Comments on: La Renta: Tax for the Church – Notes from Spain Podcast 72 http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/ Podcasts and comment on travel, tapas, learning Spanish and living in Spain, plus beautiful Spain photos. Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:00:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Russil Alden http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/comment-page-1/#comment-120413 Russil Alden Tue, 25 Aug 2009 05:27:19 +0000 http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/#comment-120413 I think that it is just amazing when some foreigner comes to live in a country because he likes the way things are there and then wants to start to make it just like the place he left. I lived in Mexico for 2 years (I am now married to a Mexican woman) and loved the fact that things were different from the sterile nations further north. As does Mexico, Spain has an extremely strong Catholic heritage. I realize that it is fashionable to despise the Church these days but Ben, you must admit that the culture you like living in is to a large degree the creation of the Catholic Church, not discounting the influence of the Islam, which was there for over 700 years. As far as the fact that the religious scene has changed in Spain due to immigration, it is important to note that many who opposed the more-or-less open door policy toward immigration in the rest of the Europe and North America had expressed concerns about the kind of cultural dilemmas that are being seen today. They had been called racists and other names, however, and that silences anybody. As for smoking, that was one thing I liked about Mexico. In the early 90s you could smoke in the theatres (there were signs but nobody paid attention to them) and I remember, as I was a smoker then, blowing smoke up into the light coming from the projector. You could also smoke on the bus. I must say that I have never felt freer as when I lived in that country, but things have changed there and the old social scale that balances freedom and security is swinging toward the latter, as it is in most democratic countries. We are well aware of the injustices of the inquisition in Spain, which were more political, having to do with the rulers of the day. There are many recent examples of atrocities against Catholics that get no press, but illustrate how “Western Civilization (has) turn(ed) against its own builders,” as Thomas Wood says. An example regarding Spain starts at 1:25 of the following link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9DeolbyLSo&NR=1 This show, "The Catholic Church: Builder of Civilization," is an interesting, though admittedly biased, 13 part series that gives a lot of info regarding the Church that you never, ever hear in universities (a legacy of the Church) or the media. I was born in England and, on returning to the place of my birth (Yorkshire) a few years ago it became obvious that the beautiful old buildings, including many churches, were in need of repair (my mother says some are being used as BINGO halls). A few pounds set aside for these directly out of the tax returns might not be such a bad idea. Having lived on the West coast of North America where something one hundred years old is a big deal, you realize how Europeans take their heritage for granted. It’s a shame. I think that it is just amazing when some foreigner comes to live in a country because he likes the way things are there and then wants to start to make it just like the place he left. I lived in Mexico for 2 years (I am now married to a Mexican woman) and loved the fact that things were different from the sterile nations further north. As does Mexico, Spain has an extremely strong Catholic heritage. I realize that it is fashionable to despise the Church these days but Ben, you must admit that the culture you like living in is to a large degree the creation of the Catholic Church, not discounting the influence of the Islam, which was there for over 700 years. As far as the fact that the religious scene has changed in Spain due to immigration, it is important to note that many who opposed the more-or-less open door policy toward immigration in the rest of the Europe and North America had expressed concerns about the kind of cultural dilemmas that are being seen today. They had been called racists and other names, however, and that silences anybody.
As for smoking, that was one thing I liked about Mexico. In the early 90s you could smoke in the theatres (there were signs but nobody paid attention to them) and I remember, as I was a smoker then, blowing smoke up into the light coming from the projector. You could also smoke on the bus. I must say that I have never felt freer as when I lived in that country, but things have changed there and the old social scale that balances freedom and security is swinging toward the latter, as it is in most democratic countries.
We are well aware of the injustices of the inquisition in Spain, which were more political, having to do with the rulers of the day. There are many recent examples of atrocities against Catholics that get no press, but illustrate how “Western Civilization (has) turn(ed) against its own builders,” as Thomas Wood says. An example regarding Spain starts at 1:25 of the following link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9DeolbyLSo&NR=1
This show, “The Catholic Church: Builder of Civilization,” is an interesting, though admittedly biased, 13 part series that gives a lot of info regarding the Church that you never, ever hear in universities (a legacy of the Church) or the media.
I was born in England and, on returning to the place of my birth (Yorkshire) a few years ago it became obvious that the beautiful old buildings, including many churches, were in need of repair (my mother says some are being used as BINGO halls). A few pounds set aside for these directly out of the tax returns might not be such a bad idea. Having lived on the West coast of North America where something one hundred years old is a big deal, you realize how Europeans take their heritage for granted. It’s a shame.

]]> By: Dean Hunt http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/comment-page-1/#comment-37055 Dean Hunt Mon, 16 Jun 2008 14:44:45 +0000 http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/#comment-37055 John, I was of course using an extreme, yet purely hypothetical scenario... the irony is that for non-smokers, the thought of sleeping in a room that smells of smoke conjures the same feelings as you felt with my example. Also, I often come back from bars smelling of smoke, and I can assure you that it takes more than a good cleaning to get rid of the smell. Anyway, don't want to bang my head against a brick wall... we are both in Spain, and as things stand, you are more than entitled to smoke in bars. Regardless of whether it is right or wrong. But smoke on my property and I will push you in the pool ;-) haha Take care John, Dean John,

I was of course using an extreme, yet purely hypothetical scenario… the irony is that for non-smokers, the thought of sleeping in a room that smells of smoke conjures the same feelings as you felt with my example.

Also, I often come back from bars smelling of smoke, and I can assure you that it takes more than a good cleaning to get rid of the smell.

Anyway, don’t want to bang my head against a brick wall… we are both in Spain, and as things stand, you are more than entitled to smoke in bars. Regardless of whether it is right or wrong.

But smoke on my property and I will push you in the pool ;-) haha

Take care John,

Dean

]]> By: John Ross http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/comment-page-1/#comment-37048 John Ross Mon, 16 Jun 2008 12:49:00 +0000 http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/#comment-37048 @Dean Where on earth did you get your weird ideas of what rock and roll is about? Whatever, it doesn't matter whether it is their cigarette smoke, sweaty feet, sexual activities, or the unpleasantnesses you apparently enjoy committing, if your hotel room smells of the previous occupants, the hotel has been negligent in not cleaning and airing it properly. You have the right to demand another room. Doesn't mean we should legislate against sweaty feet or sexual activities. It could mean you need potty training. @Dean
Where on earth did you get your weird ideas of what rock and roll is about?

Whatever, it doesn’t matter whether it is their cigarette smoke, sweaty feet, sexual activities, or the unpleasantnesses you apparently enjoy committing, if your hotel room smells of the previous occupants, the hotel has been negligent in not cleaning and airing it properly. You have the right to demand another room. Doesn’t mean we should legislate against sweaty feet or sexual activities. It could mean you need potty training.

]]> By: Dean Hunt http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/comment-page-1/#comment-37041 Dean Hunt Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:32:35 +0000 http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/#comment-37041 John Ross, You hit the nail on the head ref smoking issues... listen, I have no issue with you smoking, and like you said, it is your rented room for the day, so within reason you should be able to do what you like... but here is where the issue with second hand smoke exists... When the next person uses that room, it is going to smell. Now, whilst you are probably immune to the smell, to a lot of people it is disgusting. So why should they pay the same amount of money for a room that you have ruined? Put another way... if I was a guest in that hotel room the night before you arrived, and I decided to also live the "rock and roll life" and therefore crapped and peed all over the floors and walls... would you be ok with spending the day in the room with a faint smell of crap in the air? If not, you have no right smoking in the rooms. Same applies in bars... how about for every breath of your smoke I breathe in, I will tip some of my drink onto your head. By the way... I know which is worse. Take care. Dean John Ross,

You hit the nail on the head ref smoking issues… listen, I have no issue with you smoking, and like you said, it is your rented room for the day, so within reason you should be able to do what you like… but here is where the issue with second hand smoke exists…

When the next person uses that room, it is going to smell. Now, whilst you are probably immune to the smell, to a lot of people it is disgusting.

So why should they pay the same amount of money for a room that you have ruined?

Put another way… if I was a guest in that hotel room the night before you arrived, and I decided to also live the “rock and roll life” and therefore crapped and peed all over the floors and walls… would you be ok with spending the day in the room with a faint smell of crap in the air?

If not, you have no right smoking in the rooms.

Same applies in bars… how about for every breath of your smoke I breathe in, I will tip some of my drink onto your head.

By the way… I know which is worse.

Take care.

Dean

]]> By: Christopher http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/comment-page-1/#comment-36562 Christopher Tue, 03 Jun 2008 10:13:27 +0000 http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/#comment-36562 One of my lasting negative impressions of Spain is that it was and still is most definately Marlboro Country. It became a real problem to find anywhere to sit and eat a meal without being enveloped in clouds of putrid filthy cigarette smoke. People were either completely ignorant or thoughless as to how repulsive it is for non smokers to be subjected to their stinking smoke. When you are travelling & eating breakfast, lunch and dinner in cafes/bars it just becomes musical chairs as you move to avoid the smokers. From the podcast, it doesnt sound like anything major will happen anytime soon to rectify the situation. So I will continue to enjoy the smoke free bars, cafes, pubs & restaurants of South Australia One of my lasting negative impressions of Spain is that it was and still is most definately Marlboro Country. It became a real problem to find anywhere to sit and eat a meal without being enveloped in clouds of putrid filthy cigarette smoke. People were either completely ignorant or thoughless as to how repulsive it is for non smokers to be subjected to their stinking smoke.

When you are travelling & eating breakfast, lunch and dinner in cafes/bars it just becomes musical chairs as you move to avoid the smokers.

From the podcast, it doesnt sound like anything major will happen anytime soon to rectify the situation. So I will continue to enjoy the smoke free bars, cafes, pubs & restaurants of South Australia

]]> By: Ray http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/comment-page-1/#comment-36550 Ray Tue, 03 Jun 2008 02:37:56 +0000 http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/#comment-36550 @Parubin: I am very strongly religious, but I believe churches should have NO part of money collected by government. None. Not in any way. I am a life-long non-smoker. I hate smoke. I dislike tobacco in general, and I believe that Law should require smoking to be banned in many places, such as public schools, public libraries, museums, courts, police offices, etc. These laws should NOT extend into privately owned business that do business within their non-publicly accessible, private property. No exemptions for the well being of employees need to be considered. Every single person working in a 'smoking' environment DID choose to work there, and to keep working there. If they dislike smoke so much, they may have even asked for a raise, or threatened to leave if the didn't get some benefit in return, but they CHOSE to stay, and work for whatever it is that they are currently being paid. (On a side note, it seems only fair that they should get a pay-cut or loose benefits if the law does end up requiring their employers to enforce non-smoking policies.) Anyway, non-smoking laws are too intrusive. Taxation of tobacco (and similar products) is all that is necessary to dissuade people from ruining their health, and thus theoretically burdening the health system. However, even these tax rates should be determined and enforced at a politically LOCAL level, such as the provincial, as should the individual sales tax (I mean IVA.) This will allow for an increase in the strength of Democracy, as people will be enabled to thus, "vote with their feet." Meaning, they can go to some other place within the nation, if they disagree with local policies on smoking and taxation. Democracy (deme=the people,) looses so much meaning with every little liberty that it loses, as each liberty is a CHOICE that can no longer be made by the people. @John Ross: In this sense, it IS like fascism to keep the people from ruling their own lives. I appreciate your arguments, and I regret being so sensitive about the word. It's just that it gets thrown around so much on the internet that I sometimes forget that maybe there are still valid uses for it. @Parubin: I am very strongly religious, but I believe churches should have NO part of money collected by government. None. Not in any way.
I am a life-long non-smoker. I hate smoke. I dislike tobacco in general, and I believe that Law should require smoking to be banned in many places, such as public schools, public libraries, museums, courts, police offices, etc.
These laws should NOT extend into privately owned business that do business within their non-publicly accessible, private property. No exemptions for the well being of employees need to be considered. Every single person working in a ‘smoking’ environment DID choose to work there, and to keep working there. If they dislike smoke so much, they may have even asked for a raise, or threatened to leave if the didn’t get some benefit in return, but they CHOSE to stay, and work for whatever it is that they are currently being paid. (On a side note, it seems only fair that they should get a pay-cut or loose benefits if the law does end up requiring their employers to enforce non-smoking policies.)
Anyway, non-smoking laws are too intrusive. Taxation of tobacco (and similar products) is all that is necessary to dissuade people from ruining their health, and thus theoretically burdening the health system.
However, even these tax rates should be determined and enforced at a politically LOCAL level, such as the provincial, as should the individual sales tax (I mean IVA.) This will allow for an increase in the strength of Democracy, as people will be enabled to thus, “vote with their feet.” Meaning, they can go to some other place within the nation, if they disagree with local policies on smoking and taxation.
Democracy (deme=the people,) looses so much meaning with every little liberty that it loses, as each liberty is a CHOICE that can no longer be made by the people.
@John Ross: In this sense, it IS like fascism to keep the people from ruling their own lives. I appreciate your arguments, and I regret being so sensitive about the word. It’s just that it gets thrown around so much on the internet that I sometimes forget that maybe there are still valid uses for it.

]]> By: Nancy http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/comment-page-1/#comment-36530 Nancy Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:04:15 +0000 http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/#comment-36530 As a tax preparer in the US, I found this podcast very interesting. On our federal tax forms we only have the option to designate $3 of our tax money to go to the Presidentlal Election fund (each candidate is given an equal share of this fund). It doesn't change our refund or what we owe, it just moves part of the tax we pay into that pot. Most, if not all, of the states offer an opportunity on their tax forms to contribute to any of several different charities, but absolutely NO religious organizations. "Separation of church and state" is a closely guarded tradition here (though not, as some believe, an actual part of our Constitution). Charitable donations do affect the refund or balance due, but for some people these donations also become tax deductible the following year. As a tax preparer in the US, I found this podcast very interesting. On our federal tax forms we only have the option to designate $3 of our tax money to go to the Presidentlal Election fund (each candidate is given an equal share of this fund). It doesn’t change our refund or what we owe, it just moves part of the tax we pay into that pot. Most, if not all, of the states offer an opportunity on their tax forms to contribute to any of several different charities, but absolutely NO religious organizations. “Separation of church and state” is a closely guarded tradition here (though not, as some believe, an actual part of our Constitution). Charitable donations do affect the refund or balance due, but for some people these donations also become tax deductible the following year.

]]> By: Parubin http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/comment-page-1/#comment-36516 Parubin Mon, 02 Jun 2008 17:26:01 +0000 http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/#comment-36516 Anyway I've noticed that most comments lie in one of these two cathegories : 1) Smokers against the smoking-ban, arguing the measure invades personal liberties and it is authoritarian and paternalistic. (The bottom line is that they find it hard to enjoy a beer in a pub without a ciggy in hand). or 2) Non-smokers (or ex-smokers which are actually more aggressive) all in favour of the smoking-ban, mainly because they can't stand the stinking 'aroma' that's left in their clothing when they go for a night out. It is easy to see that these two type of arguments are biased and somewhat invalid because they rely on an egoist perception of the smokers-non smokers conflict. I'd like to see more comments and reasons of non-smokers against the smoking-ban and as well other way around : arguments of smokers in favour of this type of legislation. I can't call myself an smoker (I don't smoke) but neither am I a fully non-smoker (I sometimes enjoy a ciggarette or two -no more than three anyway-) when going out at night. I've made estimations of how much I smoke, and it turns out to be about 12 ciggies a month. Anyway, I'm in favour of the ban on smoking in all indoor public places, mainly for I see two reasons that seem to me irrefutable : 1) The right to a healthy environment for all workers. 2) The fact that the measure certainly prevents tabaquism. Ok, so reason no.2 is a bit paterlalistic, I agree. But also everyone will have to agree that most smokers want to quick the habit at some point, by just prohibiting to smoke in places where they socialize (bars, pubs, restaurants, cafes...) they will find it more easy to quite (very annoying at first for sure, true). Anyway I’ve noticed that most comments lie in one of these two cathegories :

1) Smokers against the smoking-ban, arguing the measure invades personal liberties and it is authoritarian and paternalistic. (The bottom line is that they find it hard to enjoy a beer in a pub without a ciggy in hand).

or

2) Non-smokers (or ex-smokers which are actually more aggressive) all in favour of the smoking-ban, mainly because they can’t stand the stinking ‘aroma’ that’s left in their clothing when they go for a night out.

It is easy to see that these two type of arguments are biased and somewhat invalid because they rely on an egoist perception of the smokers-non smokers conflict.

I’d like to see more comments and reasons of non-smokers against the smoking-ban and as well other way around : arguments of smokers in favour of this type of legislation.

I can’t call myself an smoker (I don’t smoke) but neither am I a fully non-smoker (I sometimes enjoy a ciggarette or two -no more than three anyway-) when going out at night. I’ve made estimations of how much I smoke, and it turns out to be about 12 ciggies a month. Anyway, I’m in favour of the ban on smoking in all indoor public places, mainly for I see two reasons that seem to me irrefutable :

1) The right to a healthy environment for all workers.
2) The fact that the measure certainly prevents tabaquism.

Ok, so reason no.2 is a bit paterlalistic, I agree. But also everyone will have to agree that most smokers want to quick the habit at some point, by just prohibiting to smoke in places where they socialize (bars, pubs, restaurants, cafes…) they will find it more easy to quite (very annoying at first for sure, true).

]]> By: John Ross http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/comment-page-1/#comment-36512 John Ross Mon, 02 Jun 2008 16:18:09 +0000 http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/#comment-36512 @Ben They aren't incompatible. Enormous amounts of alcohol aside, I haven't actually taken drugs in over twenty years - it's the principle I defend. And it is illuminating that the blog you link to quotes Hemingway, who I am fairly sure would have been the first to condemn the kind of paternalist namby-pambying authoritarianism I am complaining about. @ Parubin Fair enough, I am certainly not attacking non-smoking workers rights or those of any other non-smoker. The problem is that the fascists, sorry, antidemocratic authoritarians, use that argument and others like it to invade my personal liberties. You have to admit that there is something big-brotherish about the Portuguese legislation - every hotel not only has smoke detectors in its non-smoking rooms (100% except in five-star hotels), but has a centralized smoke detection system, presumably checked and controlled by hotel inspectors, and the hotel presumably has the obligation to report infringements. OK, they aren't going to send smokers to the gas chamber, but it still seems pretty damn fascist to me. Incidentally, probably because it combines the two things we are talking about here, I have just remembered the time when the teenage me was thrown out of Westminster Abbey - for smoking in the cloisters. @Ben

They aren’t incompatible. Enormous amounts of alcohol aside, I haven’t actually taken drugs in over twenty years – it’s the principle I defend. And it is illuminating that the blog you link to quotes Hemingway, who I am fairly sure would have been the first to condemn the kind of paternalist namby-pambying authoritarianism I am complaining about.

@ Parubin
Fair enough, I am certainly not attacking non-smoking workers rights or those of any other non-smoker. The problem is that the fascists, sorry, antidemocratic authoritarians, use that argument and others like it to invade my personal liberties. You have to admit that there is something big-brotherish about the Portuguese legislation – every hotel not only has smoke detectors in its non-smoking rooms (100% except in five-star hotels), but has a centralized smoke detection system, presumably checked and controlled by hotel inspectors, and the hotel presumably has the obligation to report infringements. OK, they aren’t going to send smokers to the gas chamber, but it still seems pretty damn fascist to me.

Incidentally, probably because it combines the two things we are talking about here, I have just remembered the time when the teenage me was thrown out of Westminster Abbey – for smoking in the cloisters.

]]> By: Parubin http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/comment-page-1/#comment-36506 Parubin Mon, 02 Jun 2008 14:03:15 +0000 http://www.notesfromspain.com/2008/05/28/la-renta-tax-for-the-church-notes-from-spain-podcast-72/#comment-36506 @ Ben & John : What would Keith Richards think of this controversy? He certainly looks clean and young to me... In this case I sympathise with John (hell yes, I sure like to boogie too!!) but I have to be in favour of the smoking-ban. It is not about your right to smoke (no one's denying that), it is about respect towards those who do not want to be in a smoking environment, and, sorry, I don't buy the argument that says "everybody's free to go someplace else if someone's smoking indoors". We all know things are not like this, the best example would be the staff working in the smoking facility : Should they be denied their right to a healthy working environment just because they didn't "choose" to work someplace else? @ Ben & John :
What would Keith Richards think of this controversy?
He certainly looks clean and young to me…

In this case I sympathise with John (hell yes, I sure like to boogie too!!) but I have to be in favour of the smoking-ban. It is not about your right to smoke (no one’s denying that), it is about respect towards those who do not want to be in a smoking environment, and, sorry, I don’t buy the argument that says “everybody’s free to go someplace else if someone’s smoking indoors”. We all know things are not like this, the best example would be the staff working in the smoking facility :

Should they be denied their right to a healthy working environment just because they didn’t “choose” to work someplace else?

]]>