The Morality of Wealth

[Analytics]

I don't agree with Buffett, and if anyone is using deceptive methods to gain their wealth they should be subject to the law. The rich don't become rich if they don't bring others along with them. And there are rich people who treat their employees fairly, pay them good wages and don't break any laws. So to apply this rule to a whole group is disingenuous. Maybe Buffett is saying more about himself than anyone else.

Really? So when Warren Buffet notes that his secretary pays a higher percentage of her income in tax than he pays on his, and when he says that isn

[LeSellers]

Really? So when Warren Buffet notes that his secretary pays a higher percentage of her income in tax than he pays on his, and when he says that isn

[mercyngrace]

I believe, that on some level, it is immoral when a small percentage of people can afford six mansions and three yachts while children die and suffer because of malnutrition and lack of healthcare, among other reasons. Of course, many of the solutions to combat this problem may be immoral as well.

I completely agree, kicks, on both counts.

It is immoral for some people to live in luxury while others starve and some of the proposed solutions for dealing with abject poverty are immoral. The moral solution is for people to come unto Christ and be moved by the feeling most oft used to describe His actions: compassion.

But then you get to the issue of who is the proper person to judge such immorality. If a person has honestly earned his wealth I believe he has the right to use it however he will, whether I agree with it or not. The judgment of those decisions is then between him and God.

Deborah, I respectfully disagree that this is the issue here. We're not talking about what the government demands, we are talking about what Christ teaches. Do we have evidence that Christ suggested the accumulation of wealth was acceptable while others starve? The parable of Lazarus and the rich man indicates, He held the exact opposite view.

[Analytics]

Do you have any idea of how the Law of Supply and Demand works?

My understanding is that the so-called "Law" of supply and demand is a very simple economic model that can be helpful to understand the economy.

Earlier in the thread I proposed a view of the economy more broad than the "law of supply and demand". Do you think I'm wrong about this? Here's what I said:

As we all go about our lives, we work together to exploit natural resources, create value, and consume the good things of the world. Some of us are more skilled at playing this game than others. Some work harder than others. Some of us are luckier than others. In the end, we negotiate with each other a claim on the goods and services we jointly produce.

That's what I think is going on. Do you disagree?

[Jeff K.]

The false presumption is that if someone is righ they are indifferent. This is what Satan wants you to think, it helps create emnity.

The false presumption that somehow wealth must almost always be bained by some illicit means or illegal means is also a tool of Satan. Their roots are often found in variations of covetousness.

Perhaps the greatest false presumption is that somehow these those judgements pronounced upon people they do not know will somehow not be turned upon them by the Lord. How dare rich people with their computers live in homes posting here, when in fact they are substantially richer than the poor that exist in the world and yet, they have not reduced their wealth to a level reflecting the lack of wealth elsewhere. The beams in their eyes must be wide indeed.

And if Buffet pays less than his secretary and feels bad about it, perhaps he should give more rather than less?

As to Christ's teaching, I suggest the commandment against coveting others begin first. And then the implication of pride, and finally the teaching of judging others lest you yourself be judged in a like manner.

If, on this night you have a computer, a home, a nice bed and a full meal and are overweight, even slightly, you are the rich, perverse people you so seem so judgemental about. It is only the degree of your perversity, not the fact you aren't sinning mightily in your riches.

You may wish to think about it before you go on with your complaints about people you know nothing about.

[thesometimesaint]

Jeff K.:

As a very wise man once told me: Poverty is not a sin, just get rid of it as fast as you can.

[mercyngrace]

As to Christ's teaching, I suggest the commandment against coveting others begin first. And then the implication of pride, and finally the teaching of judging others lest you yourself be judged in a like manner.

If, on this night you have a computer, a home, a nice bed and a full meal and are overweight, even slightly, you are the rich, perverse people you so seem so judgemental about. It is only the degree of your perversity, not the fact you aren't sinning mightily in your riches.

You may wish to think about it before you go on with your complaints about people you know nothing about.

Jeff,

I can, of course, only speak for myself but I don't covet anything anyone else has. On the contrary, I wish I had more to give away. And the condemnation of accumulating wealth while others starve outside the gates (again see the parable of Lazarus and the rich man) comes from the Savior, so the judgment is His alone.

Having taught missionary discussions to people living in handmade homes built from junk yard remnants, I am humbled by my own wealth and ashamed that it took me so much of my adult life to realize that I could in fact make a difference for people like those I served as a missionary.

Since you seem convinced that the doctrinal argument about the responsibility of wealth consists merely of "complaints about people you know nothing about", let me ask: Should we point out that lying is wrong? How about adultery? Or homosexuality? Should we condemn abuse? Or should we withhold all judgment of sin because we're just complaining about people we know nothing about?

Is all sinful behavior above condemnation or are they just sins involving money that are so sacrosanct?

Elder William R. Bradford said, Those who love Christ and are converted to His gospel will use any surplus wealth to help others and to build up the kingdom of God.

He also pointed out that The parable of the rich fool (see Luke 12:16

[mercyngrace]

Just ran across this talk and thought it was a wonderful reminder of the service we are called to...

A couple of excerpts:

The prophet Moroni was granted a vision of our day. The Book of Mormon record states:

[Deborah]

And the condemnation of accumulating wealth while others starve outside the gates (again see the parable of Lazarus and the rich man) comes from the Savior, so the judgment is His alone.

Yes, the judgment is Christ's. That was my point. Certainly we should preach against such ignoring of the poor by those who can help. But what has been happening is there are certain people who are judging the hearts and minds of others by looking on the outside, rather than knowing the whole story. Unlike Christ we can't always see inside a person's heart nor do we know all the circumstances of a person's life. People here haven't been speaking about the evil of letting others starve when you have plenty; they have actually been condemning others just because they have more than someone else, not knowing whether they have fed the hungry or clothed the poor. They assume just because they still have a nice house they haven't done enough and you have to ask when is enough enough. Even the church can only do so much to help others.

How do we know for example that the rich man didn't offer the homeless man a job and was turned down. There is only so much anyone can do. Temple Square in SLC has signs not to give handouts to the poor that there places where they can go if they have needs. They shouldn't be panhandling when there are shelters around the corner. Furthermore, I know people who have abused the charity of others and continually demanded more and more with no gratitude and no effort to improve themselves. That too is an evil that is condemned.

I think that coveting another man's wealth is very predominant in our society and is fed by those who wish to create class warfare. What we should be doing is asking ourselves what did he do to get his wealth and apply the same principles. And I disagree with some here who think everyone who has wealth obtained it other than by hard work, long hours and just having a great idea at the right time and being in the right place.

[mercyngrace]

Yes, the judgment is Christ's. That was my point. Certainly we should preach against such ignoring of the poor by those who can help.

It seems that the judgment is flowing in both directions. If one speaks in favor of using riches in accordance with Jacob 2 they are deemed "covetous" and "judgmental". (I'm not referring specifically to you, Deborah, just making a point about what I see happening in the threads on wealth, consecration, and similar topics.)

I personally have nothing to covet in terms of temporal wealth. I'm not rich by US standards but I have sufficient for my needs and I'm content with it. Still I see myself as falling short of the standard set by scriptures and I have a desire to lift the hands that hang low and strengthen the feeble knees of those who falter. So judgments about my pride, covetousness, and harsh persecution of the rich fall flat. I simply don't feel those things.

But what has been happening is there are certain people who are judging the hearts and minds of others by looking on the outside, rather than knowing the whole story. Unlike Christ we can't always see inside a person's heart nor do we know all the circumstances of a person's life. People here haven't been speaking about the evil of letting others starve when you have plenty; they have actually been condemning others just because they have more than someone else, not knowing whether they have fed the hungry or clothed the poor. They assume just because they still have a nice house they haven't done enough and you have to ask when is enough enough. Even the church can only do so much to help others.

I agree completely and again, it flows both ways.

How do we know for example that the rich man didn't offer the homeless man a job and was turned down. There is only so much anyone can do. Temple Square in SLC has signs not to give handouts to the poor that there places where they can go if they have needs. They shouldn't be panhandling when there are shelters around the corner. Furthermore, I know people who have abused the charity of others and continually demanded more and more with no gratitude and no effort to improve themselves. That too is an evil that is condemned.

Indeed! An idle heart is to be condemned as is the manipulation of others. Start another thread and we'll discuss that sin But let's not presume that because one man sins, another is excused from keeping the law which he has covenanted to uphold.

I think that coveting another man's wealth is very predominant in our society and is fed by those who wish to create class warfare. What we should be doing is asking ourselves what did he do to get his wealth and apply the same principles. And I disagree with some here who think everyone who has wealth obtained it other than by hard work, long hours and just having a great idea at the right time and being in the right place.

I agree that covetousness is a prevailing sin of our times and that people are manipulated into class warfare. But again, does that excuse any of us from knowingly allowing others to starve to death while we indulge wants and whims and have the capacity to save a life? Is that morally right?

Remember the 11th hour servants who were called to work a much shorter day than their brethren and yet received the same pay? What I'm hearing is the daylong laborers complaining about God's requirements for mercy. We need to change our mindset about wealth. Instead of thinking that we labored all day for our pay and those late arrivals are reaping what we rightfully earned, how about considering how blessed we were to be called from the start of the day instead of left behind wondering for hours and hours how we would feed and clothe ourselves and our families. We need to see our ability to work and produce as a blessing from God and give thanks by showing the same mercy He does. (And again, I say these things for my own benefit.)

[Jeff K.]

Jeff K.:

As a very wise man once told me: Poverty is not a sin, just get rid of it as fast as you can.

Chuckle. Absolutley. It was a suit of clothing I did not relish wearing in my youth.

[Jeff K.]

Jeff,

I can, of course, only speak for myself but I don't covet anything anyone else has. On the contrary, I wish I had more to give away. And the condemnation of accumulating wealth while others starve outside the gates (again see the parable of Lazarus and the rich man) comes from the Savior, so the judgment is His alone.

Having taught missionary discussions to people living in handmade homes built from junk yard remnants, I am humbled by my own wealth and ashamed that it took me so much of my adult life to realize that I could in fact make a difference for people like those I served as a missionary.

Since you seem convinced that the doctrinal argument about the responsibility of wealth consists merely of "complaints about people you know nothing about", let me ask: Should we point out that lying is wrong? How about adultery? Or homosexuality? Should we condemn abuse? Or should we withhold all judgment of sin because we're just complaining about people we know nothing about?

Is all sinful behavior above condemnation or are they just sins involving money that are so sacrosanct?

Elder William R. Bradford said, Those who love Christ and are converted to His gospel will use any surplus wealth to help others and to build up the kingdom of God.

He also pointed out that The parable of the rich fool (see Luke 12:16

[mercyngrace]

Unlike people who talk about poverty and don't really know it. I have been in the grips of poverty and have a very keen sense of what it is. So prior to your judging me as you do so many allow me to give you some insight. You seem to care more about the people who have money, than those poverty stricken who struggle to obtain their means. This says volumes alone.

Wherein have I judged you? I have repeatedly stated that I am seeking to understand the principles contained in the scriptures and that they apply to me!

* edit * I want to add here that the reason I mentioned lying, adultery, and other sins in the comment you replied to above, was specifically to make this point. This is a discussion about a precept. We judge behaviors for our own benefit. We have to know which course we personally should follow. We don't judge other individuals based on their behaviors because we can't know their motivations - their thoughts and intents. To suggest that we cannot judge behavior, especially in the context of understanding the scriptures, would be to suggest that there is no law and Lehi tells us where that leads. Now you may disagree with my understanding of the law, and that is certainly fodder for discussion, but to suggest that the mere act of discussing the law is judgmental and condemnatory is not logical.

Jeff, it's clear that you feel strongly about this topic but you are making false judgments and flawed assessments the likes of which I've already mentioned are flowing from BOTH sides of this argument. Can you not discuss this issue without those?

But let us also consider the following, you do not only complain about them, you judge them. And yet to someone in the midst of poverty, you are one of them, you have so many nice things and your choice is what? Oh yes, to complain about the other person.

See above.

You see, to a person with nothing, you are exactly like the ones who have everything, the ones you complain about. If one of the poor were to have a computer and internet access and read your post they would be shake their head in wonderment. "Doesn't she know that she is one of them"?

Have you even read my comments, Jeff, before reacting so viscerally? I said I was "one of them" and that everything I write is for my own benefit.

You don't seem to get it.

Okay. If you judge it to be so.

I do.

See above.

As to having taught the poor. Using your own logic I could condemn you for not giving them food.

I did give them food when I was there. And I already condemned myself in an earlier comment for failing to realize how much good I could have been doing in past years. So I am compelled to ask again, Do you even read my comments, Jeff, before reacting so viscerally?

But I won't, that is the Judas Isacriot route, the route so many here take when looking for a way to complain about "someone else".

You already have, denials notwithstanding.

You seem to think that the rich only amass wealth endlessly, which of course is false,

CFR

and it is covetous because it hopes to demean an entire group with a broadbrush stroke.

Stereotyping is not the same as covetousness and I'm not the one who is attacking or defending "the rich" as a class. In fact, I believe that the directive to use all our surplus for the building up of Zion, feeding the hungry, clothing the poor, etc applies to all men equally.

The fact of the matter is that most who accumulate affluence or wealth or the ability to control their environment financially have done so by hard work and perserverence. Nor are they necessarily greedy, self centered, and built up on this class warfare schtick so many of the trendy follow.

CFR that I said anything to this end.

They are also your stake presidents, your apostles, your general authorities, your bishops, your hometeachers, your prophet more than a few.

Uh-huh. I don't labor under the delusion that the world is populated by people who keep every aspect of the gospel perfectly. I also know people in those callings who sometimes tell little white lies, who eat meat in times other than winter, and who occasionally let a swear word fly. I don't judge them for that. I judge only myself which is why I need an understanding of the law as Christ taught it.

You see, you condemn them too and that is what really bothers me. Now maybe you are just thoughtlesss in your diatribe and you don't think about the many other people out there. Or just perhaps you are replacing one spirit with another. That is for you to decide, not me.

Jeff, I invite you to reread the comments I've made on this topic and see if, with your emotions set aside, I have condemned anyone or possessed any unrighteous spirit. It is you who has launched a very personal attack and diatribe while I've excerpted scriptures and quoted conference talks. This is not a personal issue, Jeff. It is an examination of a doctrinal topic - which I may or may not understand fully - which is why I consistently appeal to the authorities I've mentioned.

If you want I can give you an entire list of talks that discuss the your judgemental method and stereotyping of people.

If that alleviates your hurt feeling, Jeff, then by all means do so. I've repeatedly stated that this was not my intent and I will leave it to other readers to decide if I launched some sort of verbal rampage or if you did.

I will be glad to ask you if you condemn the Stake President called by an apostle who happens to live in a nice home, or the bishop who has good income and a good business and why you think he is somehow unworthy of you or morally inferior because he buys his son a car and you or someone else cannot? Or I can ask why you have so much compared to so many and yet cannot seem to see yourself in the same position?

So I need to ask you a third time if you've read my self-condemnatory comments or noticed that I have not condemned any other individual but focused instead on the principle.

These are the things someone who has actually been dirt poor would ask you.

See above.

[Analytics]

The false presumption is that if someone is righ they are indifferent. This is what Satan wants you to think, it helps create emnity.

The false presumption that somehow wealth must almost always be bained by some illicit means or illegal means is also a tool of Satan. Their roots are often found in variations of covetousness.

Perhaps the greatest false presumption is that somehow these those judgements pronounced upon people they do not know will somehow not be turned upon them by the Lord.

It's amazing how judgemental you are of everybody's false presumptions. It's pride because you've fallen into Satan's trap. Verily I say unto you, you are going to have rude awakening on Judgement Day.

And if Buffet pays less than his secretary and feels bad about it, perhaps he should give more rather than less?

Buffet is in the process of giving away something on the order of 99.9% of all of the money he's made in his life. You honestly think he feels bad about not giving away more? His point is simply that the U.S. tax code doesn't require the rich to pay their fair share.

[Deborah]

Still I see myself as falling short of the standard set by scriptures and I have a desire to lift the hands that hang low and strengthen the feeble knees of those who falter.

Don't we all. I think all of us can do more in terms of lifting the spirits of others, and that doesn't require any monetary exchange, but sometimes is harder than just giving money.

[Bikeemikey]

This whole conversation is focused on what it means to "earn".

A man invested 600 million in a investment fund. Over 30 years he earns 7.2 billion from that fund. Is it moral that he earned that much money over that period of time? Lets assume yes.

The fund that man invested in was Madoff's ponzi scheme. The claim is also that the man knew nothing about the corruption of Madoff's investments. Let's assume that this is also true.

Is that man's earning of 7.2 billion on a 600 million investment over 30 years from Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme moral?

This is a real scenario. The mans widow gave the profits 7.2 billion back to the government to return to the people who lost their investments.

The reality is that in general it is not the amount of money that is earned but the way in which it is earned that determines the morality of our accural of wealth.

Once we have the wealth, and assuming we have gained it morally, we are then judged again by how we decide to use it. God judges us on how we get it and what we do with it once we do.

[Analytics]

This whole conversation is focused on what it means to "earn".

A man invested 600 million in a investment fund. Over 30 years he earns 7.2 billion from that fund. Is it moral that he earned that much money over that period of time? Lets assume yes.

The fund that man invested in was Madoff's ponzi scheme. The claim is also that the man knew nothing about the corruption of Madoff's investments. Let's assume that this is also true.

Is that man's earning of 7.2 billion on a 600 million investment over 30 years from Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme moral?

This is a real scenario. The mans widow gave the profits 7.2 billion back to the government to return to the people who lost their investments.

The reality is that in general it is not the amount of money that is earned but the way in which it is earned that determines the morality of our accural of wealth.

Once we have the wealth, and assuming we have gained it morally, we are then judged again by how we decide to use it. God judges us on how we get it and what we do with it once we do.

That

[Jeff K.]

What does earn mean?

If you know a man of great talent, a song writer, he writes songs sells them effortlessly and makes a great deal of money because his songs are in demand. Has he "earned" his money?

I know a writer who is very good at what he does, he has written several novels, made a few million and they are being converted to movies (millions more). The demand for his talents is great, but he never really "works" as some would call it.

Then we have those who work 12 hours a day to make a living, they work hard, they come home tired, and they never seem to get ahead.

I am closely associated with an investment group, we earned our money and then sought to invest it. We take the money we worked hard to earn, and then we invest it in other companies that we think will grow, that need our money and our capital. When the company takes off, we do quite well, when it fails we lose everything we have put into the firm. Did we earn that money?

Earn is an interesting word because it is subjective to what one thinks "work" is.

People who know nothing about hedge funds tend to be the most critical. In a sense like those who know nothing about doctors tend to be the most critical of them, or those who know nothing of Mormons, tend to be the most critical. It is easy to hate and despersonify someone or something you know nothing about.

Hedge funds exist because investors seek to "hedge" their risks. In its simplest form, if you are a bank and you have a loan for a home, you know that a certain percentage will fail. You take some of your funds and "hedge" them against the losses by investing in a different field. That way if a loan fails you are able to miminize your loss (and the loss felt by other borrowers after the need to raise interest rates to cover the loss).

The profits didn

[Jeff K.]

Jeff K., on 18 December 2010 - 10:55 PM, said:

And if Buffet pays less than his secretary and feels bad about it, perhaps he should give more rather than less?

Buffet is in the process of giving away something on the order of 99.9% of all of the money he's made in his life. You honestly think he feels bad about not giving away more? His point is simply that the U.S. tax code doesn't require the rich to pay their fair share.

And he will still earn more than his secretary by millions. What you earn is yours to do as you wish according to the dictates of your conscience and the inspiration of God. Not for the awful small minded and covetous who think "you have too much" their judgement on you.

You seem to miss that analytics, I am not sure why you have this viceral anger and hatred towards those who may be more talented, or luckier, or work harder, or have been rewarded or earned in some way you cannot understand, but I generally worry about myself than leading a lynch mob with torches to worry about someone elses money.

If you aren't talented enough to play basketball, then stop villifying those who play it well.

[Analytics]

What does earn mean?

If you know a man of great talent, a song writer, he writes songs sells them effortlessly and makes a great deal of money because his songs are in demand. Has he "earned" his money?

It

[Jeff K.]

Jeff K., on 20 December 2010 - 09:11 AM, said:

Hedge funds exist because investors seek to "hedge" their risks.

That

[Analytics]

You seem to miss that analytics, I am not sure why you have this viceral anger and hatred towards those who may be more talented, or luckier, or work harder, or have been rewarded or earned in some way you cannot understand, but I generally worry about myself than leading a lynch mob with torches to worry about someone elses money.

"Visceral anger and hatred"? You have no idea how talented I am, how lucky I am, how hard I work, and how much I am rewarded. Maybe you have me nailed, but maybe you're very wrong.

You honestly think I

[Jeff K.]

Jeff K., on 20 December 2010 - 09:11 AM, said:

CFR it drains value from the little guys who invest in markets? You can argue then that ANY investment in markets drains from the little guys. A group of nuns get together and pool their resources to create an investment fund, have they "drained" you from the market?

In your hypothetical, do the nuns have an unfair advantage over the little guys? Stock trading is a zero-sum game, so when people engage in high-frequency trading, flash trading, insider trading, arbitrage trading, etc., and thereby extract billions of dollars, just what real value have they contributed to society in exchange for that money? When their schemes crash (e.g. AIG, Long-Term Capital Management, Enron), the devastation is much broader than to the individuals who made obscene profits from the risks they were taking.

It isn't a hypothetical. It is real life. There are Luthern investment funds, hedge funds run by investment groups that are primarily made of nuns. And many other groups. Again you lack the knowledge in finance to know this is accurst.

Stock trading is NOT a zero sum game sinse values increase based on demand which is based on a several variables including returns on investment, new technology, new ideas, management techniques. These and other factors drive up and down the value of stocks. Of course if you know nothing about stocks, you would probably assume incorrectly that it is a zero sum game.

You toss out a number of words whose industry and work, I believe you are completely ignorant of.

Lets look at some.

High frequency trading - for short term investments? Not a idea for most, but some do it. Does it "drain" the investment pool? Only of bad investors and it provides additional capital. I find it intersting how you also toss in illegal actions with legal ones and then automatically taint the entire industry. Again, a reflection of your lack of knowledge.

You really need to educate yourself on stocks and stock trading before you complain about other groups (including nuns) who make what you subjectively call "obscene" profits.

You have no idea what actually happened. It was private enterprise, brokered by private investment banks, that fueled the sub-prime mortgage crisis.

I think I have a fairly good idea as to how the problems occurred and more to the point the sequence of events and the depth of impact for each event. As a former CFO, as a former Vice President of Finances, as a private investor, and as someone who has made money on my investments, I dare say my knowledge far exceeds yours in what "goes on" and what doesn't. My wife by the way is a CFO for a commercial real estate firm. We talk about things like this the way you talk about the weather. Your view that somehow private investment firms and not fannie mae and freddie mac were the driving force pretty much places you in the catagory of one who listens to the news to get mad but doesn't analyze what happened.

Again, analytics it appears you know nothing on the subject matter bu are usually the one leading a lynch mob instead of understanding what happened.

[Jeff K.]

"Visceral anger and hatred"? You have no idea how talented I am, how lucky I am, how hard I work, and how much I am rewarded. Maybe you have me nailed, but maybe you're very wrong.

You honestly think I

[Martin.Harris]

This reminds me of the following video by Stephen Colbert:

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/368914/december-16-2010/jesus-is-a-liberal-democrat

Embedding didn't work, so here's a link to the video. Enjoy!