Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

What Constitutes A Modest Living Allowance?

Thinking

By Thinking
in General Discussions

  

56 members have voted

  1. 1. In what range do you think is the living allowance of the prophet?

    • $100,000 or less
      22
    • $100,001 to $200,000
      15
    • $200,001 to $300,000
      5
    • $300,001 to $400,000
      4
    • $400,001 to $500,000
      1
    • $500,001 or more
      9

  2. 2. In what range do you think is the living allowance of an apostle?

    • $100,000 or less
      17
    • $100,001 to $200,000
      15
    • $200,001 to $300,000
      6
    • $300,001 to $400,000
      5
    • $400,001 to $500,000
      4
    • $500,001 or more
      9

  3. 3. In what range do you think is the living allowance of a non-apostle?

    • $100,000 or less
      29
    • $100,001 to $200,000
      17
    • $200,001 to $300,000
      4
    • $300,001 to $400,000
      3
    • $400,001 to $500,000
      0
    • $500,001 or more
      3

Recommended Posts

The Nehor Grand Master

The Nehor

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yep and yet even the posters on this board cannot define what a modest living allowance is.

"even the posters on this board" as if we are collectively a source of wisdom and sound judgment.

Edited by The Nehor
1
ERayR Grand Master

ERayR

Posted
Posted

"even the posters on this board" as if we are collectively a source of wisdom and sound judgment.

 

Nope a collection of the sublime to the ridiculous.   A microcosm if you will.

Raingirl Veteran

Raingirl

Posted
Posted

It is the individual themselves who determines their needs.

"We have sufficient for our needs" ..... many of you will recognize that phrase.

 

My point about the Catholic priest is that they are provided with their needs, but don't make any money.

 

To give a GA a salary/stipend (there's no real difference) based on the position he occupies rather than his needs is just wrong. It is clearly wrong.

I am not seeing your point.

I would be deliriously happy to 'not make any money' if it meant that I never had to worry about a roof over my head, food in my belly, clothing, health care (that serious medical need that I have right now that insurance won't pay for? Is that not a need?), a car and gas in that car....heck....even my hobbies get covered and someone does my cooking and cleaning for me because I was receiving "sufficient for my need".

Those Catholic priests sure are a needy bunch. Lucky for them they don't have to worry their little minds trying to figure out how to stretch a wage to cover all of their needs. Doubly lucky because the don't have to worry about the needs of pesky things like a wife or children.

Please do tell how it is "clearly wrong" for someone such as a GA to receive any kind of stipend/salary for the enormous amount of work he does. I am assuming it is also then "clearly wrong" for pastors, ministers, rabbis, etc.

2
Stargazer Grand Master

Stargazer

Posted
Posted

"even the posters on this board" as if we are collectively a source of wisdom and sound judgment.

 

Well, I don't know about you, but I am!  :D

Jeanne Grand Master

Jeanne

Posted
Posted

Okay..I know this is just rumor that has gone around for a couple of years..but, i have heard through a few sources that Pres.

Monson owns property in Hawaii?  Just asking for clarification. 

 

Thanks,

Jeanne

mbh26 Proficient

mbh26

Posted
Posted

Doubly lucky because the don't have to worry about the needs of pesky things like a wife or children.

 

I'm not sure I'd call celibacy a lucky way to live.  Didn't the Catholic Church start that for some of the same problems we're anticipating in Mormonism?  They didn't want the priests deeding away the Church's property to their heirs.  I heard Joseph Fielding Smith's estate was worth over $2 million when he died in the 70s.  Where did all that money come from?  

Calm Grand Master

Calm

Posted
Posted

Okay..I know this is just rumor that has gone around for a couple of years..but, i have heard through a few sources that Pres.

Monson owns property in Hawaii?  Just asking for clarification. 

 

Thanks,

Jeanne

I would suggest getting clarification from your sources. Hard to check claims without something concrete to move on.

Calm Grand Master

Calm

Posted
Posted
 I heard Joseph Fielding Smith's estate was worth over $2 million when he died in the 70s.  Where did all that money come from?  

 

CFR that he had $2 million needs to be provided before requiring people to tell you where it came from, imo.

Raingirl Veteran

Raingirl

Posted
Posted

Okay..I know this is just rumor that has gone around for a couple of years..but, i have heard through a few sources that Pres.

Monson owns property in Hawaii?  Just asking for clarification. 

 

Thanks,

Jeanne

If it is "just a rumor", why the need for clarification? What are you wanting clarified? Whether or not he owns property there? You made the statement, why don't you do the legwork? And why not do that before spreading a rumor? Or does the spreading of a (supposed) rumor have a purpose in itself for you?

2
ERayR Grand Master

ERayR

Posted
Posted

Okay..I know this is just rumor that has gone around for a couple of years..but, i have heard through a few sources that Pres.

Monson owns property in Hawaii?  Just asking for clarification. 

 

Thanks,

Jeanne

 

I may have heard rumors about you but as far as I am concerned they are just rumors, not worth repeating.

Jeanne Grand Master

Jeanne

Posted
Posted

Ouch...I really wasn't out to spread a rumor.  But and however, if I don't ask you guys who may really know, how will i know.

This, by the way, is my legwork.  You guys  are mean..sorry.

ERayR Grand Master

ERayR

Posted
Posted

Ouch...I really wasn't out to spread a rumor.  But and however, if I don't ask you guys who may really know, how will i know.

This, by the way, is my legwork.  You guys  are mean..sorry.

 

How to spread a rumor:

 

"Okay..I know this is just rumor that has gone around for a couple of years   .

1
omni Mentor

omni

Posted
Posted

If it is "just a rumor", why the need for clarification? What are you wanting clarified? Whether or not he owns property there? You made the statement, why don't you do the legwork? And why not do that before spreading a rumor? Or does the spreading of a (supposed) rumor have a purpose in itself for you?

 

Strange how this discussion board thingy works.  Should posters only be allowed to make statements, after all what question can't be answered with a little legwork?

Calm Grand Master

Calm

Posted
Posted (edited)

I don't think it is a bad idea to check rumours. I think it is important to make it clear you see it as a rumour and don't accept its claims but are looking for evidence for or against it. And sometimes it takes specialised knowledge to know where and what to ask so I don't see a problem with asking for help if you don't know how to find it yourself.

I see Jeanne's request as reasonable, but without more info very hard to track down to refute or verify, IMO so it would be most helpful for her to get more details (and in fact I think we should treat all rumours that way...require those claiming the rumour is valid to give as much detail to support it as possible, etc.)

The JFS rumour repeat was problematic because in asking where the money came from, it was demonstrating an acceptance of the rumour as fact without substantiation.

I believe counties usually have searchable databases for property owners, but unless you want to search all the counties in Hawaii, you need a bit more info to start.

Add-on: as far as I can tell, the county of Hawaii does not have a search by owner function so that is not an option after all.

Edited by calmoriah
ERayR Grand Master

ERayR

Posted
Posted

I don't think it is a bad idea to check rumours. I think it is important to make it clear you see it as a rumour and don't accept its claims but are looking for evidence for or against it. And sometimes it takes specialised knowledge to know where and what to ask so I don't see a problem with asking for help if you don't know how to find it yourself.

I see Jeanne's request as reasonable, but without more info very hard to track down to refute or verify, IMO so it would be most helpful for her to get more details (and in fact I think we should treat all rumours that way...require those claiming the rumour is valid to give as much detail to support it as possible, etc.)

The JFS rumour repeat was problematic because in asking where the money came from, it was demonstrating an acceptance of the rumour as fact without substantiation.

I believe counties usually have searchable databases for property owners, but unless you want to search all the counties in Hawaii, you need a bit more info to start.

Add-on: as far as I can tell, the county of Hawaii does not have a search by owner function so that is not an option after all.

 

If she had ask if the rumor could be verified it would have been a simple inquiry.  She presented it as if true and that the money had come by way of Church accounts by improper methods.

 

I have no problem with serious inquiry.

1
Calm Grand Master

Calm

Posted
Posted

I assumed that "clarification" meant "verification" so I did not read it as her assuming it was true at all nor did i get any implication that it came from improper channels though i did with the comment about JFS. Funny how differently we each read the same remarks. :)

1
Raingirl Veteran

Raingirl

Posted
Posted

Ouch...I really wasn't out to spread a rumor.  But and however, if I don't ask you guys who may really know, how will i know.

This, by the way, is my legwork.  You guys  are mean..sorry.

The way not to spread a rumor is...to not spread it. It's easy. Easier than spreading it, even.

Why did you assume people here would really know? Why would a random Mormon know about the real-estate holdings of someone else?

The way you would know whether someone owns a piece of real estate is not by asking the question of random strangers on the internet. But I guess nowadays people can't be bothered with actually researching something themselves. They'd rather throw out a post somewhere asking others to find the answer for them.

What does it matter if President Monson owns real estate in Hawaii? Is your objection that he owns real estate? Or that it might be in Hawaii? How is that relevant to your life or any of your business?

Raingirl Veteran

Raingirl

Posted
Posted

Strange how this discussion board thingy works.  Should posters only be allowed to make statements, after all what question can't be answered with a little legwork?

What logic is there in asking people here about the real estate holdings of someone else? If someone had posted 'yes' then do we accept that as a fact? Somebody posted it on the internet so it must be true!

If someone has a need to know about some stranger's real estate holdings, there are reliable ways to find that out. I would also mention discretion, but that is obviously meaningless to some here.

If someone is legitimately not interested in spreading rumors, the don't start a conversation with saying....hey, I heard a rumor and here it is.

What difference does it make if President Monson owns real estate? Is that against some law?

1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...