Excellent Jana Riess Article Regarding the 60 Minutes Interview

[Craig Speechly]

I’ve attempted to post long responses to several posts. I’m currently without internet and have had to rely on 5G. None of my replies posted and frankly I’m not going to attempt a repost. 
 

I stand by my OP and the concerns Riess shared. No strawman arguments , no claims of billion dollar cash donations. Those are mischaracterizations of my post   

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Harry T. Clark said:

Here again, the church is free to do what it wishes with the funds we give it.  If it only gives back $65 Million per year to outside charitable causes, then so be it.  However, just be a little more open about it.  Include the members a little bit in the plans.  If the plan is that the leaders see trouble ahead and so are in a saving mode, then just let the people know about it.  Exaggerating charitable numbers is a mistake.

How can the messaging in this sampling be a little more open?

Philanthropies | Philanthropies (churchofjesuschrist.org)

Charities (churchofjesuschrist.org)

Caring For Those In Need (churchofjesuschrist.org)

 

Can you provide exaggerations of charitable numbers from this annual report: Caring for Those in Need (churchofjesuschrist.org)

[CV75]

2 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

I’ve attempted to post long responses to several posts. I’m currently without internet and have had to rely on 5G. None of my replies posted and frankly I’m not going to attempt a repost. 
 

I stand by my OP and the concerns Riess shared. No strawman arguments , no claims of billion dollar cash donations. Those are mischaracterizations of my post   

How can the messaging in this sampling be improved?

Philanthropies | Philanthropies (churchofjesuschrist.org)

Charities (churchofjesuschrist.org)

Caring For Those In Need (churchofjesuschrist.org)

Can you point out the problems in the numbers from this annual report: Caring for Those in Need (churchofjesuschrist.org)

[Craig Speechly]

28 minutes ago, CV75 said:

How can the messaging in this sampling be improved?

Philanthropies | Philanthropies (churchofjesuschrist.org)

Charities (churchofjesuschrist.org)

Caring For Those In Need (churchofjesuschrist.org)

Can you point out the problems in the numbers from this annual report: Caring for Those in Need (churchofjesuschrist.org)

Not so mediocre after all?  I defer to the Jana Riess article. I think she makes it very clear. 

Edited May 19 by Craig Speechly

[CV75]

22 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

Not so mediocre after all?  I defer to the Jana Riess article. I think she makes it very clear. 

That post wasn't about mediocrity but about clarity and accuracy in messaging. The post about mediocrity for you to address is here: Posted 6 hours ago

[Craig Speechly]

5 hours ago, CV75 said:

That post wasn't about mediocrity but about clarity and accuracy in messaging. The post about mediocrity for you to address is here: Posted 6 hours ago

What’s the male name for a Karen?  Just saying,  despite your claim of my posting mediocre posts you can’t seem to control yourself from posting in this thread.  You may want to seek treatment for your Cognitive Behavioral Posting in Mediocre Posts Obsession. Please get some help and stock someone else.

Edited May 20 by Craig Speechly

[2BizE]

The Widow’s Mite report does a good job of showing the church’s charitable giving.

https://widowsmitereport.wordpress.com

[CV75]

15 hours ago, Craig Speechly said:

What’s the male name for a Karen?  Just saying,  despite your claim of my posting mediocre posts you can’t seem to control yourself from posting in this thread.  You may want to seek treatment for your Cognitive Behavioral Posting in Mediocre Posts Obsession. Please get some help and stock someone else.

Oh my, this is too funny. "Ken" is "Karen's" male counterpart in distress. But I think "Kendall" sounds more demanding and entitled (maybe on your part as well!), so you may call me that. 

"...Stock..."?

I don't mind that you choose not to answer my question.

[Craig Speechly]

On 5/20/2023 at 10:09 AM, CV75 said:

Oh my, this is too funny. "Ken" is "Karen's" male counterpart in distress. But I think "Kendall" sounds more demanding and entitled (maybe on your part as well!), so you may call me that. 

"...Stock..."?

I don't mind that you choose not to answer my question.

It’s not in my nature to resort to retaliational posts. I allowed your negative opinion of my post(s) as rationale for turning to name calling.  I shouldn’t have done that. I sincerely apologize.  

[CV75]

28 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

It’s not in my nature to resort to retaliational posts. I allowed your negative opinion of my post(s) as rationale for turning to name calling.  I shouldn’t have done that. I sincerely apologize.  

No problem, forgotten! 

[halconero]

FWIW, it's not uncommon to include in-kind donations of labour or goods in reporting requirements, including Canada, where I'm from. In fact, I did exactly that in my previous life in partisan politics, which is regulated similarly to charities for tax reasons.

[halconero]

On 5/22/2023 at 9:08 PM, halconero said:

FWIW, it's not uncommon to include in-kind donations of labour or goods in reporting requirements, including Canada, where I'm from. In fact, I did exactly that in my previous life in partisan politics, which is regulated similarly to charities for tax reasons.

Thinking about this a bit more I also believe comparing something like the Gates Foundation to the Church is an apples-to-oranges comparison.

I work in policy-oriented academia. That means I apply for a lot of grants, some for research purposes, but others for practical projects with real-world impact. I have received some of these grants from agencies akin to the Gates Foundation. Some get a lot of bang for their buck, others not so much. The key differentiator is the fact that they are primarily grant making agencies, they don’t rely on or use large volunteer corps to make their impact. So the distribution of real to in-kind dollars is going to skew towards the former. Their activity is primarily focused on reviewing and approving grant applications.

Whatever your feelings on the size of the Church’s wealth fund, it is not in the same bucket as a grant making agency. Whether or not it should do more or less is worth discussion, but making grant-making agencies the epitome of charitable activity or donations would be a mistake, imo. It would also undermine plenty of small charities that don’t shuffle around money a lot, but do considerable volunteer hours, whose impact is indeed reported and given a dollar value.

Edited May 25 by halconero

[Teancum]

On 5/19/2023 at 11:10 AM, Amulek said:

 

 

You may be surprised to learn this, but the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints isn't a charitable foundation, it is a religious organization whose primary purpose is the advancement of religion.

Isn't a significant part of a religion relieving human suffering?  It is one of the missions of the church is it not?  And the church we are talking about claims to be The Church of Jesus Christ. Based on what I read in scripture Jesus seemed to oppose the accumulation of large amounts of wealth.  He was also an advocate of doing things to relieve human  suffering and to help the poor.  So it seems that advancing a Christian religion would include a significant effort on humanitarian aid work.

 

On 5/19/2023 at 11:10 AM, Amulek said:

Could the church be doing more than it is currently with respect to humanitarian aid?

It certainty could if the leadership wanted to take the church in that direction.

On 5/19/2023 at 11:10 AM, Amulek said:

 

People like Jana Riess obviously think so, which is why they write articles like this to try and spur public sentiment around their view. I don't have a problem with that. It's her right. 

Personally, when compared to the billionaire trust fund crowd that you refer to so favorably, I kind of prefer how the church operates. Slow, deliberate, and increasing over time - all without lining anyone's pockets. I'm not saying the Buffets aren't doing good things, but let's get real - a big motivation behind his children having their own multi-million dollar foundations is so he can ensure they are all able to continue living the trust fund / socialite life in perpetuity.

 

I am not sure Buffet has a foundation. I thought he was giving most of his $$ to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.  I am not a tax expert on private foundations but I do not think that funds put in the foundation can be used for anything other than a charitable purpose.  A trust fund is quite different and separate from a charitable foundation.  Whether Buffet has those set up for his children I do not know.

[Tacenda]

Most of this reddit thread encapsulates how I feel. Here's a compilation of quotes with the title of, Calling out church tithing administration.

All quotes below:

OP:

"So a couple of days ago some friends in the EQ asked for volunteers to set up chairs and some tables for a funeral wake the next day. I offered to help with a few guys I’m good friends with in the ward and as we were setting up the tables I noticed how cracked and broken and damaged so many of them were and let out “You’d think with $80B the church could afford pay to replace tables and chairs more than once per decade” everybody was real quiet and kinda chuckled uncomfortably.

After hearing the stake clerk recently discuss how the stake only gets back 2% of its tithing for stake use I’ve been even more pissed off recognizing how little the church actually puts into its own wards.

The churches youth programs could be phenomenal and have the best camps, experiences, and education if stakes could keep even 20% or their tithing funds. Yet they choose to force the youth to fund raise or parents to pay out of their own pockets."

Comments:

"Your volunteer time has now been included in the published charitable contributions by the church."

"It's shocking really that the church won't increase the use of funds for their various programs.

You would think church leadership would want to provide an incredible experience for the youth and for the members. Also, wouldn't they be motivated to shell out a few billion in generous humanitarian causes from a PR standpoint?

I guess they missed the whole point the story of Jesus speaking to the rich young man in Matthew 19 -

21: Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

22: But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

23: Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven."

 

"I've been to other churches since leaving Mormonism. It's stunning the amenities they have when their donations are reinvested into their congregation. Full size gym (full basketball court with hoops at each end). Full size kitchen and food services for their huge youth activities. Church buses for camps and field trips. The list goes on.

If churches smaller than LDS can do it, then the LDS church can do it, too. They just choose not to."

 

 

 

[Amulek]

On 5/25/2023 at 11:48 AM, Teancum said:

Isn't a significant part of a religion relieving human suffering?  It is one of the missions of the church is it not? 

Yes, it is one of the missions of the church.

The point I was making, however, is that the sole purpose of charitable foundations is to engage in charitable endeavors, so it isn't exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. 

 

Quote

And the church we are talking about claims to be The Church of Jesus Christ.

Correct. 

 

Quote

Based on what I read in scripture Jesus seemed to oppose the accumulation of large amounts of wealth. 

I read Jesus' teachings as being more about greed and the inability to give up material things in order to follow God as being the true obstacles to faith - not that there is anything intrinsically immoral about possessing wealth.

He certainly didn't look down on Zacchaeus who the scriptures tell us was a chief tax collector (and rich). Well, maybe Jesus did look down on him, but that would have probably been more due to his height - not because of his wealth.  

 

Quote

He was also an advocate of doing things to relieve human suffering and to help the poor. 

True. But I don't believe there's actually a single example in the Gospels of Jesus ever giving money to the poor. 

Not saying that justifies ignoring human suffering, but I don't have a problem with taking the approach that Jesus himself followed. He ministered to those he came in contact with and left it to others to do the same. 

 

On 5/25/2023 at 11:48 AM, Teancum said:

It certainty could [provide more humanitarian aid] if the leadership wanted to take the church in that direction.

I believe the church is moving in that direction already. Maybe not as fast as you would like, but the church is in it for the long haul - I'm not too worried about it.

 

On 5/25/2023 at 11:48 AM, Teancum said:

I am not sure Buffet has a foundation. I thought he was giving most of his $$ to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. 

I believe he has pledged to give most of his wealth away, but less than half of his fortune has been pledged that particular foundation - something in the neighborhood of $45B if I remember correctly. A very generous contribution to be sure. 

 

On 5/25/2023 at 11:48 AM, Teancum said:

I am not a tax expert on private foundations but I do not think that funds put in the foundation can be used for anything other than a charitable purpose. 

Well, sort of, but there are ways around that.

For starters, you can pay salaries to the people running your foundation. Now, the salaries have to be commensurate in scope with their positions, but if you are managing a multi-billion dollar fund you can expect that it's reasonable to be receiving hedge-fund manager levels of compensation. For example, the guy who has been running the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation for years now was paid $724,400 last year [source]. That's a pretty good gig if you can get it. Of course, it probably didn't hurt his chances that he happened to be married to Buffett's daughter when he first took over the position.

This sort of thing is super common. You hire your kids, their spouses, their children, etc. and you start filling up their bank accounts, IRA's, etc. You can even provide benefits like fully paid health insurance and other goodies. Oh sure, you have to be careful the IRS doesn't bust you for self-dealing, but if you are running a multi-billion dollar foundation, you've got lawyers and CPA's to ensure everything is on the up-and-up. 

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Want to throw a big, splashy fundraising gala? Go for it! And since you'll want to cater to your other uber-rich friends (in order to maximize donations, of course), you'll probably want to host it somewhere they will be interested in attending. Maybe St. Barts this year. Oh, and if you really want to ensure a good turnout, you will need to look into hiring - sorry, I mean, "making a generous donation to your favorite performing artist's charitable foundation" in exchange for having them show up and play a set. 

Oh, and don't forget: all of your mega rich super-friends you grew up with summering in the Hamptons are all in on this racket too - which means that you will be receiving free invitations to all of their galas, social events, charity drives, etc. as well. 

Yes, being a philanthropist is such hard work. So hard that you will never need to work another day in your life. So hard that you will never attend a party for the rest of your life and tell a joke that doesn't get laughed at. I seem to recall that one of Buffett's kids gave a ton of money for training and purchasing equipment for local law enforcement. Do you think that guy is ever going to get a speeding ticket in his home town? 

Like I said before, their entire family is going to be living the socialite life for the rest of their lives - likely for generations to come. And people who don't know better are going to fawn over how noble they are for doing so. It's probably the closest thing to having your cake and eating it too. 

 

On 5/25/2023 at 11:48 AM, Teancum said:

A trust fund is quite different and separate from a charitable foundation.  Whether Buffet has those set up for his children I do not know.

He has. Each of his three children has their own multi-billion dollar charitable foundation. Those are separate from any trust fund / estate planning that he intends on giving them personally. 

 

Edited June 2 by Amulek

[ksfisher]

On 5/25/2023 at 10:01 PM, Tacenda said:

After hearing the stake clerk recently discuss how the stake only gets back 2% of its tithing for stake use I’ve been even more pissed off recognizing how little the church actually puts into its own wards.

The stake doesn't pay the electric bills for the units in it's stake.  It doesn't pay for interior maintenance, snow removal in the winer, lawn mowing in the summer.  It doesn't pay the water bill or for the toilet paper that's used in it's buildings. The church spends more money on it's wards and stakes than just what comes back in budget money.

 

On 5/25/2023 at 10:01 PM, Tacenda said:

The churches youth programs could be phenomenal and have the best camps, experiences, and education if stakes could keep even 20% or their tithing funds. Yet they choose to force the youth to fund raise or parents to pay out of their own pockets

Great.  My stake, which is in an inner city area would have a vastly inferior youth program than a stakes 5 or 10 miles east of us where the average income is significantly more.  Stakes in 3rd world countries?  How would they fare with this arrangement?

 

On 5/25/2023 at 10:01 PM, Tacenda said:

"Your volunteer time has now been included in the published charitable contributions by the church."

The non-profit I work for includes hours by volunteers in it's contribution totals.  i believe this is a common practice.

 

On 5/25/2023 at 10:01 PM, Tacenda said:

"It's shocking really that the church won't increase the use of funds for their various programs.

My experience has been that activities are best measured by how much people interact with each other and have a good time, not by how many dollars were spent. 

Edited June 1 by ksfisher

[Tacenda]

57 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

The stake doesn't pay the electric bills for the units in it's stake.  It doesn't pay for interior maintenance, snow removal in the winer, lawn mowing in the summer.  It doesn't pay the water bill or for the toilet paper that's used in it's buildings. The church spends more money on it's wards and stakes than just what comes back in budget money.

 

Great.  My stake, which is in an inner city area would have a vastly inferior youth program than a stakes 5 or 10 miles east of us where the average income is significantly more.  Stakes in 3rd world countries?  How would they fare with this arrangement?

 

The non-profit I work for includes hours by volunteers in it's contribution totals.  i believe this is a common practice.

 

My experience has been that activities are best measured by how much people interact with each other and have a good time, not by how many dollars were spent. 

You of course are quoting the writer of the article not me, just making sure to clarify it's from an article I shared.