Are you saying the church did not enter into and execute a plea agreement?
Of course they did. You posted the link.
The information is a click away Aaron. At EPA, according to Harris, the #1 concern was stealth. That is why the church lied on the 13f forms.
Yes. And for people who understand wealth, tax law, and seek to avoid frivolous lawsuits know WHY wealth is kept hidden. And it's not illegal. If you want to start a movement on how much 501c3's can hold, good luck with that. Don't forget that the funds were funded by dollars already taxed by individuals. (It's pretty much a collective Roth IRA account.)
If EPA had actually given the declared managers to independently manage the funds in which they were given, there would be no case to dispute.
Now that they have to fill out the forms correctly, each quarter, one can follow the movement of the portfolio.
Yep. This transparency is to protect the stock market from manipulation by one single entity.
Fortunately, EPA isn't accused of market manipulation.
this is just one link of many when you google EPA
Heatmaps of the top 13f holdings and a list of the largest trades made by Ensign Peak Advisors, the hedge fund managed by Ensign Peak Advisors Inc.
hedgefollow.com
Thanks for the link! It looks like they know how to effectively manage a portfolio.
It's also says a lot about how much of the funds came from the Church, and how much came from Church donors. It looks like we could safely say atleast 25% of that $45B ($10B-$15B) came from cumulative returns in the past, but would those return have been generated if they didn't have the donations to begin with?
What your actually missing is the crime. If you're implying that the Church leadership is personally enriching themselves, you have to prove it. But from everything I can see, it looks like the funds are essentially a locked vault. It's the Church, not any given individual that benefits. And if you want to credit the First Presidency for all of it, then it simply shows that they've fulfilled their stewardships over the years.
And Markk, I'm surprised you don't understand how the Church considers itself the government of God's kingdom. If you were setting up your own independent government appointed by God because you believed that all world governments would eventually fail by the end of the millennium, how much would you invest into charity and humanitarian aid knowing there is another donation category dedicated to that? If Daniel the prophet told you that there would be seven years of plenty, and seven years of famine, would you give Daniel the middle finger and say "Nope, sorry Daniel, I believe it's more important to take care of the poor now instead of later. God can perform miracles, I'm going to depend on him to bail me out." (Despite the fact that the prophet Daniel is a messenger from God) So you drain all your reserves, and become a victim of circumstance yourself, and because you "gave a man a fish" you didn't build the infrastructure to "teach a man to fish" so you still have a poverty issue. Wouldn't it more prudent to build the infrastructure (buildings, farmland, universities, etc.) so that people in your "kingdom" have the means to take care of others?
But you don't believe prophets do or could exist in our day and age. And this is why your criticisms are absolutely useless. You're unwilling to apply the belief system in which it was founded, and impose your own worldly view, just as an atheist would. The same people that would say gay couples should be sealed in temples - and when the Church says "no", then you expect them to feel ashamed of the "depraved" behavior, but you're further confused and offended that their not. You can't believe that a tithe payer would be happy that the assets of the Church are flourishing and we continue to give it more money. It's obvious you just want the Church to look bad, you're not interested in understanding of giving them the benefit of the doubt that we see the Church fulfilling it's mission, because you're too busy ark-steadying in your limited perspective imposing that your personal values are supreme over the goals and values of the Church.
A.D.D. Moment:
It's interest that God can perform miracles. I think about the Jesus feeding the 5,000. Do you think the audience came to attend sought to condemn and criticize Jesus and his disciples? And if so, do you believe miracles would have occurred despite their level of faith?
If Jesus had no authorized servants, do you think he would have been able to do it all himself? Do you think god operates in wisdom and practicality? Or is God only proven in the miracles? I think people we live in a day and age where they want a Savior to do all the work for them. They want to result, but they don't necessarily want to do what it takes to create the result, which is another unique aspect of Mormonism vs Christianity. Christianity teaches "poof" salvation done, no work required, and in heaven people will be "glorified" and this will all be done because we said a magic prayer. Mormonism is more about becoming, and fulfilling the measure of our creation by the sweat of our brow, and doing/participating in the work that our Lord and Master did himself. (What I would consider, spiritual improvement by practical means.) [And to be fair, most Christian pastors worth their salt teach the same thing.] So when they see this in practice, and if they studied macro economics they'd see that the world is financially built on a house of cards, and is in trillion dollars of debt (of which our currency is created out of), and criticize the church for owning hard assets because they expect that us tp practice the Law of Consecration with non-believers. But economically, in the real world, that simply can't work. (and the scriptures say be not yoked with unbelievers, right?) There's a lot more I could bloviate about this, but in short, it's amazing how much of these subtle beliefs are reflected in practical situations. Faith is belief, but it's reflected in actions. Those actions generally reflect common sense. You're all hung up about the morality of the Church holding billions of dollars and masking the amount - believing members only donate because they think the Church needs it. But you have it backwards - the Church is there to assist men, not just now, but in future generations. Tithing is a law that teaches that our blessings can be multiplied if we keep giving our blessings back to God. If members collectively demanded for the Church to liquidate their assets, assuming leadership gave in, it could happen, but it would be to the detriment of men, not God.
