Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Misuse of Church Funds

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by The Rambam View Post
    If this was directed at me, I wholeheartedly concur. Please send your sister over immediately. The good looking one.
    She doesn't think you are very good looking so she took a pass. Sorry.
    "The first thing I learned upon becoming a head coach after fifteen years as an assistant was the enormous difference between making a suggestion and making a decision."

    "They talk about the economy this year. Hey, my hairline is in recession, my waistline is in inflation. Altogether, I'm in a depression."

    "I like to bike. I could beat Lance Armstrong, only because he couldn't pass me if he was behind me."

    -Rick Majerus

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by The Notorious J.I.C. View Post
      She doesn't think you are very good looking so she took a pass. Sorry.
      So is Rambam back on the market or is he just filling Jeffs' void? I have to ask this question when Southern Utahns are involved.
      Everything in life is an approximation.

      http://twitter.com/CougarStats

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Indy Coug View Post
        It doesn't sound like you know what's in the article either, which still means you don't know that the church funds were misused in the past. Of course, we would still have to define what constitutes misuse.
        If there was no misappropriation of funds from one purpose to another which precipitated the change in the tithing slips, I'll buy you and your wife dinner at La Cai next time you are in Utah. (Do you live in Utah?)

        While it is possible that they just decided to change the use of funds policy so drastically without needing to, I suspect something prompted them to do so. And it wasn't the still small voice, but the concerned tones of their accountants and lawyers.

        In fact, let's do dinner regardless, and we'll let the reuters article decide who was right on this one and therefore who pays.
        A Mormon president could make a perfectly patriotic, competent, inspiring leader. But not Mitt Romney. He is a husked void. --David Javerbaum

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by The Notorious J.I.C. View Post
          She doesn't think you are very good looking so she took a pass. Sorry.
          But women are attracted to confidence and money, not looks. . .
          A Mormon president could make a perfectly patriotic, competent, inspiring leader. But not Mitt Romney. He is a husked void. --David Javerbaum

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by The Rambam View Post
            If there was no misappropriation of funds from one purpose to another which precipitated the change in the tithing slips, I'll buy you and your wife dinner at La Cai next time you are in Utah. (Do you live in Utah?)

            While it is possible that they just decided to change the use of funds policy so drastically without needing to, I suspect something prompted them to do so. And it wasn't the still small voice, but the concerned tones of their accountants and lawyers.

            In fact, let's do dinner regardless, and we'll let the reuters article decide who was right on this one and therefore who pays.
            He's trying to trick you! La Cai doesn't exist! La Caille is gross (despite a really nice atmosphere and waitresses with nicely elevated breasts)!
            At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
            -Berry Trammel, 12/3/10

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by The Rambam View Post
              If there was no misappropriation of funds from one purpose to another which precipitated the change in the tithing slips, I'll buy you and your wife dinner at La Cai next time you are in Utah. (Do you live in Utah?)
              1. La Caille is a vastly overrated restaurant whose time had come and gone 20 years ago.

              2. The time spent in Utah is few and far between, but when I am there, I have no interest in allocating that precious time to someone that is so pathologically asspuckered.
              Everything in life is an approximation.

              http://twitter.com/CougarStats

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by The Rambam View Post
                If there was no misappropriation of funds from one purpose to another which precipitated the change in the tithing slips, I'll buy you and your wife dinner at La Cai next time you are in Utah. (Do you live in Utah?)

                While it is possible that they just decided to change the use of funds policy so drastically without needing to, I suspect something prompted them to do so. And it wasn't the still small voice, but the concerned tones of their accountants and lawyers.

                In fact, let's do dinner regardless, and we'll let the reuters article decide who was right on this one and therefore who pays.
                Rambam, you mentioned earlier in the thread that they have a big surplus in the PEF. Could it be that the balances are just so out of whack that they decided to remove most of the individual categories from the slip so as to direct most donations to a central fund so that they can achieve a better balance (i.e., optimize the use of the donated funds)? That was my first impression when I saw the new slip.
                "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Moliere View Post


                  My CPA head hurts after just reading the first article and then seeing you take the $1 billion estimate, which was never made by the church, and then extrapolate that somehow to get to a $1 billion overage.

                  Listen, I hate the masked financial dealings of the church as much as the next CUFfer and I really, really detest the idea of the church building the CCC, but you'd make an exmo blush with your hard headedness and manipulation of stories and numbers.
                  This is the real point, IMO. Open the books already! All you do by keeping them closed is give people ammunition.

                  I wonder if they will in response to the Reuters article (when's it coming out again?).
                  At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
                  -Berry Trammel, 12/3/10

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                    Rambam, you mentioned earlier in the thread that they have a big surplus in the PEF. Could it be that the balances are just so out of whack that they decided to remove most of the individual categories from the slip so as to direct most donations to a central fund so that they can achieve a better balance (i.e., optimize the use of the donated funds)? That was my first impression when I saw the new slip.
                    Yikes though.
                    I'd have a problem if found out money I donated to PEF was being allocated in any significant way to any other area. Keep it in an endowment fund, fine. Move it to CCC--not fine.
                    At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
                    -Berry Trammel, 12/3/10

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by ERCougar View Post
                      Yikes though.
                      I'd have a problem if found out money I donated to PEF was being allocated in any significant way to any other area. Keep it in an endowment fund, fine. Move it to CCC--not fine.
                      But what if there is more money in the PEF than they can reasonably use in the next 20 years? Why allow more money to go there when there are real needs for humanitarian or missionary funds (just picking a couple out of the air)?

                      I agree that money donated under the old slip should stay where directed, but I don't see much of a problem with the new approach.
                      "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                      "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                      "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by ERCougar View Post
                        Yikes though.
                        I'd have a problem if found out money I donated to PEF was being allocated in any significant way to any other area. Keep it in an endowment fund, fine. Move it to CCC--not fine.
                        I agree. Tithing do with it what you will. I wouldn't lose sleep over them moving the funds I put toward a certain thing, but would feel I was misled.

                        Now, if contributions to the CC somehow leaked into BYU's general fund, I would lose a lot of sleep over that and might consider a law suit.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by The Rambam View Post
                          If there was no misappropriation of funds from one purpose to another which precipitated the change in the tithing slips, I'll buy you and your wife dinner at La Cai next time you are in Utah. (Do you live in Utah?)
                          Mes oreilles!! Je pleure pour toi

                          Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                          Rambam, you mentioned earlier in the thread that they have a big surplus in the PEF. Could it be that the balances are just so out of whack that they decided to remove most of the individual categories from the slip so as to direct most donations to a central fund so that they can achieve a better balance (i.e., optimize the use of the donated funds)? That was my first impression when I saw the new slip.
                          That sounds reasonable, which means Rambam won't think it is the reason.

                          Originally posted by ERCougar View Post
                          Yikes though.
                          I'd have a problem if found out money I donated to PEF was being allocated in any significant way to any other area. Keep it in an endowment fund, fine. Move it to CCC--not fine.
                          I don't think Jeff is saying this. I think what he is saying is that future donations can now be allocated as needed, so less will go to the PEF in the future (since there is a surplus) and more will go elsewhere (shopping malls? ).

                          If anything, the surplus in the PEF just shows that members are willing to donate to good humanitarian causes. I'd imagine there isn't an overwhelming surplus in the BOM fund because, let's be serious, do we really need more and more BOMs printed?
                          "Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            I wonder if the alleged PEF overfunding is due to extremely high contributions, or a low utilization rate? When I say low, I mean lower than expected.
                            Everything in life is an approximation.

                            http://twitter.com/CougarStats

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Indy Coug View Post
                              1. La Caille is a vastly overrated restaurant whose time had come and gone 20 years ago.

                              2. The time spent in Utah is few and far between, but when I am there, I have no interest in allocating that precious time to someone that is so pathologically asspuckered.
                              I am truly sorry you feel that way about me. It is too bad we can't disagree without being disagreeable. I have no idea what you mean by asspuckered but clearly you don't want to have dinner with me. That is too bad and I am sorry you feel that way.

                              Why is it typically the righteous conservative that shuns and belittles and eschews the liberal sinner who extends an welcome invite?

                              I think I need a break, the name calling gets old.
                              A Mormon president could make a perfectly patriotic, competent, inspiring leader. But not Mitt Romney. He is a husked void. --David Javerbaum

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                                But what if there is more money in the PEF than they can reasonably use in the next 20 years? Why allow more money to go there when there are real needs for humanitarian or missionary funds (just picking a couple out of the air)?

                                I agree that money donated under the old slip should stay where directed, but I don't see much of a problem with the new approach.
                                Right--at this point, they're protected. They're telling us upfront that they may do that, although I think they could be a little more clear in their language. If they've already done that to a significant extent, that's not ok. They would've seen that coming and should have done what they're doing now a while ago.
                                At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
                                -Berry Trammel, 12/3/10

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X