Unemployment Checks

[AmorLibertas]

A tithe is 1/10 of one's increase. In the Old Testament, only certain types of things were tithes...essentially the production of the land and the animals that grazed on it, and the spoils of war. An offering, on the other hand, was not a specific fraction of one's wages or profits. The Old Testament says notbing about tithing tbe income or profits of one's labors. In the case of.the widow's mite, the widow offered all she had, not 1/10, whereas those who were abundantly wealthy only gave a portion of their wealth to the treasury.

[LDS Guy 1986]

A tithe is 1/10 of one's increase. In the Old Testament, only certain types of things were tithes...essentially the production of the land and the animals that grazed on it, and the spoils of war. An offering, on the other hand, was not a specific fraction of one's wages or profits. The Old Testament says notbing about tithing tbe income or profits of one's labors. In the case of.the widow's mite, the widow offered all she had, not 1/10, whereas those who were abundantly wealthy only gave a portion of their wealth to the treasury.

When I think of OT tithing and modern tithing there really isn't any comparison though, because most were farmers hence the reason why tithes were based in livestock, not gold or silver.

Plus remember at those times they were still doing animal sacrifices also, so livestock was very valuable as well.

Those who had no livestock would still buy livestock out side the temple and offer that livestock to the priests.

In early days of the Church when most of the membership was still farmers, the Church accepted livestock and produce as well. This is called tithing in kind, and I still believe that it can be done though it almost never is.

With the emergence of currency and our societies move away from barter and to currency though such practices fell away to tithing of ones income since this was our source of increase now instead of livestock and produce.

This is to great convince to the overwhelming majority of the members and the bishopric since I doubt they would want to continue to collect actual food donations once a month and livestock and produce donations throughout the month.

As our economy changes, the practice of tithing changed with it!

[AmorLibertas]

While. It may be true that the practice of tithing changed with the times, for faithful Mormons it is a matter of revelation and clarification by the First Presidency. Tithing is to be one tenth of one's income, to be determined by the one offering the tithes.

[LeSellers]

Lehi normally I agree with you but on this onw I differ. UI is an insurance paid by the employer and I know very few employers who would give this to the employee if they were not required to pay it.

Whether the employer would pass the cost of the premium on to his employees is not the basis for the argument that the employees pay unemployment the insurance costs. the fact is that the cost of that premium is just another cost of employment, exactly the same as his wage or his antiSocial inSecurity insurance (it's called "FICA": Federal Insurance Contribution Act). In the world of competition, where each employee would receive his marginal contribution to profit as his wage, those insurance premiums would end up in his pocket because any other employer would pay them in order to attract the employees he needs to run his business.

We live in an imperfect world, so the employer might try to keep that money for himself, but in the world of true competition, the employee would take it home. Thank government for your limited paycheck, because it does more to reduce it than any other force.

Lehi

[ERayR]

A tithe is 1/10 of one's increase. In the Old Testament, only certain types of things were tithes...essentially the production of the land and the animals that grazed on it, and the spoils of war. An offering, on the other hand, was not a specific fraction of one's wages or profits. The Old Testament says notbing about tithing tbe income or profits of one's labors. In the case of.the widow's mite, the widow offered all she had, not 1/10, whereas those who were abundantly wealthy only gave a portion of their wealth to the treasury.

Do you really not see the lesson in the parable. Apply it to tithing. Instead of trying to figure out what is the minimum requirement pay with the attitude of the widow. You will find there are not so many questions about how much.

[ERayR]

Whether the employer would pass the cost of the premium on to his employees is not the basis for the argument that the employees pay unemployment the insurance costs. the fact is that the cost of that premium is just another cost of employment, exactly the same as his wage or his antiSocial inSecurity insurance (it's called "FICA": Federal Insurance Contribution Act). In the world of competition, where each employee would receive his marginal contribution to profit as his wage, those insurance premiums would end up in his pocket because any other employer would pay them in order to attract the employees he needs to run his business.

We live in an imperfect world, so the employer might try to keep that money for himself, but in the world of true competition, the employee would take it home. Thank government for your limited paycheck, because it does more to reduce it than any other force.

Lehi

I know what it is called I do accounting. Whether it would be paid as wages or not if it weren't required is debateable and would depend on the labor market. If labor were scarce, maybe. I can guarantee you in todays labor market it wouldn't be.

[Whiskeypete]

Your are sick so you go to the hospital. They do an MRI. Because you have health insurance, you pay a $50 co-pay and the insurance picks up the rest.

If you follow the logic of some on this thread, what you should then do is look at the bill, find out how much your health insurance paid for the MRI, and tithe that amount.

This could become problematic if the procedure was really expensive and the insurance paid out $500,000 on you and you only make $40,000 per year.

Are you really saying that the Lord expects you to come up with $50,000 to cover the benefit that you got for the health insurance?

[LDS Guy 1986]

Your are sick so you go to the hospital. They do an MRI. Because you have health insurance, you pay a $50 co-pay and the insurance picks up the rest.

If you follow the logic of some on this thread, what you should then do is look at the bill, find out how much your health insurance paid for the MRI, and tithe that amount.

This could become problematic if the procedure was really expensive and the insurance paid out $500,000 on you and you only make $40,000 per year.

Are you really saying that the Lord expects you to come up with $50,000 to cover the benefit that you got for the health insurance?

No, which is why comparing apple to oranges does not work here!

You tithe your income, not your medical expenses, so medical insurance payments are not income.

But unemployment insurance payments are making up for your loss of INCOME from losing your job. So you tithe from that unemployment since it is replacing your INCOME!

[LDS Guy 1986]

While. It may be true that the practice of tithing changed with the times, for faithful Mormons it is a matter of revelation and clarification by the First Presidency. Tithing is to be one tenth of one's income, to be determined by the one offering the tithes.

I agree 110% with you.

[AmorLibertas]

Do you really not see the lesson in the parable. Apply it to tithing. Instead of trying to figure out what is the minimum requirement pay with the attitude of the widow. You will find there are not so many questions about how much.

The lesson from the parable is somewhat debatable. The obvious lesson is spoken by Jesus that the amount that a person gives in offerings is not judged based on the quantity that is received, but by what the amount that is being given represents to the individual. While the widow is able to contribute an almost insignificant amount to the treasury, what she contributes is everything she has. A further lesson might be taken from the attitude of faith of the widow who is likely giving all she has with the faith that God will bless her according to the promise in Malachi 3:10.

My original point, however, is that Tithing according to the Old Testament was different than Tithing according to modern LDS teachings and commandment. Tithing according to LDS teachings today is 10% of one's income, whatever the source.

[thesometimesaint]

UI is an insurance policy. The only way you collect is by being unemployed. It is part of you compensation package that you work for. It no different than the fire insurance on you home. You are required to have it(if you have a mortgage) and in some locals even if you don't have one. The ONLY way to collect is by having a fire that damages your home.

[LDS Guy 1986]

UI is an insurance policy. The only way you collect is by being unemployed. It is part of you compensation package that you work for. It no different than the fire insurance on you home. You are required to have it(if you have a mortgage) and in some locals even if you don't have one. The ONLY way to collect is by having a fire that damages your home.

The difference though is that fire insurance is insuring your home (which you don't tithe your home in the LDS Church) and Unemployment is insuring your INCOME (you do tithe your INCOME in the LDS Church).

You are comparing apples and oranges here because the two cases are completely different!

[Whiskeypete]

No, which is why comparing apple to oranges does not work here!

You tithe your income, not your medical expenses, so medical insurance payments are not income.

But unemployment insurance payments are making up for your loss of INCOME from losing your job. So you tithe from that unemployment since it is replacing your INCOME!

Actually that is an excellent point. Worded that way, I have to agree with you.

It just appeared that the tone of many comments on this board what that you should tithe anything that is a benefit to you. I was trying to point out that in todays world, that isn't always possible.

But I do agree with you. Where the purpose of unemployment checks is to replace lost income, it should definitely be tithed (at least by the spirit of the law.)

[ERayR]

My original point, however, is that Tithing according to the Old Testament was different than Tithing according to modern LDS teachings and commandment. Tithing according to LDS teachings today is 10% of one's income, whatever the source.

The Law of Tithing is the same today as it has always been. It says nothing about income. What it says is 10% of ones increase. Example: If I have 100 widgets at the begining of the year and 110 widgets at the end of the year I owe tithing in the value of 1 widget.

You can get as detailed as you want in calculating your own widgets.

[thesometimesaint]

LDS Guy 1986:

We don't normally tithe on our job either, just on the money we earn. As fire insurance normally pays less than the value of the home it is technically a decrease in money.

[LDS Guy 1986]

LDS Guy 1986:

We don't normally tithe on our job either, just on the money we earn. As fire insurance normally pays less than the value of the home it is technically a decrease in money.

Unemployment isn't insurance for your job (you still lose your job, UI doesn't bring back your job) it is insurance on your INCOME, and you do tithe your INCOME!