906 million dollars

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
drumdude
God
Posts: 6471
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

906 million dollars

Post by drumdude »

Not 905, not 907. 906 million was the number that corporate Jesus decided was the correct amount to spent on humanitarian projects in 2021.


One wonders what the reasoning is behind this rather specific number. When church programs are proposed in the church office building, is there a Latter-day Saint saying “No, that African country can’t get clean water because our budget is limited to 906 million and we can’t spare another million.”


What I’m saying is: why can’t the Church of Jesus Christ just have a modicum of transparency in their finances? If they just said, “this is the amount we have, this is the amount of interest it generates, and this is the amount we can donate every year to keep it sustainable in perpetuity” what would be so harmful to the church to release those numbers?

Is it because Latter Day Saints could compare this charity to the performance of similar charities with similar goals?
Analytics
High Priest
Posts: 386
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:11 pm

Re: 906 million dollars

Post by Analytics »

Why $906 million?

I know how they think. They made $9.06 billion in profit the year before (perhaps 7% return), and donated 10% of that to charity.
User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 1855
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:16 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: 906 million dollars

Post by Dr Moore »

It wasn’t their call. $906m is what members donated. Most of that sum, or near 95% it seems, was fast offerings.

Saw this commentary posted yesterday.

https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... ame=iossmf
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 1870
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm

Re: 906 million dollars

Post by Dr Exiled »

I'd love a little transparency for my family's sake. They continue to serve the Fund and deserve to know how their money is being spent to the penny. However, $906 million isn't bad, but, leave it to the Fund to take credit for what it's poor members did.

From the article that Dr. Moore posted:
In all cases, Church humanitarian giving remains, at least for 2021, a system of rebranded member generosity.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 1855
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:16 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: 906 million dollars

Post by Dr Moore »

Dr Exiled wrote:
Sat May 14, 2022 4:51 pm
I'd love a little transparency for my family's sake. They continue to serve the Fund and deserve to know how their money is being spent to the penny. However, $906 million isn't bad, but, leave it to the Fund to take credit for what it's poor members did.

From the article that Dr. Moore posted:
In all cases, Church humanitarian giving remains, at least for 2021, a system of rebranded member generosity.
Yeah, the church crushed it in 2021 on profits. And it would seem from the annual report, not a dollar of the church’s $180 billion or so in investment funds were allocated to humanitarian causes.
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 6964
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: 906 million dollars

Post by Moksha »

Image

Almost all of the $906 million (roughly $850 million of the total) relates to fast-offering pass-through, solicited from members and given back to other members via Church welfare and Bishop's storehouse projects. Charity-wise, the amount was 40 million.

With Roe v. Wade ending the Church might reenter the baby market and increase income through adequate sales.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Gadianton
God
Posts: 4778
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 11:56 pm
Location: Elsewhere

Re: 906 million dollars

Post by Gadianton »

Dr Moore wrote:
Sat May 14, 2022 4:30 pm
It wasn’t their call. $906m is what members donated. Most of that sum, or near 95% it seems, was fast offerings.

Saw this commentary posted yesterday.

https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... ame=iossmf
ouch
Social distancing has likely already begun to flatten the curve...Continue to research good antivirals and vaccine candidates. Make everyone wear masks. -- J.D. Vance
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 1870
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm

Re: 906 million dollars

Post by Dr Exiled »

Maybe the church (Fund) could solve the baby formula crisis? Abbott controls too much of the market and so the lack of alternative sources made us vulnerable to Abbott's poor, perhaps criminal descision to not update their facilities. Enter LDS baby services to the rescue?
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
KevinSim
Bishop
Posts: 514
Joined: Sun May 08, 2022 1:09 am

Re: 906 million dollars

Post by KevinSim »

drumdude wrote:
Sat May 14, 2022 12:02 pm
If they just said, “this is the amount we have, this is the amount of interest it generates, and this is the amount we can donate every year to keep it sustainable in perpetuity” what would be so harmful to the church to release those numbers?
I don't think the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints makes decisions based on what would or would not be harmful. Instead they make decisions based on what they feel God is telling them to do.
drumdude
God
Posts: 6471
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

Re: 906 million dollars

Post by drumdude »

KevinSim wrote:
Sun May 15, 2022 9:40 pm
drumdude wrote:
Sat May 14, 2022 12:02 pm
If they just said, “this is the amount we have, this is the amount of interest it generates, and this is the amount we can donate every year to keep it sustainable in perpetuity” what would be so harmful to the church to release those numbers?
I don't think the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints makes decisions based on what would or would not be harmful. Instead they make decisions based on what they feel God is telling them to do.
Maybe on the doctrine side, but it’s gotta be really hard to balance your checkbook with prayer alone and no spreadsheets or analysis, right?
Post Reply