Popular Post pogi Posted August 16, 2018 Popular Post Posted August 16, 2018 (edited) 11 hours ago, Exiled said: As to who benefited, I think the church did in that it avoided a protracted public legal battle with one of its companies. To call a $600,000,000 loss a "benefit" is a bit of a stretch. Either way, there is nothing nefarious about that. To me, it seems rather integrous that the church would take a major financial hit to avoid default of one of its businesses - thus protecting the tax payer and the employees of the company in a time of financial trouble. At first you claimed that the bail out occurred because "G.A. life insurance policies were at stake." But now you seem to be grasping at straws here, trying to find anything at all that might be used as potential ammo against the church (at least, that is how it appears). It seems clear to me that the church followed principles of financial responsibility and integrity by shouldering the loss. Edited August 16, 2018 by pogi 8
Exiled Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 14 minutes ago, pogi said: To call a $600,000,000 loss a "benefit" is a bit of a stretch. Either way, there is nothing nefarious about that. To me, it seems rather integrous that the church would take a major financial hit to avoid default of one of its businesses - thus protecting the tax payer and the employees of the company in a time of financial trouble. At first you claimed that the bail out occurred because "G.A. life insurance policies were at stake." But now you seem to be grasping at straws here, trying to find anything at all that might be used as potential ammo against the church (at least, that is how it appears). It seems clear to me that the church followed principles of financial responsibility and integrity by shouldering the loss. I have information about the G.A. policies from a reliable source but cannot go further on that. It is too sacred to tell? So, take it for what you like. It didn't happen. I withdraw the assertion as I cannot name names. Even though the church life insurance company ..... well, I must be grasping at straws because that may reflect negatively on something.
pogi Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 (edited) 56 minutes ago, Exiled said: I have information about the G.A. policies from a reliable source but cannot go further on that. If you are still arguing that the bail out happened to protect the life insurance policies of the GAs, it seems to me that $600 million would more than cover all G.A. life insurance policies. So, why would they need to save the company? To claim that the church would pay out more money than the policies themselves were worth, in order to protect the policies, doesn't seem to hold water. There had to be other reasons. The church could have assumed the policies (paying them out of their own pocket) and been financially better off. Edited August 16, 2018 by pogi 2
Tacenda Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 10 minutes ago, pogi said: It seems to me that $600 million would more than cover all G.A. life insurance policies. So, to claim that the church would pay out more money than the policies themselves were worth, in order to protect the policies, doesn't seem to hold water. There had to be other reasons. The church could have assumed the policies (paying them out of their own pocket) and been financially better off. A neighbor from about 1996 - 2000 worked or may still work there. I remember reading something about all of this, also had a good friend that worked there but she passed away several years ago. I could ask this former neighbor, but he might not want to tell me anything, he's pretty high up.
pogi Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, Tacenda said: A neighbor from about 1996 - 2000 worked or may still work there. I remember reading something about all of this, also had a good friend that worked there but she passed away several years ago. I could ask this former neighbor, but he might not want to tell me anything, he's pretty high up. I am a little confused, what would you ask your neighbor exactly? The reason for the bail out? Go for it, it wouldn't hurt to ask. I feel fairly confident that the church would not pay $600 million to save life insurance policies that are most likely worth much less. 1
Stargazer Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 (edited) Nevermind Edited August 16, 2018 by Stargazer
Amulek Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 2 hours ago, Exiled said: I'm sure there were potential lawsuits that drove this as well. But we will never know. So, move on. What kind of "potential lawsuits" are you talking about?
pogi Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 And what would the critics be saying if the church let the business fail even when they had the resources to bail it out, leaving the burden to the public and employees who lost their jobs? They would be singing it's praises, right? 3
Amulek Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Exiled said: I have information about the G.A. policies from a reliable source but cannot go further on that. It is too sacred to tell? So, take it for what you like. Now we're getting somewhere. How much do you believe the GA's were insured for (per person): $250K, $500K, $1m, etc.?
Amulek Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 1 minute ago, pogi said: And what would the critics be saying if the church let the business fail even when they had the resources to bail it out, leaving the burden to the public and employees who lost their jobs? They would be singing it's praises, right? In a recession...while they were in the middle of building a billion dollar shopping mall (that critics were already griping about)...yeah, nobody would have complained about that. 2
pogi Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, Amulek said: In a recession...while they were in the middle of building a billion dollar shopping mall (that critics were already griping about)...yeah, nobody would have complained about that. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, it seems. Nothing new. 2
Tacenda Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 24 minutes ago, pogi said: I am a little confused, what would you ask your neighbor exactly? The reason for the bail out? Go for it, it wouldn't hurt to ask. I feel fairly confident that the church would not pay $600 million to save life insurance policies that are most likely worth much less. I said could, but don't want to, haha.
Exiled Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 2 hours ago, pogi said: And what would the critics be saying if the church let the business fail even when they had the resources to bail it out, leaving the burden to the public and employees who lost their jobs? They would be singing it's praises, right? I don't think altruism was the motive for the bailout or the main motive if at all. The church gives about $40 mil per year to charity causes and likes to count the free labor of its members when reporting these numbers (please let me know if Im wrong here). But the charity it does never is $600mil and not at one time as with the bailout. Has the church ever written a $600mil check at once for charity?
pogi Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 (edited) 53 minutes ago, Exiled said: I don't think altruism was the motive for the bailout or the main motive if at all. The church gives about $40 mil per year to charity causes and likes to count the free labor of its members when reporting these numbers (please let me know if Im wrong here). But the charity it does never is $600mil and not at one time as with the bailout. Has the church ever written a $600mil check at once for charity? Again, I think it has more to do with following principles of financial responsibility and integrity, rather than a charity. It was their business after all. Either way, to argue that they sunk 600 mil to save the life insurance policies of the GA's simply doesn't make sense. Edited August 16, 2018 by pogi 4
USU78 Posted August 16, 2018 Posted August 16, 2018 24 minutes ago, pogi said: Again, I think it has more to do with following principles of financial responsibility and integrity, rather than a charity. It was their business after all. Either way, to argue that they sunk 600 mil to save the life insurance policies of the GA's simply doesn't make sense. There you go. Insurance companies, in order not to be turned over to a receiver and have their managers jailed, must maintain a ratio of assets to liabilities. Policies are liabilities. If present assets lose value for whatever reason, they must be replenished somehow by someone. The Church is that someone for Benny Life. 1
Popular Post strappinglad Posted August 17, 2018 Popular Post Posted August 17, 2018 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little information, As They Suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise outrage 8
sunstoned Posted August 17, 2018 Posted August 17, 2018 Why are we arguing about this. 600 million is chump change to an organization that has 32 billion in the stock market.
Kenngo1969 Posted August 17, 2018 Posted August 17, 2018 23 hours ago, Exiled said: I think your CFR is misplaced. It was obvious garbage that the company invested in because it took the company down. Post hoc, ergo, propter hoc. 3
Duncan Posted August 17, 2018 Posted August 17, 2018 11 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said: Post hoc, ergo, propter hoc. that's from the Big Bang theory!!! when Sheldon came home from the Arctic! 1
Recommended Posts