How the Mormons Make Money

[Mr. McGibblets]

I think it's important to bear in mind that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is a different entity than The Corporation of the First Presidency, or what ever other business arms they operate.

The church is broken up into several (a ton actually) separate corporate entities - you are right. This occurred around 1960 under the direction of N. Eldon Tanner and with the legal help of Elder Oaks. It was meant to shield the church from liability and protect its assets. Some of the corporations are for profit, others are non-profit.

However, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" is not a corporation at all. It isn't even an actual church or legal entity - it is a trademark.

Your tithes go to the Corp. of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" is a trademark. It is not a church. It is not even a corporation - the name is a trademark owned by Intellectual Reserve Inc. - yet another corporate legal entity owned by "the church." https://www.lds.org/bfs/0a_P13_disclaimera.htm and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_Reserve. You belong to a corporation.

If my tithes and offerings were being used for urban renewal, rather than directly for church infrastructure and humanitarian reasons, I'd be pretty pissed. *But (to my knowledge) they aren't.

You will also notice that tithing slips have recently been changed. You may no longer designate how your funds can be used - for the education fund, temples, missionary, etc. The new slips clearly state that from now on it does go into one big fund that can be spent wherever.

The church has specific interest in Salt Lake City and the economic health of downtown. *So, their corporate arm acts on that interest.

The corporation is not the arm of the church - the corporation IS the church. The church is just a name tag worn by the corporation. The "church" is a business propped up by volunteer labor. They have hunting preserves costing thousings of dollars per hunter which feature an airstrip for the rich to land in private planes - these are run by senior missionaries.https://www.deseretnews.com/article/770568/Tending-the-flock.html?pg=all

Bill Gates has donated more to charity and humanitarian relief than our church. And while some in this thread argue for spending billions to build a mall rather than sending it to Africa, even when nobody is building malls anymore, Melinda Gates just pledged over $500MM for contraception for the poor. https://www.chicagotribune.com/heal...tes-melindabre86a1du-20120711,0,2461524.story Aids and pregnancy related deaths are huge problems throughout the world and this will make a huge difference and save many lives. This will undoubtedly do more good for the temporal welfare of God's children than any mall. It will also likely save hundreds and thousands of lives.

You might find all this well and fine. But surely you can understand why others might be critical of the way the Jesus of the new testament has directed his modern day corporations to spend billions on Utah real estate development over the past 6 years and only $1 Billion on charity for the poorest of the poor over the past 30 years throughout the world.

If you truly cannot understand why many outside, and within, our church are critical of our church's financial organization then I don't think there's much else I can add.

Edits-so many errors in original. Hopefully all corrected.

 

[Deleted member 848]

The church is broken up into several (a ton actually) separate corporate entities - you are right. This occurred around 1960 under the durection of N. Eldon Tanner and with the legal help of Elder Oaks. It was meant to shield the church from liability and protect its assets. Some of the corporations are for profit, others are non-profit.

However, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" is not a corporation at all. It isn't even an actual church or legal entity - it is a trademark.

Your tithes go to the Corp. of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" is a trademark. It is not a church. It is not even a corporation - the name is a trademark owned by Intellectual Reserve Inc. - yet another corporate legal entity owned by "the church." https://www.lds.org/bfs/0a_P13_disclaimera.htm and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_Reserve. You belong to a corporation.



You will also notice that tithing slips have recently been changed. You may no longer designate how your funds can be used - for the education fund, temples, missionary, etc. The new slips clearly state that from now on it does go into one big fund that can be spent wherever.



The corporation is not the arm of the church - the corporation IS the church. The church is just a name tag worn by the corporation. The "church" is a business propped up by volunteer labor. They have hunting preserves costing thousings of dollars per hunter which feature an airstrip for the rich to land in private planes - these are run by senior missionaries.https://www.deseretnews.com/article/770568/Tending-the-flock.html?pg=all

Bill Gates has donated more to charity and humanitarian relief than our church. And while some in this thread argue spending billions to build a mall rather than sending it to Africa, even when nobody is building malls anymore, Melinda Gates just pledged over $500MM for contraception for the poor. https://www.chicagotribune.com/heal...tes-melindabre86a1du-20120711,0,2461524.story Aids and pregnancy related deaths are huge problems throughout the world and this will make a huge difference and save many lives. This will undoubtedly do more good for the temporal welfare of God's children than any mall. It will also likely save hundreds and thousands of lives.

You might find all this well and fine. But surely you can understand why others might be critical of the way the Jesus of the new testament has directed his modern day corporations to spend billions on Utah real estate development over the past 6 years and only $1 Billion on charity for the poorest of the poor over the past 30 years throughout the world.

If you truly cannot understand why many outside, and within, our church are critical of our church's financial organization then I don't think there's much else I can add.

Edits-so many errors in original. Hopefully all corrected.

lolz, what a meydiogre post from Mrs McGoebbels!!
















































Father my children/marry me, seriously. Ill settle for either.

 

[TroutBum]

Yes, clearly you've learned enough about my position to conclude that I'm entirely against every relationship in the production, distribution, and consumption of retail goods. Excellent reading once again.

Ah, my bad. I swear I thought I read:

shucks, if only retail jobs in malls were thought provoking and meaningful.

Nobody is being done a favor by having one of those jobs... don't kid yourself.

But you have an education and some of us don't, so go easy on us lower lifeforms, okay? Thanks friend.

Clever stuff here, Trout. It sorta looks like I'm looking at dictionary entries. I stand behind what I said; if you read the entire thread he authored a politically neutered and nihilistic position.

Nothing clever about it, really. I was just as shocked as everyone else to see your name come up under those two words.

Awww, I forget you're so sensitive. Sorry, guy.

So says the guy that just can't help but report my posts and private messages... Oh, boooo hoooo... You're a pretentious, narcissistic prick AND a hypocrite -- nice combo, guy. Also, you never followed up on a date for our "face to face" meet n' greet, and I'm getting impatient.

Trout is the board's biggest douchebag. People think it's funny... that's why he has a Rep Power of 20+. He didn't get a single one of those fist bumps because of something insightful he said about the Utah Jazz. But, you know this already.

21, but who's counting, right? Also, you say your second sentence as if it's a bad thing. Yay me for being THAT awesome all without knowing a damn thing about the subject of the forum I visit. I mean, we all have our things we're known for, you just got lucky and are the board cooter.

I thought that was from his (alleged) alt accounts.

Oh, the things the haters come up with. I'm like Fred Durst, yo -- the real motha' ****in' deal, ya'll.

Trout - going on an on about what a douchebag someone is, then trying to highlight your point by being a douchebag yourself seems counterproductive. Just my .02

Oh Bronco, in what way/shape/form have I ever attempted being productive? It's a well known fact that I'm a douchebag and I can proudly accept that. In fact, because I'm so good at it, it allows me to spot fellow douchebags with relative ease. NAOS was practically pink and neon polkadots, screaming for a label -- I just helped out a little. You're welcome, all of you.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BOp_uktAx0

 

[Dr. Jones]

I read it all. Nothing to add.

 

[One Brow]

I get what you're saying here, but it did create new permanent jobs as well. All those new retail stores need employees. The mall itself needs employees. The parking structures built with it need employees. The housing it created needs employees. The grocery store needs employees. None of those things were there.

The retail jobs depend on people buying there, instead of elsewhere. Same for the mall jobs, grocery jobs, and parking structure jobs. The housing depends on people living there, instead of elsewhere. IfSLC was being underserved in the retail or housing market, this would mean jobs have been created. Otherwise, I see it as them being shuffled around.

Manufacturing creates jobs. Infrastructure creates jobs indirectly. New technologies create jobs. Retail, I'm not so sure about.

 

[NAOS]

Ah, my bad. I swear I thought I read:

But you have an education and some of us don't, so go easy on us lower lifeforms, okay? Thanks friend.

Please, keep demonstrating how little you've thought about this. You're taking my statement about the teenager or 20-something selling an object in a retail outlet as indicative of what I think of the value of the entire retail enterprise. In other words, you're being a ****ing moron.

Continue...

 

[NAOS]

So says the guy that just can't help but report my posts and private messages... Oh, boooo hoooo... You're a pretentious, narcissistic prick AND a hypocrite -- nice combo, guy. Also, you never followed up on a date for our "face to face" meet n' greet, and I'm getting impatient.

I'm doing everybody a favor. You've been way too uncensored around here because you've coddled the right sacks. Just how above censorship are you? Everybody who has been dinged or suspended would probably want to know since there clearly has been special treatment.

EDIT TO ADD: I'll take your comment about how I reported your PM to me (which made specific physical threats) as a joke.... since, earlier, you posted my Private Message to you on a Public Forum. I mean, what you did is totally cool, right? (also, that's the only thing I've reported... and you say otherwise... cool, braugh)

 

[NAOS]

The retail jobs depend on people buying there, instead of elsewhere. Same for the mall jobs, grocery jobs, and parking structure jobs. The housing depends on people living there, instead of elsewhere. IfSLC was being underserved in the retail or housing market, this would mean jobs have been created. Otherwise, I see it as them being shuffled around.

Manufacturing creates jobs. Infrastructure creates jobs indirectly. New technologies create jobs. Retail, I'm not so sure about.

excellent point. This thread has been way too sparse in questioning the jobs themselves. Shockingly sparse.

jobs = good = praise for the person who scattered the seed
right?

 

[Stoked]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...an-experience/2012/07/11/gJQA5aU2cW_blog.html

Interesting take on Mormonism viewed from outside and from within.

As for the comment someone made about members being "robbed" of 10% of their income. Well they choose to give that income to the church. If a man that chooses to do so that is between him and his church and is frankly none of your damn business. As for PMSing about paying that or his lighting bill as he gazes at that mall well guess what...He can go to his Bishop and receive the help that he needs to pay that bill.

So kindly stay out of an affair that is frankly none of your damn business.

 

[Stoked]

excellent point. This thread has been way too sparse in questioning the jobs themselves. Shockingly sparse.

jobs = good = praise for the person who scattered the seed
right?

Possibly yes. Further more intensive study may lead one to another conclussion but yea creating jobs is generally a good thing.

 

[franklin]

The retail jobs depend on people buying there, instead of elsewhere. Same for the mall jobs, grocery jobs, and parking structure jobs. The housing depends on people living there, instead of elsewhere. IfSLC was being underserved in the retail or housing market, this would mean jobs have been created. Otherwise, I see it as them being shuffled around.

That's a fallacy limited by some imaginary sales maximum. Human psychology plays a huge role in economic output. Being spurred to purchase more because I like the environment increases velocity. Sales tax revenues increase, providing funding for additional jobs elsewhere. Public transportation loads have increased moving people to this new center. No doubt many others frequented gas stations, etc. at a higher clip in their travels too and from it.

Manufacturing creates jobs. Infrastructure creates jobs indirectly. New technologies create jobs. Retail, I'm not so sure about.

This essentially contradicts your first paragraph. New technologies create jobs by? (stimulating demand for products)
The manufacturing angle is identical to the pre-1900's farm angle. The majority of jobs as a % of the population in both these categories have disappeared and we're all better off for it.

 

[One Brow]

As for the comment someone made about members being "robbed" of 10% of their income. Well they choose to give that income to the church. If a man that chooses to do so that is between him and his church and is frankly none of your damn business.

I agree, "robbed" is uncalled for. Now, "swindled", "conned" or "defrauded" are all in the mix (all of which invovle one person voluntarily giving money to another), but certainly not "robbed".

 

[One Brow]

That's a fallacy limited by some imaginary sales maximum. Human psychology plays a huge role in economic output. Being spurred to purchase more because I like the environment increases velocity. Sales tax revenues increase, providing funding for additional jobs elsewhere. Public transportation loads have increased moving people to this new center. No doubt many others frequented gas stations, etc. at a higher clip in their travels too and from it.

If being spurred to purchase because of a pleasant environment is a reason that jobs increase, than the retail outlet only increases jobs to the degree that it's environment is more pleasant, correct? Sales tax revenue increases in one locastion, but is that offset by another location losing that revenue?

As I said, I am unsure if retail outlets increase jobs in communities already well-served by retail. What you offer seems to be conditional on this, as well. I am not saying retail development never increases the total job status of a community, only that it does not necessarily do so.

This essentially contradicts your first paragraph. New technologies create jobs by? (stimulating demand for products)
The manufacturing angle is identical to the pre-1900's farm angle. The majority of jobs as a % of the population in both these categories have disappeared and we're all better off for it.

New products can create demand where it may not have existed before, or increase satisfaction to the satisfied demand to the point that spending increases (e.g., 3D movies). Will the new retail structure in SLC have either of those effects? I don't know.

 

[Dr. Jones]

This thread has become a yawner. Where's the fighting, the name calling .. The invites for fist-fights. C'mon ladies!

 

[Stoked]

This thread has become a yawner. Where's the fighting, the name calling .. The invites for fist-fights. C'mon ladies!

You shut your dirty mouth when you are talking to me you sandbagging sombich. When I want your opinion I will give it to you!







Better?

 

[NAOS]

That's a fallacy limited by some imaginary sales maximum. Human psychology plays a huge role in economic output. Being spurred to purchase more because I like the environment increases velocity. Sales tax revenues increase, providing funding for additional jobs elsewhere. Public transportation loads have increased moving people to this new center. No doubt many others frequented gas stations, etc. at a higher clip in their travels too and from it.




This essentially contradicts your first paragraph. New technologies create jobs by? (stimulating demand for products)
The manufacturing angle is identical to the pre-1900's farm angle. The majority of jobs as a % of the population in both these categories have disappeared and we're all better off for it.

I sincerely love it when you jump in with these well-informed economics arguments. I thought about this differently after you posted, so thanks.

I agree that the differential rate of consumption can have transformative effects on an economy. Therefore, seeing that One Brow's comments didn't acknowledge this differential and the ensuing complexity, what he said had certain limitations. That said, it is also possible that the increased rate of consumption spurred on by this mall (which is certain to happen at first) will taper off and come back to rates that equal "shuffling around." In other words, what he said has limitations, but could still be generally true. Remember, there is $2 billion invested here....

It's also certainly the case that the advanced econometrics you hinted at are themselves full of certain assumptions/fallacies. The most obvious being how they are predicated on a model of continuous growth/accumulation. That's not reducible to human psychology, but requires participation from the Earth and productive bodies. Do your econometrics account for the true costs of production? <-- too short, but I gotta run.

 

[franklin]

OB made a good observation. I just wanted to point out the benefits of moving the world forward and that spurring our animal spirits is hard to account for on paper. For example, how do you measure the positive impact from those living next to this gentrified structure has on consumption not directly linked to the mall? And what about the new products and services sold inside?

It's also certainly the case that the advanced econometrics you hinted at are themselves full of certain assumptions/fallacies. The most obvious being how they are predicated on a model of continuous growth/accumulation. That's not reducible to human psychology, but requires participation from the Earth and productive bodies. Do your econometrics account for the true costs of production? <-- too short, but I gotta run.

I'll be happy when we decide we've accumulated enough ****, recycle everything, work 2 hours per day, & have nothing left to do other than give each other hand jobs & back massages--preferably on guided fishing excursions or cave tours. Services don't require much from the earth.

In the meantime, good luck with that true production cost stuff. Socialist republican conservatives love to spread the costs of pollution.

 

[NAOS]

... And that spurring our animal spirits is hard to account for on paper.....

hahaha

 

[Revolution 9]

Is there anything really dishonest in this cover?
Why run away from this. When you combine business, and religion aren't you open for debate?
This is one of the big reasons I could not be a member of the church(or any church for that matter). The ability to debate, and question things.

In my book the truth should be examined in detail. The truth has nothing to hide.