Mocking The Poor

[Vance]

He's actually right.

 

http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/nutrition/healthy-eating/myth-or-fact-celery-has-negative-calories.html

 

"The majority of energy that celery has locked within it passes through our digestive system without being processed. The cellulose calories celery has is irrelevant; all that counts is the six or so food calories we can get from each eight-inch stalk. Since it takes more than six food calories of energy to digest the celery, the net result is that digesting celery does, in fact, exhaust calories. In a very real sense, celery is a "negative calorie" food."

And so, how would it be bad for someone to eats too many calories now to replace some of those calories with celery?

[MorningStar]

Oh my gosh.  Celery is disgusting.  We shouldn't even be debating this.

[bluebell]

And so, how would it be bad for someone to eats too many calories now to replace some of those calories with celery?

 

If the point is to lose weight, it's not bad at all.

 

Of course, that hasn't ever been the point of the discussion-what diet is best if you want to lose weight.  

 

The point of the discussion has been how much less expensive and more filling food is that fills you up and staves off your hunger are compared to foods that are good for you. 

 

And in regards to the question with the celery, the specific issue was what would you eat if you have limited money-a bag of celery, or a fast food hamburger and fries (since they are similar in cost, that's why they were being compared).

 

Obviously, under those circumstances, it would be bad for someone to spend all of their money on celery, since it provides no nutritional value.  They would be slim, but incredibly unhealthy, and more to the point of the discussion, incredibly hungry in comparison to the person who bought the burger.

[thatjimguy]

I remember being out in Provo and seeing beggars out there with homeless signs. Then seeing a news "gotcha" story about how some are living a few blocks away.

 

My buddy just last night said he would never give to the Salvation Army because their CEO made just under $1 mil.

 

There are all kinds of reason to fear giving. No one wants to be duped and its very soul sapping when it happens. I would say be generous enough that you see something positive happen for certain to make sure you get (see the) blessings that come from it.

[bluebell]

Oh my gosh.  Celery is disgusting.  We shouldn't even be debating this.

 

It's passable with peanut butter, but only in small quantities.  Otherwise i think it should be banned from all meals.  And that includes celery seed, that stuff is just as gross.

[Vance]

That's a Romneyism. Businesses are a legal fiction. They are not individuals. They don't get sick, they don't get too old to work, and they don't die.

What a bunch of tripe.

Businesses are real and they are made of individuals. They get sick when they are not competitive or are producing unwanted products. They do get old but only if they adapt to the always changing market. They do die. It is call going out of business. It happens all the time.

 

If a business uses public resources, and they all do. Then they have to pay taxes that support those resources.

 

If my business wants to make money. I use the use public resources to do it. I have not only a legal obligation to pay for them, but a moral one besides.

And those taxes are NOT income taxes. If they own a delivery truck they pay taxes (to support the highways when they buy fuel) just like individuals do.

 

As a COO I didn't pay the business taxes. The CFO did.  As a company we charged what the market would bear for our services. If the public felt we overcharging then we either lowered our rates. If we were what the public felt were undercharging we might have a slight increase in business but we would still go bankrupt. We charged enough that we were neither overcharging or undercharging.

And that is what the free market causes.

 

He established the principles that we operate under today.

IF ONLY! What we have today is not a free market but crony capitalism. And Obama is the worst crony capitalist we have ever has as president.

 

You might think it is a joke, but I don't find it very funny when I have to use my tax dollars to subsidize private for profit companies that deliberately underpay their employees.

You keep saying that, but yet you CAN'T demonstrate how it happens.

[bluebell]

I remember being out in Provo and seeing beggars out there with homeless signs. Then seeing a news "gotcha" story about how some are living a few blocks away.

 

My buddy just last night said he would never give to the Salvation Army because their CEO made just under $1 mil.

 

There are all kinds of reason to fear giving. No one wants to be duped and its very soul sapping when it happens. I would say be generous enough that you see something positive happen for certain to make sure you get (see the) blessings that come from it.

 

The Salvation army doesn't have a CEO as it's a religious organization (it's like a church).

 

According to Snopes, the leader of the Salvation Army is called the National Commander, and it's William A. Roberts. The BBB reported that he earned about 127,000 in salary last year.

 

I agree though that there is sometimes an element of fear when we are talking about giving to the homeless.  I just finished Elizabeth Smart's book "My Story" which tells how Mitchell (the man who kidnapped her) used begging and appearing downtrodden as his primary way of getting money for pornography, alcohol and drugs, as well as getting into people's homes to have access to their daughters.  He was a master at manipulation, and many people supported evil when they gave him money, even though they were honestly and sincerely just trying to be helpful or more like Christ.

 

It's a hard world to navigate sometimes.

Edited January 7, 2014 by bluebell

[Vance]

You've got a point.

 

My father works for a large natural gas and oil company.  They pay taxes.  The people in one state were upset about the profits the business was making and decided that they wanted to increase the tax on the land which the business used to transport it's product into cities and such (it's product in this case was natural gas-which was used to heat people's homes and businesses, etc.).  The business buried it's pipes in public lands, and the people wanted them to pay more for that privilege.

 

The bill did not pass however, when people were made aware that any rise in taxes would automatically be passed along (cent for cent) to the customer.  Thus, voting in a 10% increase in taxes that this business would pay in this area, would be the equivalent of the people voting for a 10% increase in their energy bill.  People rightly decided that that wasn't such a good deal for them.

 

Especially since they only reason they wanted to raise the taxes in the first place was because they were mad that their energy bills were so high at the time (something the company had little control over since the price of this energy is regulated).

 

I have no idea if that's how all business taxes work, but that's how it worked in this one case i'm aware of.

Another example of what I have been saying.

It is the consumer that pays the "business" taxes, not the business. The business is just turned into a tax collector for the government.

[Calm]

Oh my gosh.  Celery is disgusting.  We shouldn't even be debating this.

Celery with cream cheese isn't too bad.

[Vance]

Then why did Reagan sign off on 11 tax increases?

He wasn't a dictator and he had to work with a Democrat controlled legislative branch.

But even so, you have not shown my statement to be incorrect.

Today, our taxes are going up, yet due to their inhibiting economic nature the revenue to the gov is down causing the debt to skyrocket.

Obama is Kennedy and Reagan in reverse.

Government spending can never stimulate the economy like tax cuts and free enterprise.

 

And no, that is not a proven fact that happens every time you do it.

You are free to provide a counter example. IF you can find one.

I have done enough of what I call fixed base optimization to conclude the Laffer curve to be a real and correct phenomena.

 

You are out of the thread for politicking.

[halconero]

Oh my gosh.  Celery is disgusting.  We shouldn't even be debating this.

 

Celery with peanut butter and raisins/cranberries is a gift from the hand of divinity! You take that back.

 

Back to the thread:

 

There's one-size-fits-all answer to your question. Each instance must taken on a case-by-case basis that involves experience, sound judgement, and the Spirit. While food might be good in some situations, in others money may be the answer, or a place to stay, or a blanket, whatever.

[halconero]

[Reagan] wasn't a dictator and he had to work with a Democrat controlled legislative branch.

 

Reagan was a specter from the gods, and with his legislation he granted himself (political) immortality.

[Calm]

Mosiah 4:26I would that ye should impart of your substance to the poor, every man according to that which he hath, such as feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and administering to their relief, both spiritually and temporally, according to their wants.Apparently, he forgot to include housing......

In the scriptures, poor can refer to (1) people who are without needed material goods, such as food, clothing, and shelter, or (2) people who are humble and without pride.

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/poor.p2?lang=eng&letter=p

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/isa/58.6-7?lang=eng#5

[Calm]

I did a search on bishop for the thread and didn't see this verse...sorry if it's a repeat

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/84.112?lang=eng#111

"searching after the poor to administer to their wants by humbling the rich and the proud."

Edited January 7, 2014 by calmoriah

[MorningStar]

Celery with peanut butter and raisins/cranberries is a gift from the hand of divinity! You take that back.

 

Back to the thread:

 

There's one-size-fits-all answer to your question. Each instance must taken on a case-by-case basis that involves experience, sound judgement, and the Spirit. While food might be good in some situations, in others money may be the answer, or a place to stay, or a blanket, whatever.

No.  I will not take it back.  Nothing can mask the horrible texture of raw celery.  Heathen.

 

Edited:  Sorry, I got a little overheated there, but it's only because I think you're a heathen and shouldn't have called you a heathen for promoting one of the worst snacks ever.

Edited January 7, 2014 by MorningStar

[Calm]

For Nehor, http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/56.16

For Vance, http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/56.17

Again, didn't see them, sorry if repeats.

[thatjimguy]

The Salvation army doesn't have a CEO as it's a religious organization (it's like a church).

 

According to Snopes, the leader of the Salvation Army is called the National Commander, and it's William A. Roberts. The BBB reported that he earned about 127,000 in salary last year.

 

Thanks for the info. I'll pass oit along. But I guess the point I was making that there are a lot of "we are going to help people" organizations that use charity as a cash cow. I probablly should have used the one about cancer that is happening somewhere in Arizona I think that CBS news did a story on.

 

 

 

Is there scripture that may support borth sides? Or at least, the side for NOT giving? I think the side for giving is most likely plentiful.

[MorningStar]

Thanks for the info. I'll pass oit along. But I guess the point I was making that there are a lot of "we are going to help people" organizations that use charity as a cash cow. I probablly should have used the one about cancer that is happening somewhere in Arizona I think that CBS news did a story on.

 

 

 

Is there scripture that may support borth sides? Or at least, the side for NOT giving? I think the side for giving is most likely plentiful.

Wasn't it the CEO (don't know if that's the correct term) of The Red Cross that makes $1 million per year?

[Calm]

 

 

 

Is there scripture that may support borth sides? Or at least, the side for NOT giving? I think the side for giving is most likely plentiful.

See the post right above yours for what I think is the most likely balanced approach in the scriptures, iow from both sides'

[Calm]

Iirc, this is a good site for finding costs involved including salaries...

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm/bay/studies.ceo.htm#.UsyKhWt5mSM

The rationale usually for high salaried employees of nonprofit is that it takes just as much hard work and talent to run a nonprofit as it does a for profit business and if one wants it done right, one has to pay a salary that attracts the experienced and talented.

I don't really agree...perhaps they should look more at retired CEOs that are willing to devote their time...but perhaps there is too much competition out there with so many nonprofits in existence.

"

“Given our research, which show that the typical charity CEO earns just $125,000, we do not believe that salaries approaching a million dollars or more are needed to attract bright, able, and committed candidates to positions of nonprofit leadership.  As such, we agree that donors should continue to be skeptical of charities that pay salaries hovering near or above one million dollars, but that they not discount organizations where the leader's pay is in the low six figures,” said Charity Navigator, president & CEO, Ken Berger."

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=1641#.UsyLzmt5mSM

Edited January 7, 2014 by calmoriah

[bluebell]

Wasn't it the CEO (don't know if that's the correct term) of The Red Cross that makes $1 million per year?

 

Could be.

 

In my personal opinion, Goodwill is one of the biggest 'we are here for the poor' scammers out there.  All of their merchandise is given to them free of charge, then they don't donate any of it to the poor, they sell it to make a profit.

[Calm]

But the profit apparently goes to pay mainly wages for those who wouldn't have very good job opportunities apparently:

"Goodwill of Greater New York and Northern New Jersey has empowered individuals with disabilities and other barriers to employment to gain independence through the power of work for close to 100 years. We annually assist more than 100,000 people in New York City, Northern New Jersey, Long Island and upstate New York experience the pride of earning a wage. Our programs continue to enable people with disabilities, new immigrants, ex-offenders, mature workers and underserved youth, to fully participate in society by achieving employment."

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=13302#.UsyOVGt5mSM

I would check the local Goodwill to see its rating. The one above was three star, four star being the highest rating given.

Sounds comparable to DI: "Mission

Goodwill Industries of North Louisiana, Inc. serves people with disabilities and other barriers to employment. We believe that all people want to work and have opportunities to work and grow. Goodwill provides effective vocational programs that help people with disabling and/or disadvantaging conditions achieve their greatest individual potential. Goodwill prepares people for competitive community employment and/or transitional sheltered employment within Goodwill Industries or another appropriate setting. Goodwill believes that all people want to work and have opportunities to work and grow. Goodwill Industries of North Louisiana currently provides services to 26 parishes in North Louisiana, with retail operations in Shreveport, Bossier City, Minden, Haughton, Lakeshore, Natchitoches, Ruston, Monroe, West Monroe, Bastrop, Alexandria and Pineville.". This one was rated four star: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=6559#.UsyPZGt5mSM

Edited January 7, 2014 by calmoriah

[mercyngrace]

Could be.

 

In my personal opinion, Goodwill is one of the biggest 'we are here for the poor' scammers out there.  All of their merchandise is given to them free of charge, then they don't donate any of it to the poor, they sell it to make a profit.

 

Isn't that how Deseret Industries works, too?

 

eta: Oops. Cal mentioned that already. 

Edited January 7, 2014 by mercyngrace

[bluebell]

But the profit apparently goes to pay mainly wages for those who wouldn't have very good job opportunities apparently:

"Goodwill of Greater New York and Northern New Jersey has empowered individuals with disabilities and other barriers to employment to gain independence through the power of work for close to 100 years. We annually assist more than 100,000 people in New York City, Northern New Jersey, Long Island and upstate New York experience the pride of earning a wage. Our programs continue to enable people with disabilities, new immigrants, ex-offenders, mature workers and underserved youth, to fully participate in society by achieving employment."

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=13302#.UsyOVGt5mSM

I would check the local Goodwill to see its rating. The one above was three star, four star being the highest rating given.

Sounds comparable to DI: "Mission

Goodwill Industries of North Louisiana, Inc. serves people with disabilities and other barriers to employment. We believe that all people want to work and have opportunities to work and grow. Goodwill provides effective vocational programs that help people with disabling and/or disadvantaging conditions achieve their greatest individual potential. Goodwill prepares people for competitive community employment and/or transitional sheltered employment within Goodwill Industries or another appropriate setting. Goodwill believes that all people want to work and have opportunities to work and grow. Goodwill Industries of North Louisiana currently provides services to 26 parishes in North Louisiana, with retail operations in Shreveport, Bossier City, Minden, Haughton, Lakeshore, Natchitoches, Ruston, Monroe, West Monroe, Bastrop, Alexandria and Pineville.". This one was rated four star: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=6559#.UsyPZGt5mSM

 

The only information i could find on Goodwill was from 2011.  

 

The CEO then was Jim Gibbons, who's compensation was 725,000.  That seems excessive but i will be the first to admit that i certainly don't know everything there is to know about the way the company uses all it's money.

Edited January 7, 2014 by bluebell

[bluebell]

Isn't that how Deseret Industries works, too?

 

eta: Oops. Cal mentioned that already. 

 

To be more clear, I don't have an issue with this kind of 'business'.  We have Catholic mission stores in Montana which also work this way, but almost all the proceeds go back into the community or to support the mission of, well, the mission.

 

If Goodwill works that way too, then i retract my previous statement.