Massive wealth of the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints

[Teancum]

On 7/13/2021 at 1:34 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

 

It matters not one whit to me how much the Church has in its coffers. The Church could have a hundred times that much and my attitude would be the same. I contribute because I love God and I want to be an instrument in His hands to bless His children. 

Scott

 

FYI I removed my snarky comment to this post of your. It was rude and out of line.  I apologize.

[Meadowchik]

On 7/13/2021 at 1:49 PM, 2BizE said:

 Isn’t there an expectation that there will be a return on investment for your tithing donation? 

Valid questions. It's not just giving for obedience's sake, but for righteousness. The receivers of the donation have an obligation to use it for righteousness.

[Scott Lloyd]

On 7/13/2021 at 12:49 PM, 2BizE said:

Very serious.  Isn’t there an expectation that there will be a return on investment for your tithing donation?  I think there is.  I think that if I am paying 10% of my income, the church can mange these menial tasks, so I can apply my efforts to important aspects of building Zion….not cleaning Zion.

 

On 7/19/2021 at 4:26 PM, Meadowchik said:

Valid questions. It's not just giving for obedience's sake, but for righteousness. The receivers of the donation have an obligation to use it for righteousness.

By “return on investment,” I thought 2BizE was referring to a personal return on his/her individual “investment.” Was I wrong in my understanding? If so, then others here apparently were as well. 
 

And doesn’t the “obligation to use it for righteousness” go without saying? It’s not self evident that the proceeds from tithing are NOT being used by the Church of Jesus Christ for righteousness. 

Edited July 21, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[Warlock]

On 7/20/2021 at 1:47 AM, Scott Lloyd said:

 

By “return on investment,” I thought 2BizE was referring to a personal return on his/her individual “investment.” Was I wrong in my understanding? If so, then others here apparently were as well. 
 

And doesn’t the “obligation to use it for righteousness” go without saying? It’s not self evident that the proceeds from tithing are NOT being used by the Church of Jesus Christ for righteousness. 

Correct

[secondclasscitizen]

On 7/19/2021 at 10:47 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

 

 

And doesn’t the “obligation to use it for righteousness” go without saying? It’s not self evident that the proceeds from tithing are NOT being used by the Church of Jesus Christ for righteousness. 

According to ensign peak, the only two disbursements from that fund (profit from invested tithing surplus) were to finance a $1.5bn mall and $600mm to bail out a failing insurance company which was insured by a Utah govt insurance policy similar to fdic. 
 

How is this a righteous use of tithing proceeds?

the secrecy of these two transaction tells me it’s not what the 15 feel would be publicly acceptable.

Edited July 23, 2021 by secondclasscitizen

[Scott Lloyd]

11 hours ago, secondclasscitizen said:

According to ensign peak, the only two disbursements from that fund (profit from invested tithing surplus) were to finance a $1.5bn mall and $600mm to bail out a failing insurance company which was insured by a Utah govt insurance policy similar to fdic. 
 

How is this a righteous use of tithing proceeds?

the secrecy of these two transaction tells me it’s not what the 15 feel would be publicly acceptable.

To say that Beneficial Life was “bailed out” is misleading. 
 

Like many other institutions, the company fell on hard times during the recession late in the first decade of this century. At that time, the company ceased to issue any new policies. So it has been slowly going out of business since then. It will cease to exist when the last extant policy has  been paid out or expires, probably well within your lifetime.  
 

Meanwhile, the infusion of funds has allowed the company to make good on its obligations to widows and orphans without foisting the obligation off on the state of Utah and its taxpayers. Seems pretty righteous to me. 
 

City Creek was constructed to preserve the environs around the Church’s sacred spaces from the urban blight that was besetting downtown Salt Lake City. Presumably, it has turned a profit by now and been able to compensate the capital used for it. 
 

So yes, I’m quite comfortable that both of these uses of funds are well within the confines of righteousness. Thank you for asking. 

Edited July 24, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[secondclasscitizen]

7 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

To say that Beneficial Life was “bailed out” is misleading. 
 

Like many other institutions, the company fell on hard times during the recession late in the first decade of this century. At that time, the company ceased to issue any new policies. So it has been slowly going out of business since then. It will cease to exist when the last existing policy has  been paid out or expires, probably well within your lifetime.  
 

Meanwhile, the infusion of funds has allowed the company to make good on its obligations to widows and orphans without foisting the obligation off on the state of Utah and its taxpayers. Seems pretty righteous to me. 
 

City Creek was constructed to preserve the environs around the Church’s sacred spaces from the urban blight that was besetting downtown Salt Lake City. Presumably, it has turned a profit by now and been able to compensate the capital used for it. 
 

So yes, I’m quite comfortable that both of these uses of funds are well within the confines of righteousness. Thank you for asking. 

Bailout is not misleading.. the church admitted it:

• Latter-day Saint officials acknowledged that it used Ensign funds to underwrite construction of City Creek Center mall in downtown Salt Lake City and rescue Beneficial Life, a church-owned insurance company, but said there was nothing illegal in that.
 

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2020/02/08/lds-church-kept-lid-its-b/

A for profit business selling annuities and rip-off whole life policies with crazy guaranteed returns always deserves to go under when the underlying investments fail. Failure to do due diligence and examine the underlying composition of the bonds all these companies use to promise guaranteed returns is just more evidence our leaders lack inspiration. Michael burry figured it out because he bothered to look at what the bonds were built with. Too bad the church doesn’t have anyone smart enough or even inspired enough to figure it out. 
 

I think the super secret bailout with tithing was to make sure the members didn’t lose faith in their leaders for not being able to deliver on promises.   Pres monson was in many ads for beneficial life. Would be a shame if the prophet’s pet company went belly up. It was all about optics, not aversion to falling back on an insurance function of the Utah guarantee. I mean the church policy directs its own members to go to the government for aid before going to the church. 

Another article… mortgage backed security heavy portfolio

https://www.deseret.com/2009/6/16/20323863/beneficial-financial-group-cuts-150-of-its-214-utah-jobs

Edited July 23, 2021 by secondclasscitizen
Added another link

[Calm]

1 hour ago, secondclasscitizen said:

Bailout

A rescue may or may not be a bailout, depending of what is being rescued…a bailout is with the intent to save a business from collapse, failure, closing its doors.  They did not try and save the business, but instead intended to save its customers by allowing the business to intelligently shutdown, fulfilling their contracts rather than go bankrupt and defaulting.  The company is not trying to recover…or even make a profit, I am guessing.  It would be like a construction company getting help to finish off half finished construction projects, but closing the doors otherwise.

Quote

always deserves to go under

And that is what is going to happen.

Where has Michael Burry had anything to do with Beneficial Life?  Was that just a random comment?

Edited July 24, 2021 by Calm

[Calm]

From the Deseret link confirming cessation of business except for prior commitments:

Quote

Parent company Deseret Management Corp. said in a news release that the reason for the decision to pull out of the insurance business, and the resulting job cuts, was Beneficial's "relatively small size putting it at a competitive disadvantage compared to larger insurers." Beneficial's employees were told of the decision Tuesday morning.

"Beneficial is and will remain well capitalized and fully able to meet its obligations to current policyholders," said Mark Willes, Deseret Management's president and chief executive officer. "However, like virtually all life insurers, Beneficial has been impacted by the financial-market meltdown.

"When you combine our lack of scale with the economic impact of the market meltdown, it becomes clear that the limited economic opportunity does not justify the risk of potential future losses."

Kent Cannon, Beneficial's chief executive officer, told the Deseret News that the company would continue to serve its existing policyholders and "do right by our employees and agents, many of whom have ties with Beneficial going back generations."

Quote

mean the church policy directs its own members to go to the government for aid before going to the church. 

Do you think members should just view taxes as donations or is it allowed for them to benefit from supporting those programs through their taxes?  Do we give up our right to government aid just because we donate to the Church and charities?

Edited July 24, 2021 by Calm

[secondclasscitizen]

14 minutes ago, Calm said:

A rescue may or may not be a bailout, depending of what is being rescued…a bailout is with the intent to save a business from collapse, failure, closing its doors.  They did not try and save the business, but instead intended to save its customers by allowing the business to intelligently shutdown, fulfilling their contracts rather than go bankrupt and defaulting.  The company is not trying to recover…or even make a profit, I am guessing.  It would be like a construction company getting help to finish off half finished construction projects, but closing the doors otherwise.

And that is what is going to happen.

Where has Michael Burry had anything to do with Beneficial Life?

Michael burry figured out the bonds many institutions were investing in aka mortgage backed securities ( to include beneficial) were bad bonds. He shorted it while the Mormon church (and others) gambled with them to fund life insurance and annuities with them.  I just figured church leadership wouldn’t make such risky bets to promise guaranteed returns to its policy holders but I guess some discernment meters  were way out of wack. 
 

not a bailout? Lol

[secondclasscitizen]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

 

Do you think members should just view taxes as donations or is it allowed for them to benefit from supporting those programs through their taxes?  Do we give up our right to government aid just because we donate to the Church and charities?

Why should beneficial life also pay taxes and then not use the insurance guarantee benefit instead of taking tithing to get their house in order? They should have used just used the benefit.  Either way belly up. 

low income pay more in tithing than they do in taxes but they have to go everywhere else before the church will help. The church should be first. 
 

 

Edited July 24, 2021 by secondclasscitizen
On drugs I think

[Calm]

1 hour ago, secondclasscitizen said:

I just figured church leadership wouldn’t make such risky bets to promise guaranteed returns to its policy holders but I guess some discernment meters  were way out of wack. 

Church leadership is church leadership and not insurance company leadership.

One thing I appreciate about the way our faith community works is that leaders are there for support and guidance, not micromanaging.

The Lord never promised members or his Church that he would give us lottery numbers for faithfulness.  Why would he ensure employees in a for profit business owned by the Church (not ran by it) be given special revelation/inspiration to ensure the Church isn’t ever in the red.  As far as we know, Jesus only once told Peter and the others to throw the nets on the other side in what was more miracle than advice.  No word of him handing out maps to where the best fishing always was or evidence that church members or the organized church hit a jackpot weekly.  Otoh, we have lots of history showing when some church leaders tried to do business, they weren’t that great at it as well as prophets and others inspired making errors, sometimes big ones.

Edited July 24, 2021 by Calm

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Do you think members should just view taxes as donations or is it allowed for them to benefit from supporting those programs through their taxes?  Do we give up our right to government aid just because we donate to the Church and charities?

If we did, no tithe payer in the Church could ever take Social Security, which is arguably the most pervasive benefit offered by the U.S. government. 
 

And by the way, the typical Social Security recipient, over the course of time, receives far more from Social Security than he or she ever paid into it. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, secondclasscitizen said:

not a bailout? Lol

One church owned property steps in to cover the debts of another church own property while the second goes through the painful process of shutting down.  The Church management company didn’t tell them to get a bailout from the government and try to continue functioning, but stepped in to take the loss itself.  The Church owned company isn’t using the rescue money to invest in Beneficial Life to ensure it one day is going to get a return on that investment, whether in dividends to owners or taxes to the government.  They aren’t selling the company to another company to make a last kill for shareholders at the expense of employees and customers.  The rescue wasn’t for the purpose to ensure the company didn’t lose more money or to recover lost investments.  The purpose was to fulfill contracts it had made with customers. A bailout is not about helping a company shut its doors in a decent, customer focused process.

[secondclasscitizen]

32 minutes ago, Calm said:

Church leadership is church leadership and not insurance company leadership.

If so why the $600mm check? It is a church owned company therefore church leadership is the company leadership. If it has nothing to do with church leadership that check would never have been written.

[Calm]

3 hours ago, secondclasscitizen said:

If so why the $600mm check?

I never said it had nothing to do with church leadership, but company leadership is not identical to church leadership, nor the reverse.  Interchanging them misrepresents the situation.

I am not a mind reader, but my guess would be the apostles who are on the board of the management company were informed along with other board members and Ensign company leaders in Ensign company meetings that Beneficial was going under and recommendations were made by employees/leaders at Beneficial and Ensign, including not to try and keep it going for profit, which was then agreed upon by whatever level of management was required by policy.  Whether it was Beneficial, Ensign, or the apostles on the board or someone else who came up with the idea to protect Beneficial’s customers (not owners or shareholders) and employees during the shutdown, so go for a smooth landing instead of a crash, I don’t know.  Whoever it was, I am guessing Ensign’s board, including the apostles appointed to it, gave the final okay.  And this was likely reported back in meetings where apostles report on their stewardship  to the 15.

Added:  Strikethroughs rather than deletion in case some gets confused by before and after.  Scott corrected me about the hierarchy.

Edited July 24, 2021 by Calm

[secondclasscitizen]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

 Why would he ensure employees in a for profit business owned by the Church (not ran by it) be given special revelation/inspiration to ensure the Church isn’t ever in the red?

Maybe because they are using tithing money? I know it seems silly but just saying. 

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

I never said it had nothing to do with church leadership, but company leadership is not identical to church leadership, nor the reverse.  Interchanging them misrepresents the situation.

I am not a mind reader, but my guess would be the apostles who are on the board of the management company were informed along with other board members and Ensign company leaders in Ensign company meetings that Beneficial was going under and recommendations were made by employees/leaders at Beneficial and Ensign, including not to try and keep it going for profit, which was then agreed upon by whatever level of management was required by policy.  Whether it was Beneficial, Ensign, or the apostles on the board or someone else who came up with the idea to protect Beneficial’s customers (not owners or shareholders) and employees during the shutdown, so go for a smooth landing instead of a crash, I don’t know.  Whoever it was, I am guessing Ensign’s board, including the apostles appointed to it, gave the final okay.  And this was likely reported back in meetings where the apostles report on their stewardship to the 15.

Actually, apostles had ceased to serve on the boards of Church-owned businesses some years before that. 
 

What is likely to have happened is that Mark Willes, the retired executive powerhouse whom the First Presidency had brought on in those days to be CEO of Deseret Management, likely engineered the arrangement between the companies, this under close consultation with the Church leadership.  

However it was done it was a brilliant move. The Church has no need to be in the life insurance business anymore, and this allows Beneficial to come in for a smooth and safe landing rather than crashing and burning with a monetary hit to the taxpayers of Utah. 
 

 

Edited July 24, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[secondclasscitizen]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

 Whether it was Beneficial, Ensign, or the apostles on the board or someone else who came up with the idea to protect Beneficial’s customers (not owners or shareholders) and employees during the shutdown, so go for a smooth landing instead of a crash, I don’t know.  

They fired half the company so it definitely was not about protecting employees.

why would they care about the company’s customers? Oh yea cuz many gen auth to include pres monson at the time likely had a policy there. Now that makes more sense- protecting themselves with tithing money. 

Edited July 24, 2021 by secondclasscitizen

[Calm]

32 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Actually, apostles had ceased to serve on the boards of Church-owned businesses some years before that. 

Good to know.

[Calm]

24 minutes ago, secondclasscitizen said:

They fired half the company so it definitely was not about protecting employees.

They were closing down the company, you think they should be paying them for doing nothing?  The DN article iirc said they worked at getting employees other jobs.  I was saying they just didn’t have a job one day and handed a check and shown the door and that was it the next day.

Edited July 24, 2021 by Calm

[Calm]

3 hours ago, secondclasscitizen said:

why would they care about the company’s customers? Oh yea cuz many gen auth to include pres monson at the time likely had a policy there. Now that makes more sense- protecting themselves with tithing money. 

CFR they saved money by paying off all company’s customers instead of just cutting that group adrift and using other funds to cover alleged GS’ needs.  Guessing the latter choice would have cost a lot less.

PS added as my point was not understood. The implications of the above, that church leadership or the General Authorities rescued Beneficial to 1) protect themselves with 2) tithing money…my CFR to show that there would be any money saved from completely fulfilling all contacts as opposed to just find a way to deal with any GA’s contract first and then declare bankruptcy so as not to have to pay anything else…a much more practical solution if the goal was to cover GA losses….assuming there are 100 GAs and 900 other customers….which is cheaper…paying the 100 or paying 100 plus an additional 900?

Edited July 24, 2021 by Calm

[Calm]

30 minutes ago, secondclasscitizen said:

They fired half the company so it definitely was not about protecting employees.

Do you not read the articles you link to?

Quote

Willes said the Beneficial employees who are being laid off will receive generous severance packages, including outplacement assistance for up to six months, "so that you have a real chance at landing on your feet with a new job."

 

 

[Calm]

4 hours ago, secondclasscitizen said:

Maybe because they are using tithing money? I know it seems silly but just saying. 

 

So once again you are calling them liars when they state they haven’t used tithing money.  And yes, I do see a big difference between investing the tithing**** and never touching the principle, but only interest or other contributions.  My husband gets part of his salary from an endowed chair.  The principle is not to be touched***. It is not that hard of a concept to process.
 

Added:  ***”Restricted endowments have their principal held in perpetuity, while the earnings from the invested assets are expended per the donor’s specification”

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/how-do-university-endowments-work/

****Tithing has a very specific meaning in the Church, it is the amount we give to the Church as our 10%.  That is our gift. What happens next to that gift does not change that. If my $10 tithing as a kid got tossed in the garbage, I gave 10$ and the Church received it and then tossed it. Someone did something with it, but my tithing was still always $10. If the Church takes the $10 and stick it into a bank where interest of $2 is made with it, my tithing is not changed in the records to $12, but remains at $10. There the $2 cannot be said to be tithing even if it source was tithing funds.  What makes tithing tithing is someone giving it to the Church as the 10% the Lord requires. Earning interest is not creating tithing. That interest is not counted as anyone’s tenth or tithe. 

Edited July 24, 2021 by Calm

[secondclasscitizen]

8 minutes ago, Calm said:

CFR they saved money by paying off all company’s customers instead of just cutting that group adrift and using other funds to cover GS’ needs.  Guessing the latter choice would have cost a lot less.

Where did I say they paid anyone off to save money? I definitely did not say that.