with fewer casualties, a policy that is in line with Christian Wolmar’s arguments in the New Review (“Are lower speed limits a good idea?”). What is not clear yet is the evidence to support their case and were it subsequently to be proved that lower speed limits did reduce accidents would they then advocate a 15mph speed limit to eliminate them further?
This is not to argue against all speed restrictions, as there would seem to be a prima facie case for having relatively low limits on selected roads in the vicinity of hospitals, care homes and schools, as opposed to the blanket city-wide approach we now have.
Also my recent experience of being tailgated by a clearly impatient and inconsiderate driver, when observing the new 20mph limit on a quiet Bristol road, suggests that this speed limit might well have the unintended consequence of increasing road-rage incidents in our city, with a potentially detrimental effect on road accident statistics.
Mick Beeby
Bristol
Less of this clock watching
I can’t understand how so many learned people in last week’s Big Issue can write such nonsense about the issues of being on Central European Time (“We’re still in the dark ages when it comes to time zones”). How is it that several million Scandinavian children seem quite capable of adapting to life for six months when it’s pretty dark most of the time and for the other six months when it’s constantly light all the time, the severity of which depends on your latitude? The standard of education in all these countries is typically admired, as well as them having the lowest rates of traffic accidents.
Arguably these countries also have more equal and social welfare orientated societies compared to ours, so maybe there is something more in this argument than whether our kids can cope with one hour’s difference. Quite a ridiculous argument in all honesty.
Keith E Hoult
Witney
Oxon
Don’t bump into the furniture
In the Observer Magazine last week, Nigel Farndale writes: “Jamie Dornan is a happily married, Guardian-reading feminist with a young daughter. So how come he’s so persuasive as a serial killer in The Fall?”
As Laurence Olivier might have put it: “Acting, dear boy.”
Teresa Guerreiro
London NW6
Why should I buy in Dubai?
Wow! Should I be impressed by the fact that 80 million people travel to Dubai for the “retail experience” (“New York, Paris… Dubai. Why this desert mall is the height of couture”, In Focus, )? When I want to purchase special garments, all I need do is jump in the car and drive to Exeter. It’s called “going shopping”.
Ted Lavery
Newton Tracey
Devon
