The Latest From Grant Palmer

[mfbukowski]

Believe me a million dollars is still a lot of money. But once your willing to be bought the rest is just price negotiating. I don't believe any Apostle or 70 is willing to be bought.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millionaire

Recently, there has been some controversy over how to correctly determine a person's status as a millionaire. One of the two most commonly used measurements is net worth, which counts the total value of all property owned by a household minus the household's debts. According to this definition, a household owning an $800k home, $50k of furnishings, two cars worth $60k, a $60k retirement savings account, $45k in mutual funds, and a $325k vacation home with a $250k mortgage, $40k in car loans, and $25k in credit card debt would be worth about $1,085,000; and every individual in this household would thus be a millionaire. However, according to the net financial assets measurement used for some specific applications (such as evaluating an investor's expected tolerance for risk for stockbroker ethics), equity in one's principal residence is excluded, as are lifestyle assets, such as the car and furniture. Therefore the above example household would only have net financial assets of $80,000. Another term used is "net investable assets" or working capital. These practitioners may use the term "millionaire" to mean somebody who is free to invest a million units of currency through them as broker. For similar reasons, those who market goods, services, and investments to high net worth individuals (HNWIs) are careful to specify a net worth "not counting principal residence." As the end of 2011, there are around 5.1 million HNWIs in US,^[8] while at the same time, there are 11 million millionaires^[9] in a total of 3.5 million millionaire households,^[10] including those 5.1 million HNWIs.

....

The "World Wealth Report" is a report on individuals with a net worth of at least $1 million in all assets except their primary residence. The report is compiled annually by Capgemini for RBC Wealth Management (as of 2012. Previously, the report was compiled for Merrill Lynch).

World Wealth Report 2007 – "The 11th annual World Wealth Report from Merrill Lynch/Capgemini finds the World’s High Net Worth (HNW) population growing to 9.5 million with their assets rising to $37.2 trillion."^[14]

The number of U.S. households with a net worth of $1 million or more, not including first homes, fell by 2.5 million to 6.7 million in 2008, according to the Spectrum Group report, as reported by Reuters.

After the 27 percent drop, the number of millionaires is at the lowest level since 2003, when the millionaire population stood at 6.2 million.

[mfbukowski]

Obviously this wasn't released in conference but I have gained permission to share this information now.

Don, Mike Reed, Chris Smith, Blair Hodges, Bill Hamblin and I were called to serve in the newly re-formed "Council of 50." Each of us were given $150 to settle our financial affairs (well, Blair got more to buy razors and shaving cream) as well as an unlimited supply of 10% off coupons at Chuck-o-Rama (where many of our meetings will be held, apparently). We have yet to meet the other members of the Council but I've heard it will happen at some point this summer. Most likely at the annual Sunstone symposium.

Rumor has it that the same call was extended to others here (Dan Peterson??) on the board but terms could not be reached on the Chuck-o-Rama discount.

Seth

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

With the way they try to exploit friendships and family relationships, is there anybody on the planet who hasn't at some point been impacted by MLM?

Impacted? Or talked to about them? Edited April 9, 2013 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Scott Lloyd]

Impacted? Or talked to about them?

With MLMs, is there a difference?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

With MLMs, is there a difference?

Rofl. I suppose not.

[nealr]

I agree that Dan is not a leprechaun--or if he is, he is a very sneaky one. And I would add that based on my extensive research into LDS history, having often looked at private documents, including journals, of 19th and 20th century apostles and First Presidency members, it is simply impossible for me to believe that they have not consistently been sincere in their faith.

Don

Yes, but do any of those documents shed light on Dan's status as a leprechaun? This is an important matter, and Dan is, as we all know, a psychological liar, so we simply cannot trust his word on any of this. We need to historical records to tell us the truth!

[KevinG]

Ah yes the good old days for me. i am no longer able to keep up with them any more. Enjoy it fades soon enough.

Truly I do enjoy it. I hope they always use me in some capacity with the Scouts. If all else fails I will teach them to lash a sedan chair and carry me about!

[Duncan]

How about this. Someone can give me a million dollars and i'll try an experiment to see how long you can live off of it

[T-Shirt]

I agree that what palmer says is hard to believe. And yet... It is also hard to believe that he would risk all credability by making this stuff up. I don't know.... Maybe the truth is to be found somewhere between the two extremes and that the alleged disaffected seventy was exagerating/guessing, and that this was further problematized by Palmer's mental filter.

Except, it is impossible to ever know, for sure, that it is a lie, as long as the names remain secret. There is no danger of being caught in a lie if he never names names.

[mfbukowski]

And what happens when the million runs out? Remain silent? I would hit them up for another million to remain silent. It would never end. Not to mention the wonderful book deal that would rake in a few million more. Imagine if 8 of the 12 who Palmer says doesn't believe would get together and tell all. The church would fall like a house of cards, especially with proof.

An excellent point. It would never stop.

But if you complained I suppose they could send out the Danites to break your legs.

When we start seeing multiple Apostles showing up with broken legs, I guess the secret will be confirmed

But seriously, this consequence is inescapable if he is right. We would see some evidence somewhere of something going on with the 12. Wives not being able to stand it.- something. It could not be kept quiet forever.

They would have to suddenly turned their entire lives around from being "nice Mormon boys" into gangsters virtually overnight, where the only thing important is money. No one could ever speak out after refusing the offer. They would have to change their entire characters overnight and never mention any of this to anyone. Defenders of the faith would have to suddenly become secret total apostate gangsters- with no evidence of a change of mind or character or desire to speak out, all for that million bucks.

How could anyone pull that off much less all who have ever been apostles? With no one speaking out about it- publicly? No family, no friends, nobody??

There is no way that this adds up.

Edited April 9, 2013 by mfbukowski

[Scott Lloyd]

Except, it is impossible to ever know, for sure, that it is a lie, as long as the names remain secret. There is no danger of being caught in a lie if he never names names.

That is why lies of such a nature are so insidious.

It's like falsely accusing someone of child abuse. With no way to disprove the accusation, it amounts to placing a cloud over someone's reputation that can never be fully removed.

[cdowis]

Satan is the author of lies. I can only expess my deepest sympathy for Grant Palmer.

One of Satan's most perverse lies is "The apostles know that the church is false", to deny their apostolic testimony. When you hear it, run away.

Get thee behind me, Satan.

Edited April 9, 2013 by cdowis

[ALarson]

Satan is the author of lies.

Agreed. But, of the lies that have been told here, who told them? No one can really know for sure....not yet anyway.

Could it be Grant Palmer? Yes.

Could it be the Seventy? Yes (if there is one who Palmer is actually in contact with.)

Could it be whoever the Seventy got his information from? Yes (I think that's a stretch, but he could also just be repeating information he's been told.)

I'm thinking there will be more to this story and we'll learn who's truly behind these claims. I have a very difficult time believing any of them other than that there may be even those at the top who have some doubts and questions just as members do.

As far as the 1 million dollars? I say, "So what if that's true." These men are called, asked to give up their livelihoods and to devote the rest of their lives in service to the church. Many of them are independently wealthy, but many aren't. What are they supposed to live on? Actually 1 million is not that much when one considers how young some of these men are when they are called.

[Mike Reed]

Except, it is impossible to ever know, for sure, that it is a lie, as long as the names remain secret. There is no danger of being caught in a lie if he never names names.

maybe it is in the naive humanist in me, but I like to think that most people aren't maliciously deceptive.

[jwhitlock]

maybe it is in the naive humanist in me, but I like to think that most people aren't maliciously deceptive.

Correct. However, by definition, that leaves some that are. Chances are that most of us know some of those people. I know I do.

Grant's story sets off way too many red flags for me.

[ALarson]

maybe it is in the naive humanist in me, but I like to think that most people aren't maliciously deceptive.

I agree 100% and that's why I posted what I did above. No one knows that Grant Palmer is lying and no one should accuse him of telling lies. He very well could just be repeating information he's been told.

[mercyngrace]

maybe it is in the naive humanist in me, but I like to think that most people aren't maliciously deceptive.

Mike,

I tend to agree with you that most people aren't maliciously deceptive but the way I see it, you'd have to believe a veritable cabal of church leaders were being just that in order for Palmer's account to be true.

Essentially, to believe Palmer, you have to accept that the odds are 15 to 1 against your naive humanism.

My naive humanism is balanced, I guess, with my cynicism born of sad experience which convinces me that it's harder for 15 men to keep a secret than it is for 1 man to lie.

[MichelleD]

Mike,

I tend to agree with you that most people aren't maliciously deceptive but the way I see it, you'd have to believe a veritable cabal of church leaders were being just that in order for Palmer's account to be true.

Essentially, to believe Palmer, you have to accept that the odds are 15 to 1 against your naive humanism.

My naive humanism is balanced, I guess, with my cynicism born of sad experience which convinces me that it's harder for 15 men to keep a secret than it is for 1 man to lie.

I agree but you still can't be sure if these claims originated with Grant Palmer or with those he spoke to. He very well could be honestly repeating conversations he had. If this is the case, he's been deceived himself and one has to wonder why he'd believe these claims enough to repeat them.

[Calm]

maybe it is in the naive humanist in me, but I like to think that most people aren't maliciously deceptive.

Perhaps not, but I do think there is good evidence that Palmer is at minimum lazily deceptive, giving out false information because he hasn't made the effort to find out the correct info (one only has to listen to his explanation of what is 'really' going on at the JSP to get that).

[Traela]

I agree that what palmer says is hard to believe. And yet... It is also hard to believe that he would risk all credability by making this stuff up. I don't know.... Maybe the truth is to be found somewhere between the two extremes and that the alleged disaffected seventy was exagerating/guessing, and that this was further problematized by Palmer's mental filter.

I've heard people talk about their toxic family members, who always have to make themselves look good, and their scapegoat look bad. Sometimes it gets to the point that the stories are very easily disproven, but the family member will never admit the truth, because they have some twisted need to believe their own stories.

[mercyngrace]

I agree but you still can't be sure if these claims originated with Grant Palmer or with those he spoke to. He very well could be honestly repeating conversations he had. If this is the case, he's been deceived himself and one has to wonder why he'd believe these claims enough to repeat them.

If he is deceived, he is a very unfortunate soul, indeed. However, that presupposes malicious deception on the part of an unknown party. Suddenly we have the macguffin, a mysterious, faceless 70 upon whom all guilt can be lain. The unknown authority, initially a mere footnote, becomes a plot device used to absolve Grant Palmer. We need only hint that he is out there, somewhere, misleading the disaffected with contrived stories like some sort of nefarious fourth Nephite.

Meanwhile, pushing the blame onto this phantom authority conveniently absolves Palmer of his part in distributing this unsubstantiated tale to a conference of former members as if he had no ill will toward the church or its leaders. As if, pure-intentioned, poor Palmer played a tune to which he did not expect his audience to dance.

Sorry, MichelleD, if Grant Palmer was deceived, shame on him for being so willing to see evil in others where he has been so reluctant to see the good.

[teddyaware]

If he is deceived, he is a very unfortunate soul, indeed. However, that presupposes malicious deception on the part of an unknown party. Suddenly we have the macguffin, a mysterious, faceless 70 upon whom all guilt can be lain. The unknown authority, initially a mere footnote, becomes a plot device used to absolve Grant Palmer. We need only hint that he is out there, somewhere, misleading the disaffected with contrived stories like some sort of nefarious fourth Nephite.

Meanwhile, pushing the blame onto this phantom authority conveniently absolves Palmer of his part in distributing this unsubstantiated tale to a conference of former members as if he had no ill will toward the church or its leaders. As if, pure-intentioned, poor Palmer played a tune to which he did not expect his audience to dance.

Sorry, MichelleD, if Grant Palmer was deceived, shame on him for being so willing to see evil in others where he has been so reluctant to see the good.

Bullseye!

[Calm]

If he is deceived, he is a very unfortunate soul, indeed....

I think it is also useful not to examine this incident in isolation, but take into account other similar behaviours if they exist....as in 'does he have a pattern of __________' (fill in whatever you intend to look for, whether deception, gullibility, sloppiness in research, or whatever else including combinations of these behaviours).

[MichelleD]

If he is deceived, he is a very unfortunate soul, indeed. However, that presupposes malicious deception on the part of an unknown party. Suddenly we have the macguffin, a mysterious, faceless 70 upon whom all guilt can be lain. The unknown authority, initially a mere footnote, becomes a plot device used to absolve Grant Palmer. We need only hint that he is out there, somewhere, misleading the disaffected with contrived stories like some sort of nefarious fourth Nephite.

Meanwhile, pushing the blame onto this phantom authority conveniently absolves Palmer of his part in distributing this unsubstantiated tale to a conference of former members as if he had no ill will toward the church or its leaders. As if, pure-intentioned, poor Palmer played a tune to which he did not expect his audience to dance.

Sorry, MichelleD, if Grant Palmer was deceived, shame on him for being so willing to see evil in others where he has been so reluctant to see the good.

mercyngrace, very well stated. I think it you'll read the last sentence of my post, you'll see that we agree.

[MichelleD]

Sorry...I can't edit yet, but it should state above, "IF you'll read...."