Haha, I think Jesus would be okay with (nay, support!) making the best out of what we have. Which is what capitalism does- it is about private ownership of a good or service which is sold for profit (making the most money out of what we have). However, the well-being of humanity is of no importance in capitalism, which is why I think Jesus would be against it. Profit is the bottom line of capitalism- things are not done to help others, or do good, it is to make money. Other things are only secondary in importance, if that. If one can make more profit and have a more efficient business by paying workers less, one will do it (unless the law is standing in one's way). If one can make more profit at the expense of our natural treasures and resources, history has shown people will do it (again, unless the law is standing in ones way). If one can make more profit by spending millions to convince people that things are better than ever in the gulf, companies will do it (sorry, I've been seeing BP ads on TV- what dbs). I think God would approve of earning profit, so long as it wasn't at the expense of others or our environment, which is not an inherent trait of capitalism.

So, as regards to the Mall situation, I think God would be against it, not just because of it's lack of inherent good to humanity, but also because (if we're following Christianity) Jesus said to do things the Quorum clearly aren't doing- do not accumulate treasures on Earth, sell all you have and distribute it to the poor, etc. It looks like the primary reason the Church is using it's businesses is to amass wealth, not to help the poor. Otherwise the amount of money given to charity would be much higher (as the article stated, it appears the church only gives 0.7% of it's income to charity every year.)

I definitely think Jesus would be a socialist, rather than a capitalist. Verses like these fit well with socialist ideology:

Luke 3:11- John answered, “Anyone who has two shirts should share with the one who has none, and anyone who has food should do the same.”

Acts 4:34 & 35- that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.

* To clarify it is not my intent to demonize capitalism, I realize that every well functioning society needs it to an extent. However, the form of capitalism we currently have, particularly in America, is doing more harm than good, imo, and it's time we had more serious regulation of the corporations in this country.

As usual, good points and post, haha.

You could also look at the Parable of the Talents this way: Jesus wanted the stewards to make money with what he gave them so they could give MORE to the poor.

But as you pointed out, the LDS church gives a measely amount of their wealth to the poor so they may just want to keep their amassing wealth.

The pro-LDS argue for the mall as a way of beautifying downtown Salt Lake City and fighting urban decay.

I've been in downtown Salt Lake. I've been to their conference center and on the rooftop of it to see the landscaping of trees, grass, and creeks they built on top of the building. It was very delightful and peaceful up there. I would think the 2 billion dollars they spent on a mall could have landscaped the most beautiful park money could buy. A epicenter of tranquility or something, haha.

A mall? A Jesus Mall?

Come on.

Caroline Winter wrote:
Though to be fair, the 0.7% sent to charity might not be representative of their own activities, which the article says has been $1.3 billion in humanitarian aid done by themselves. Perhaps that is why they do not give so much to other charities. The author snuck that 0.7% in right after the figure seemingly to give the impression 0.7% is related to the $1.3 billion.

So those figures seem to represent different things and from different sources. The author also seems to make an assumption or claim that all that money was distributed evenly over the 25 years, which I doubt because I'd imagine as the organisation grew its capacity to earn and spend grew as well. It probably is more likely more then half of that was spend in the last 10 years, so they could actually be spending quite a lot at the moment and probably much much more then $52 million annually. I only skim read it though.

No doubt its takes money to do things, and its great to see they are redistributing wealth from the 1st world to the 3rd world for good reasons. If they are getting rich in the process then that is a shame because they could do even more, but then again I guess in the 1st world to get money it might be the right formula as people see an organization which can achieve something without taking them out of feeling like they are still in the 1st world!?

@ Adder

Yes, it's good to be fair, but consider this about the LDS church and how they expend the money donated to them. We don't have the benefit of looking at their books in the U.S. (where the majority of their donations originate from), but we are able to peer into their records in the good United Kingdom which makes it a law for charities to report their finances.

In 2004, the horrible tsunami hit in Sumatra, Indonesia.

Donations in the UK in 2004 specified for the tsunami: 252,000 U.K. pounds
Amount expended in the tsuami relief effort by the LDS church in 2004: 51,000 U.K. pounds

Donations in the UK in 2005 specified for the tsunami: 509,000 U.K. pounds
Amount expended in the tsuami relief effort by the LDS church in 2005: 34,000 U.K. pounds

So out of all the donations they received for the tsunami in the UK in 2004, only 20.23% went to the victims. In 2005, that number was only 6.67%

What does that tell us? What did they do will all that extra money?

Oh...right. I forgot about their little disclaimer they put on donation slips now: "Though reasonable efforts will be made globally to use donations as designated, all donations become the church's property and will be used at the church's sole discretion to further the church's overall mission."

So there you have it Jedi. Who can you trust?

BTW, this information was gathered from www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Showcharit...1&SubsidiaryNumber=0

when the 2004 and 2005 annual returns were posted by the LDS church.

Reliah wrote:
Yes. Very true. The LDS church isn't the only religion that has institutionalized corruption.

That was the point you were trying to make, right? (kidding, kidding. I tease; it's a curse.)

Now this may never be known until the LDS church opens their books in the U.S.

And, they don't just invest in that real estate company, they own it.

Well, thanks for dropping by despite having little interest in the topic, haha.

Maybe, I'll go post in a thread I have very little interest in, too. Like the World of Warcraft thread, LOL.

Seriously, you gamers could create a new language and I'd have as hard of time understanding that as I do Reformed Egyptian.

(inside Mormon joke, lol.)

Actually, yes to the first part of your reply, that's almost exactly what I was getting at. Organized religion as a whole will always have major flaws and, as you said, corruption, because they are ran by imperfect people. I've said it before: people ruin perfectly good religions.

By having little interest, I mean in the affairs of the LDS church and such. I don't care any more about what they do as opposed to what any other organization is doing because that is all they are to me - just another organization. It has taken a little while for me to get there, too. I always tell people about religions of fear. They don't seem to believe me.

I also want to state that I'm with you all who say the 2 billion dollars that was used on the downtown SLC project was a bit... over the top? I was asked if they should have just left it as it was and my reply was something along the lines of the fact that bulldozing and making a park wouldn't have cost nearly as much money and would be just as "beautiful". Then, the rest of the money could have gone to other places that need it just as much (or worse) so that more people could benefit.

As far as the gaming thing goes, you're absolutely right! I remember when I first started and couldn't carry on an in-game conversation because of the language barrier. You just have to jump in!

Hypatia, capitalism is simply a method used to provide the maximum number of goods and services as efficiently as possible

Capitalism is a precondition for freedom but freedom is not a sufficient condition for capitalism (hence why it can be abused in places with dictatorships like China)

I would also add that the vast majority of bad decisions influencing a capitalist market system are government created

I would imagine Jesus would have been a libertarian if anything
Reliah wrote:
kek

Akkarin wrote:
You forgot [Orcish] haha
That means you're playing? And Alliance?

How to derail a thread in less than 5 posts: mention gaming.

Reliah wrote:
No on all accounts. I just know games

Whenever A conversation turns into "they/he/she shouldn't spend money that way" I always like to put it in a more personal context. For instance, My family owns(or is paying for:) ) a large gas guzzling SUV. There are many people that would disagree with our decision to buy such an "extravagent" "bad for the enviroment" vehicle. We could of purchased something smaller, something greener but in the end it is my wife and I decision to spend our money to buy whatever we want. And I wouldn't trade our Lincoln for anything. I love it:)

I think what we are getting hung up on is the diffrence between the LDS church(non-profit) and the ZSC or Zion Securities Corporation. ZSC is just that, A corporation "ran" by the church much like BYU is "ran" by the church. ZSC is a for profit corporation that deals in real estate and other "investments" or "interests" of the communities and areas that the church has a presence in. It pays taxes just like any other business. It does not operate from the tithing of the LDS church but operates through capital provided by independent Investors and through profit from it's ventures. It has a CEO and other officers. And while I think the heads of the company are all LDS I am sure it's not a prerequisite for employment in their divisions as that would be illegal. And those officers are not part of the 1st presidency nor the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. I hope this helps put a little perspective on things.

As to capitalism, true that it isn't perfect and it seems selfish. That's why it is important that we try to be good honest people. I think it's more of a matter of people caring more about other people and the environment as opposed to a problem with the "system". The only alternatives to capitalism, as far as I know, has to do with confiscation of wealth and redistribution of it. Which I am not a proponent of to say the least.


Disclaimer: It is 4am and I am typing this message on my laptop out in the desert working.. It seems to make sense to me now, but I may discover otherwise when I read it later lol