[civil] "Greece moves closer to eurozone exit after delaying €300m repayment to IMF "

[kentonio]

But you already said that it wasn't a supermarket or paint factory.

That it was like a museum/national landmark.

Why do you refuse to treat them similarly to those sort of institutions? Who also value material things?

I'm happy to. As long as they belong to the nation, not to a private organization.

I personally try not to judge, I know many good Catholics/Orthodox/etc. So I don't condemn them for considering material things sacred.

Why? Would you judge people for other sins? Because valuing material objects over human life appears to be a pretty massive one.

[giblets]

The church buildings aren't worth all that much. It's the land they're sitting on that is in some cases worth a lot of money if they're in the middle of a major city. The property is worth a lot because of the opportunity cost of not demolishing the buildings and replacing it with something more productive. If land value taxation is practiced, non-profit organization shouldn't be exempted from paying the land value tax because that would give them an incentive to take up too much land. How many medieval church buildings does a country really need? I'd say ten is plenty for a small country like Greece. I don't see anything wrong with bulldozing the rest and replacing them with commercial buildings. If Greek Christians disagree, they can donate sufficient amounts of money to the Church to pay the land value taxes.

[kentonio]

The church buildings aren't worth all that much.

You're talking about buildings that are hundreds and in some cases well over a thousand years old. Yes, they're worth a lot.

How many medieval church buildings does a country really need? I'd say ten is plenty for a small country like Greece. I don't see anything wrong with bulldozing the rest and replacing them with commercial buildings.

Please tell me this is a troll..

[giblets]

Does the supply of old buildings have any relevance? Is a single medieval church building worth just as much in a country that has thousands of them as it would be in a country that only has ten or twenty of them?

[kentonio]

I don't think historical significance works like that..

[The Mad Monk]

Well given that just minutes ago I told you that was C0ckneys desire not mine, I'm quite confused by why you'd try and use me as the protagonist.

I find your designation of the "protagonist" interesting.

[giblets]

I don't think historical significance works like that..

Yeah it does. The more common an antique item is, the less it's worth.

[kentonio]

Yeah it does. The more common an antique item is, the less it's worth.

The things we consider the most priceless antiquities often have a market value far lower than much more recent art. The value isn't in its market price.

[kentonio]

I find your designation of the "protagonist" interesting.

Well as protagonist literally means 'player of the first part'...

[PLATO]

Most businesses are expected to operate in a sustainable and logical way. The fact the church don't want to, shouldn't give them some special status. What's annoying me more though is that you seem to have already decided that any attempt to make the church pay its way is some 'attack on religion', rather than just expecting religion to follow the same rules as everyone else has to.

Aren't churches non-profit entities, and therefore, by definition, different from nearly "everybody else". I am not advocating a tax exempt status for just churches, but for all non-profit philanthropic organizations.

Why reduce the effectiveness of philanthropy by transferring money to the government?

[giblets]

The things we consider the most priceless antiquities often have a market value far lower than much more recent art. The value isn't in its market price.

Who is "we"?

[PLATO]

I disagree with the assumption that government is inefficient at distributing help to the needy in the first place. Charity is a horribly inefficient way of dealing with the needy, as its hugely location based, and pretty much always dependent of the levels of donation at any particular time. Hungry or homeless people can't just take a six month break from needing help, just because the economy dips or because they live in a rural area.

I didn't say that government was inefficient (although I believe in many cases it is, but for sake of argument let's say not for this case). Churches must be more efficient, however, if they are using free labor and donated goods, wouldn't you agree? Further, Churches augment existing government programs and don't replace them so your homeless people example is not really meaningful.

I also disagree with both the idea of the church being particularly philanthropic and that they are in any way accountable to anyone. Their headquarters is its own country for goodness sake, and one that is dripping with obscene amounts of wealth.

Probably some truth in this, but the mission of the church is not accumulation of wealth. I believe that the current Pope is trying to address these very concerns.



The poor should never, ever be reliant on charity to survive.[/QUOTE]

[PLATO]

I don't have particular ill will towards the church for having old buildings, some of them are incredibly beautiful and in England especially their age makes them hugely important cultural landmarks.

I'd actually be fine with your option two, although if the government (well in the UK we have a conservation organization that looks after such things, called the National Trust) are taking over their maintenance then no they are not going to receive some huge valuation of the property. It'd be likely in fact they wouldn't receive any recompense for the buildings.

If they care deeply about their preservation and cannot afford to maintain them, then they'd gift them to the nation, probably with the agreement that they could continue to be used for church services. This kind of arrangement has happened many times in the past with privately owned historical buildings.

I think that State owned religious buildings is a recipe for disaster. Freedom of religion demands some independence from the government. Governments can change and they have absolute power...having ownership of a church could lead to "You can't preach that here because it is government owned and the government does not believe that is correct." You may not practice eligion on your own, but I do hope that you support the right of freedom of religion.

[PLATO]

Well given that just minutes ago I told you that was C0ckneys desire not mine, I'm quite confused by why you'd try and use me as the protagonist.

What I've been saying is that the church should be taxed on donations. I'd actually excuse them those taxes if they could prove that the vast majority of the money was going directly into charitable causes. If the church can't afford to maintain its buildings then they'll have to stop owning them, like anyone else in that position would.

I could support taxes on some commercial activity by churches, but not on donations. If someone wanted to donate to the government, I am sure they would be allowed to. Why have a middle man?

An example of Church income that should be taxed was made apparent to me not long ago. I went to a cocktail reception at a place called Inside Park at St. Bart's in New York. St. Bart's is a church that was struggling financially until they realized that they had a nice commercial kitchen and an area to host private events in. The income they produce from this should be taxed. The income they get from direct donations of the parrishoners should not be taxed. I see these as two significantly different sources of revenue. Additionally, the portion of the property used for commercial activity should be subject to property taxes as well.

[PLATO]

I could see the point in saying that if the Church takes tax exempt status due in part to running the churches as public museums/landmarks, then the churches should be available for everyone to use for church type activities (such as marriage between two men/etc).

JM

While I agree with the right of two men (or women...or woman/man) to marry, I don't believe that you can dictate religious belief for the sake of tax exempt status.