rockpond Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 1 hour ago, Garden Girl said: Am I mistaken, or isn't Quinn a vocal critic of the Church, and if so, as such I would expect his book to present the Church from his particular critical view... right up your alley... GG Quinn is not a critic. He is a believer and a historian. 1
rockpond Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 7 minutes ago, Rain said: When visiting the sort center on welfare square I found the church needs to be very careful where they pour in money. Early on they just gave a bunch of things to the poorest countries, but found they were having bad effects on the economy. This changed a lot of the way they do things. For example, instead of sending in a bunch of new clothes to give to people they take the clothes that are not in the best of conditions from Deseret Industries and sell them inexpensively to the "rag sellers" who then sell them to people who want to wear them. Overall they started to see boosts in local economies when they did this instead of before where they hurt the local economy. I'm sure the church can do better with money sometimes, but when I find out things like this I realize that often finances with the church are a lot more complicated than most would imagine. I never would have guessed that giving clothes outright would hurt some places. So I don't know Salt Lake was picked over other places. I can guess, but it would only be a guess because I have not a single fact to back up my guesses. I'm confident that the Church has the intellectual resources to effectively invest in and support third-world economies.
strappinglad Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 One must tread very carefully in some ( many ) third world countries. Corruption is rampant ( even worse than the US ) . The Church has partnered with world renowned charitable organizations in order to be as effect in giving as possible. From personal experience I know that food stuffs given from the US and clearly marked " not for resale" in several languages , were openly sold in markets in Central America. Much of the food sent to poor countries spoils on the docks because of corrupt officials and militant blockades. To be as wise as foxes and harmless as doves we need to give things that are difficult to steal or destroy , like education , and water wells etc. Critics would have the Church give out fishes to all those in need. True help is the old ' teach fishing ' platitude. Trouble is , such takes time and doesn't make for quick and sexy photo ops. 3
Calm Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 I know of one project where clothes and other things were given on a regular basis by a charity to a Russian orphanage and the local mafia got involved because of the easy money. Orphanage ended up worse than before. You have to be very careful to not upset the local economic balance as it can invite corruption, abandonment of good, stable industry for a quick buck that then disappears after the money is gone, leaving them without the previous stability, and probably a dozen or more other things that can go wrong. I know in some places charities now give money to start small businesses to the women, not the men because the men don't stick with it, but the women do...it is just the culture. The men are helped as the businesses grow and the families become more stable, their kids get educated, and slowly the culture changes. Trying to change a culture overnight just destroys the community. 4
Garden Girl Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 1 hour ago, rockpond said: Quinn is not a critic. He is a believer and a historian. Hello rockpond... Perhaps I have him mixed up with someone else... I thought he was a serious critic... GG
Bernard Gui Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 Someplace it's declared in the scriptures that honest and wise investment, business, and trade practices are evil. At least that seems to be the assumption here. The money invested in City Creek....has it been flushed down the tubes or is it returning a profit that can be used now and in the future for other purposes?
Bernard Gui Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 1 hour ago, Calm said: I know of one project where clothes and other things were given on a regular basis by a charity to a Russian orphanage and the local mafia got involved because of the easy money. Orphanage ended up worse than before. You have to be very careful to not upset the local economic balance as it can invite corruption, abandonment of good, stable industry for a quick buck that then disappears after the money is gone, leaving them without the previous stability, and probably a dozen or more other things that can go wrong. I know in some places charities now give money to start small businesses to the women, not the men because the men don't stick with it, but the women do...it is just the culture. The men are helped as the businesses grow and the families become more stable, their kids get educated, and slowly the culture changes. Trying to change a culture overnight just destroys the community. A close friend who works for the Church in helping with micro-loans to people in poor countries and the Perpetual Education Fund. Those things help a poor area far more than big building schemes and give-always. 3
Calm Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Garden Girl said: Hello rockpond... Perhaps I have him mixed up with someone else... I thought he was a serious critic... GG He has done some good work, but imo his reputation took quite a blow when he wrote Same Sex Dynamics. His personal agenda appears to have overcome his critical abilities in my view in that text. Some feel the need to doublecheck his sources, but you really should do that for every one. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._Michael_Quinn. "In September 26, 1993, Quinn was excommunicated from the LDS Church as one of the September Six. Quinn had been summoned to a disciplinary council to answer charges of "conduct unbecoming a member of the Church and apostasy", including "'very sensitive and highly confidential' matters that were not related to Michael's historical writings".[5] Lavina Fielding Anderson has suggested that the "allusion to Michael's sexual orientation, which Michael had not yet made public, was unmistakable."[5] Quinn did not attend the disciplinary council that resulted in his excommunication. Quinn has since published several critical studies of Mormon hierarchy, including his two-volume work of The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power and The Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power. He also authored the 1996 book Same-Sex Dynamics Among Nineteenth-Century Americans: A Mormon Example, which argues that homosexuality was not uncommon among early Mormons, and was not seen as a serious sin or transgression. Despite his excommunication and critical writings, Quinn still considers himself to be a Latter-day Saint[5] and believes in Mormonism, although he is in disagreement with certain policies and doctrines.[6][7] Quinn's research topics, both before and after his excommunication, were in-depth revisions of traditional accounts of Mormon history grounded in primary source material. Three of his most influential books, each of which is the focal point of intense controversy, are Early Mormonism and the Magic World View, The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power, and The Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power." Edited March 19, 2017 by Calm 2
rockpond Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 6 hours ago, strappinglad said: One must tread very carefully in some ( many ) third world countries. Corruption is rampant ( even worse than the US ) . The Church has partnered with world renowned charitable organizations in order to be as effect in giving as possible. From personal experience I know that food stuffs given from the US and clearly marked " not for resale" in several languages , were openly sold in markets in Central America. Much of the food sent to poor countries spoils on the docks because of corrupt officials and militant blockades. To be as wise as foxes and harmless as doves we need to give things that are difficult to steal or destroy , like education , and water wells etc. Critics would have the Church give out fishes to all those in need. True help is the old ' teach fishing ' platitude. Trouble is , such takes time and doesn't make for quick and sexy photo ops. Which "critics" just want the church to "give out fishes to all those in need". This is a strawman.
rockpond Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 6 hours ago, Calm said: I know of one project where clothes and other things were given on a regular basis by a charity to a Russian orphanage and the local mafia got involved because of the easy money. Orphanage ended up worse than before. You have to be very careful to not upset the local economic balance as it can invite corruption, abandonment of good, stable industry for a quick buck that then disappears after the money is gone, leaving them without the previous stability, and probably a dozen or more other things that can go wrong. I know in some places charities now give money to start small businesses to the women, not the men because the men don't stick with it, but the women do...it is just the culture. The men are helped as the businesses grow and the families become more stable, their kids get educated, and slowly the culture changes. Trying to change a culture overnight just destroys the community. Investing in people to start small businesses is a wonderful way to help.
rockpond Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 6 hours ago, Garden Girl said: Hello rockpond... Perhaps I have him mixed up with someone else... I thought he was a serious critic... GG Nope. He was excommunicated but he is still very much a believer who loves the restored gospel. 1
rockpond Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 5 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Someplace it's declared in the scriptures that honest and wise investment, business, and trade practices are evil. At least that seems to be the assumption here. The money invested in City Creek....has it been flushed down the tubes or is it returning a profit that can be used now and in the future for other purposes? Would be nice to know but our leaders won't share that info with us.
rockpond Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 4 hours ago, Calm said: He has done some good work, but imo his reputation took quite a blow when he wrote Same Sex Dynamics. His personal agenda appears to have overcome his critical abilities in my view in that text. Some feel the need to doublecheck his sources, but you really should do that for every one. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._Michael_Quinn. "In September 26, 1993, Quinn was excommunicated from the LDS Church as one of the September Six. Quinn had been summoned to a disciplinary council to answer charges of "conduct unbecoming a member of the Church and apostasy", including "'very sensitive and highly confidential' matters that were not related to Michael's historical writings".[5] Lavina Fielding Anderson has suggested that the "allusion to Michael's sexual orientation, which Michael had not yet made public, was unmistakable."[5] Quinn did not attend the disciplinary council that resulted in his excommunication. Quinn has since published several critical studies of Mormon hierarchy, including his two-volume work of The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power and The Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power. He also authored the 1996 book Same-Sex Dynamics Among Nineteenth-Century Americans: A Mormon Example, which argues that homosexuality was not uncommon among early Mormons, and was not seen as a serious sin or transgression. Despite his excommunication and critical writings, Quinn still considers himself to be a Latter-day Saint[5] and believes in Mormonism, although he is in disagreement with certain policies and doctrines.[6][7] Quinn's research topics, both before and after his excommunication, were in-depth revisions of traditional accounts of Mormon history grounded in primary source material. Three of his most influential books, each of which is the focal point of intense controversy, are Early Mormonism and the Magic World View, The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power, and The Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power." Thanks for posting that.
BlueDreams Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 7 hours ago, Calm said: I know of one project where clothes and other things were given on a regular basis by a charity to a Russian orphanage and the local mafia got involved because of the easy money. Orphanage ended up worse than before. You have to be very careful to not upset the local economic balance as it can invite corruption, abandonment of good, stable industry for a quick buck that then disappears after the money is gone, leaving them without the previous stability, and probably a dozen or more other things that can go wrong. I know in some places charities now give money to start small businesses to the women, not the men because the men don't stick with it, but the women do...it is just the culture. The men are helped as the businesses grow and the families become more stable, their kids get educated, and slowly the culture changes. Trying to change a culture overnight just destroys the community. so true...and Even THAT can have complicated results. In areas that are highly patriarchal it can increase domestic violence in households where men feel threatened by their wife's economic success. So though results have been good, they are still not the fix-all. I think the idea that there is a simple solution to other parts of the world's economic prOblems is very short sighted and shows a lack of knowledge in the area of international development. Some of the responses that I see here indicate that lack of knowledge to me. Economic and social development need to at least be in part organic. When it doesn't happen in a way that fits the area, the people, and their respective cultural values, there is often unexpected and harmful consequences. With luv, BD 1
rockpond Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 26 minutes ago, BlueDreams said: so true...and Even THAT can have complicated results. In areas that are highly patriarchal it can increase domestic violence in households where men feel threatened by their wife's economic success. So though results have been good, they are still not the fix-all. I think the idea that there is a simple solution to other parts of the world's economic prOblems is very short sighted and shows a lack of knowledge in the area of international development. Some of the responses that I see here indicate that lack of knowledge to me. Economic and social development need to at least be in part organic. When it doesn't happen in a way that fits the area, the people, and their respective cultural values, there is often unexpected and harmful consequences. With luv, BD Has anyone here suggested that there is a simple solution to third-world economic problems? Again, I'm calling strawman on this line of dialogue. Wishing that the church would have done something different with the billions of dollars that were put into City Creek (and other similar but smaller developments) is not the same as suggesting that there are simple solutions to global economic woes nor that we should just give fishes rather than teaching to fish. City Creek Center demonstrates that the Church has the capacity to tackle incredibly complex projects. 1
BlueDreams Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 (edited) On 3/17/2017 at 11:28 AM, Tacenda said: First point, disagree that it created many jobs which help the poor. What does that really mean? Second point, I'd like to see projects, but not a mall. I live in Utah, I have been to the mall, all I see is materialism. I see the opposite of what the church has taught all my life. I remember talks about not idolizing things. I see a mall with a stream running through it with gold fish. I see many stores that only the rich could afford to shop in. My MIL is a great believer in not idolizing things, she has always been a minimalist and she gives to the church 100%. I think it's a slap in the face to what she tries to do. What about former presidents of the church that instruct members to pay off their debts, and then this current leadership, saying "let's go shopping!", such sad irony. I'm more of a minimalist who gives to the church. I have plenty of things, but half of them are from travel, paintings, or have significant value to me or utility. My dream home is a very small home that would fit exactly what I need and nothing more. Oh, and with garden space. It only grows in my head if/when I have a family. I say that to also say I have no problem with the city creek mall. It didn't make a ton of sense when they built it, but it does to me now. I went there just last weekend for a conference. I mostly window shop as well, but I tend to eat there. The area is bustling, the mall was filled with people who were a mix of visitors, local non-Mormon salt lake folks, and Mormons, both local and not. That fish creek and its water area seems to be a common hub for kids to play safely. The people who served me up my food were super young and my guess not rolling in it money wise. The down town area is generally inviting and a part of that credit goes to the city creek mall. Because of the unique dynamics of tourism to salt lake, that inviting ambiance, keeps economic development going. That development is not contained by the rich and Mormon of SLC. But I'm not a local of SLC and spend most of my time in UT county. The church knows the area well, they saw a potential economic niche (higher end good v medium or lower end that have a number of neighboring malls/shops that fit this) to be filled to help the area. And they did so. It acted as an economic boon to an area that would have likely suffered harder from the recession. I'm ok with it because I know it's not the church's sole project or move in the world. It's not a one or the other type of deal. If it were I would have a problem with it. On 3/17/2017 at 11:16 AM, MormonVideoGame said: In our opinion: City Creek Center visionaries and developers deserve a round of applause By Deseret News editorial board I think the mall was a good idea because it helped the economy, and created many jobs which help the poor. Will the church ever fund similar projects in poor countries like Mexico, Brazil, Ghana? or at least in poor USA cities like Detroit, Michigan. Fresno, California. El Paso, Texas. Flint, Michigan. Memphis, Tennessee? As pointed out, philly has a smaller scale project similar to city creek. In some areas, such as poor countries, this may not be a good idea and would end up hurting the economy or exacerbating disparities. Take Brazil for instance. When the olympics came around it was used as a tool to remove poorer communities, displacing people and cutting off poor areas further from more economically developed/wealthy areas. And Brazil is a relatively wealthier economy that is growing. Yet the means to do so can have negative effects to more vulnerable populations, which I feel the church tries hard to minimize. In areas where the economic system and overall situation is different, a mall like city creek may not be economically unsound, but a hindrance to more equitable development. In some poor regions, it would just be stupid. If you're growing faster than the area can actually afford you can create a project that cannot be really maintained. What would be the point of a huge mall in the middle of rural Uganda or an area more concerned about basic education and subsistence? It would, at best, remain relatively empty and become a financial deficit. In some countries, like china, they're currently riding an economic bubble where whole cities are basically empty because the development of high end property is more expensive then most Chinese can afford. The church, as flagrant as this may seem to many, builds and works in areas very very cautiously. This is done to not hurt the local growth, to not offend or overstep local/national municipalities, not unintentionally bolster corruption in areas where it's fairly rampant, and to be able to create projects that continue to grow and allow for the economic capacity to continue to afford other projects. Could money be better spent? Of course! They're human and we can always do a little better. But they're not doing a bad job with it IMHO. With luv, BD Edited March 19, 2017 by BlueDreams 2
rockpond Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 4 minutes ago, BlueDreams said: I'm ok with it because I know it's not the church's sole project or move in the world. Yes, the church has many projects and does much good in the world. I think that City Creek gets a lot of attention because of the size of the investment. The money put into City Creek was more than the entire $1.2b that the church put into humanitarian aid over a 25 year period. Pretty substantial. 1
Rain Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 22 minutes ago, rockpond said: Has anyone here suggested that there is a simple solution to third-world economic problems? Again, I'm calling strawman on this line of dialogue. Wishing that the church would have done something different with the billions of dollars that were put into City Creek (and other similar but smaller developments) is not the same as suggesting that there are simple solutions to global economic woes nor that we should just give fishes rather than teaching to fish. City Creek Center demonstrates that the Church has the capacity to tackle incredibly complex projects. I started down that line because the OP asked about the church doing this in other areas and you said you would like to see the money put in other areas. I, poorly, was showing that the church IS helping in other countries, but just because we don't see it then we shouldn't assume it isn't being done and because if things are not that simple with the poor areas maybe they are not as simple with city creek being there only to make the church richer. 1
BlueDreams Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 44 minutes ago, rockpond said: Has anyone here suggested that there is a simple solution to third-world economic problems? Again, I'm calling strawman on this line of dialogue. Wishing that the church would have done something different with the billions of dollars that were put into City Creek (and other similar but smaller developments) is not the same as suggesting that there are simple solutions to global economic woes nor that we should just give fishes rather than teaching to fish. City Creek Center demonstrates that the Church has the capacity to tackle incredibly complex projects. With all due respect, there are several comments on here that to me are often over-simplified or over-generalized in both the suggestions of where they could spend more money or where they could have better spent money or in the assumptions about working with third-world economic problems. To be fair, there are some in defense that also come off over simplified and overgeneralized. That includes the first post that suggested why couldn’t we also build a mall, or something like it, in Ghana. I find the criticism as oversimplified and at points hyperbolic such as in this comment in this thread: Quote Because President Trump hasn't talked about jobs or creating jobs once over the last six months, right? I didn't realize a church's focus should be on economic development/jobs/malls. The church, IMO, sounds more like a corporation in this case because of its focus on jobs and economic development. I guess at the end of the day, $ is the priority for some... And whether you meant to or not this comment does sound oversimplified to me: Quote I'm confident that the Church has the intellectual resources to effectively invest in and support third-world economies. I studied international development for my minor. It’s not my career and it doesn’t necessarily make me an expert, but to assume that any entity on earth had the intellectual resources to effectively invest in and support third-world economies seems a stretch. Or an oversimplification. I am not suggesting that people are saying here that we should give fishes rather than teaching to fish. That would be a strawman on your part . I do feel that some of the criticism is treating economic development and humanitarian work as a zero-sum game where because the church invested big in one project that they’re not a fan of (and then oversimplify or inject potential reasons for it that cut out any “noble” purposes) it’s short changing other areas. Or that it’s not equitable because it’s UT and they won’t reproduce similar results in other areas…when there are fairly valid reasons that I can think of from the top of my head as to why they don’t (and shouldn’t) do such. With luv, BD 2
BlueDreams Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 (edited) 45 minutes ago, rockpond said: Yes, the church has many projects and does much good in the world. I think that City Creek gets a lot of attention because of the size of the investment. The money put into City Creek was more than the entire $1.2b that the church put into humanitarian aid over a 25 year period. Pretty substantial. Yes it is, and I actually think there's some fairly good reasons for that. The church is very careful with the money and in humanitarian efforts more money isn't absolutely needed, but sustainable systems that can support aid given...ironically these systems may be cheaper in and of themselves because they focus on local and established groups/systems to funnel the work and more organic methods to implimentation. Plus the projects outside of developed nations are inherently going to be cheaper because the american dollar goes further in these regions. What I see is the church trying to use sustainable methods to apply aid. Doing so also means that they can have a longer impact in aid and a staying power in the region. At least that's what I see with the projects I've seen. But breakfast and potting flowers call....so I'm out for the bit With luv, BD Edited March 19, 2017 by BlueDreams 2
Jeanne Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 12 hours ago, Garden Girl said: Yes, but according to Teancum there is a smaller open mall nearby, so there is obviously a choice for those who don't feel they can/want to shop at City Center... where I live, we have the outlet style mall which is popular with such stores as Old Navy, the Gap, Eddie Bauer, etc... all selling the same style/quality of merchandise,,, with their particular brand name emblazoned on it... I was so frustrated the other day when I went into Old Navy, I asked the clerk if they possibly had just a plain tee shirt without their ridiculous logo all over it. They had only one in black, gray or navy... I bought 2 navy tees of mediocre quality but at least they didn't have a logo on them... If I want a choice of something of higher quality or style, I have to drive 65 miles to Salem where they have some boutiques, or a Nordstrom. GG I get you on this.I can find a nice T-shirt..right size...right color...then look at the front...and there is Donald Duck or something... 1
Tacenda Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 24 minutes ago, BlueDreams said: Yes it is, and I actually think there's some fairly good reasons for that. The church is very careful with the money and in humanitarian efforts more money isn't absolutely needed, but sustainable systems that can support aid given...ironically these systems may be cheaper in and of themselves because they focus on local and established groups/systems to funnel the work and more organic methods to implimentation. Plus the projects outside of developed nations are inherently going to be cheaper because the american dollar goes further in these regions. What I see is the church trying to use sustainable methods to apply aid. Doing so also means that they can have a longer impact in aid and a staying power in the region. At least that's what I see with the projects I've seen. But breakfast and potting flowers call....so I'm out for the bit With luv, BD Just think of the cleft palate surgeries, eye cures, substantially better wheel chairs, clean water (even in our country such as Flint, Michigan, good missionary tool) that can happen in third world countries.... too many to list, vs. this mall. Which in a few years may not be needed after all, since malls are becoming less and less a thing. 1
strappinglad Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 I know its new fangled , Garden Girl , but ebay and amazon are your friend. I typed in T shirts plain and got 17000 hits. They deliver to your door.
Tacenda Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 9 minutes ago, strappinglad said: I know its new fangled , Garden Girl , but ebay and amazon are your friend. I typed in T shirts plain and got 17000 hits. They deliver to your door. GG, if you don't have Amazon, you can become a member for I think $99.00 a year and get most purchases shipped for free. And free movies, etc. if it's under Prime.
Jeanne Posted March 19, 2017 Posted March 19, 2017 Just now, Tacenda said: GG, if you don't have Amazon, you can become a member for I think $99.00 a year and get most purchases shipped for free. And free movies, etc. if it's under Prime. Wow....I didn't know this.
Recommended Posts