The king and Saint Jacques

I cut my flesh with a whip  when I see the King of Spain in offering to the Apostle Saint Jacques. It turns out that each year, is the monarch to the cathedral, with a wealth of mitred bishops and botafumeiro flying, to "ask for Spain". In his last appearance he asked the Saint to lend a hand to the Spanish for early resolution of the severe economic crisis.

I do not know where to begin to bring to the spirit of my readers how ridiculous it seems to me. 

First, are we not a Secular State? So what does the Chief of State, in dress coat, identifying himself with a particular religion? Why is he saying such nonsense to a wooden saint?

The king should also know that the economic crisis - according to several bishops - is a divine punishment sent down by God because of the moral degradation of our society. So, the king should not interfere with Divine Justice. On the other hand, we all have it that the King is a well known sinner, what moral authority may he have? 

It is similar to the protest of certain prelates when they installed the first lightning rod: bad because they thought it was an interference with the justice of God. If God sent a thunderbolt to kill someone, what kind of arrogant was Mr. Franklin (inventor of the lightning rod) to stop it? 

If Spain is doomed to go through an economic crisis, because God so determined, who's the King to interfere?

Get out of the way, King of Spain. Let God have His ways.

Taxes and I

After more than 30 years devoted to the study of taxes, what idea do I have of  the workings of the tax system in Spain?

Well, the first thing I note is that, at the top of the social ladder, the rich do not pay taxes. Governments have decided it is better to have the capital - most notably financial - are home, even without paying taxes, than to see it flight elsewhere. While at home, it creates jobs. The motto seems to be: "we must not crowd out capital, there is much competition". In Spain there are a couple of institutions that are going in this direction: Investment Companies with Variable Capital (SICAVs), which are taxed at 1% and the ETVEs (foreign securities holding companies) which are not taxed on the profits of foreign sources. With the first, break free the likes of Amancio's, Koplovitz's and those listed in Forbe's. With the latter, multinational holdings with business abroad. Unfair? Yes, but that's what is happening elsewhere. I am of the opinion that rich are necessary to keep the poor illussioned they may one day make it.

The second thing I note is that the bottom of the social scale - small selfemployed businessmen, - opaque money is flowing smoothly, especially in professions that are paid in cash. For instance, my Dentist. Studies say the underground economy is 30% of GDP (the Treasury, who knows these data, keeps them secret, not to demoralize taxpayers). The attitude of the Gorvernment is called in ornitology BDFA "bills down face away".

Who pays the taxes, then? Those who are on a payroll and final consumers. For the first, tax is automatically withheld from the paycheck,, and the latter are charged VAT when they spend their money and avoidance is impossible because they are last of the chain. Have you guessed that they are taxed twice? You guessed right, they are.

Is the system sustainable? It seems so.

Are there alternatives? Tell me a few.

Nationalism

Nationalism is a sense of ownership of a group of individuals to a political entity called a Nation. Many times it is an ethnic group. Often includes the belief that some States are superior to other states. Anyone who feels different is, obviously, because he feels superior. The Flemish feel superior to the Walloons, the Catalans feel superior to the Andalusian and Americans feel superior to everyone else. The rich feel superior to the poor and the Indians feel superior to the Pakistani.

The nationalist parties, which have no nation, need the central power to serve them as a counterweight. If there is no central authority, there are no comparative grievances. For, to whom should you to complain to if you feel aggrieved? Without the Central State, a nationalist would have to invent it. A nationalist is only defined by opposition to another nationalist.Oviously, to prove you're different, you ought to put emphasis on the differential facts. 

Nationalism, in terms of marketing, is a segmentation of the vote market. First you create a need, either real or merely induced by advertising, and then there appear, like mushrooms in a rainy autumn day, political groups which purport to meet this need. 

They say we need a national identity as advertisers say you need milk with omega 3, both things will  give us comfort and happiness.