paracaidista508
-
Posts
387 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by paracaidista508
-
-
Just thought of this, but for as long as I can recall, the young men were compelled to get their Eagle badge. Why??? Oh because that made their odds of going on a mission much higher. How true that is can be debated, but what do we do now that the church is dumping the BSA???
No more Eagle scouts or pretty soon we wont have any. Does that mean no one will now go on a mission?
-
On 2/6/2018 at 4:28 PM, Ironhold said:
Speaking from personal experience?
I wonder how many of those people who didn't serve a mission dropped away because individuals in their ward or stake gave them nothing but grief about the matter.
I would say there are many in this boat. I chose to go into the military rather than go on a mission and I took incoming fire from all directions for about 6 months before I left for Boot Camp. The only mistake I made was to tell anyone I had joined. I should have just waited till about 2 weeks prior to leaving for boot and I'm sure my life would have been much more peaceful. Parents treated me OK although one spent considerable time dangling college tuition, new car, tuition and car etc in front of me if I went on a mission, but it didn't work. I think they honestly thought I was going to hell for not going on a mission. Also was told no self-respecting LDS girl would marry a non-RM. I was like well dad didn't go on a mission, why did you marry him? Well there was a war going on- that was different. Ok- whatever.
I don't believe that the mission is what keeps people active or whatever. I think it is more because of how they are raised, having a solid family life at home and just general good examples at home.
If the mission is what keeps YM from leaving the church before they are 40 ish, what then is the reason a ton of our General Authorities both past and present have stayed around? I mean heck tons of them served in a war and didn't go on a mission, but somehow they end up in the church senior leadership?? How does that happen? If anyone has served in a war ( I mean in real combat, not paper pushing or wrench turning) they will see some pretty horrific things that will shake your faith in mankind and possibly your Maker to put it lightly. If there was ever a recipe for making someone either not believe in God or believe more strongly than ever before it is service in combat.
A couple examples of people who didn't go on missions and turned out ok:
Lets look at Pres Monson for example:
Bday - 8-21-1927, end of WW2 Sept 2 1945 (remember these dates)Joined the Navy during WW2. His contract released him from the military 6 mos after the end of WW2. I have not found a date when he joined the Navy, but his discharge would have him at 18.5 yrs old.
Think about that- 18.5 yrs old and he had already been in the military and back again. He got married in 1948. So for three years he went to school and did whatever. No mission and yet he ended up being the Pres of the Church. One would have thought that being 18.5 yrs old and no war going on it would have been the time to go on a mission, but it wasn't.
How about Russell Nielsen? Born 1924, graduated college in 1945 at age 21. How he didn't end up in the war is a mystery to me, but he was 21 when it ended and he ended up finishing med school. Served in Korean war.
Here is another one- no inclination to go on a mission when he easily could have gone, yet he ends up as the Pres of the Church also.I'm not citing these two in order to disrespect them, I bring this up because the lack of serving a mission is no indicator of what someone may do in the future. Both of them could have served missions but they both chose not to-----for whatever reason.
No one went on missions then. You see back then, no one cared and if you went to the war you were set for life. If you didn't end up in the war and still didn't go on a mission, well no one cared about that either.
Now if you go the war (which we do have one going on BTW) you are a turd. The military is a bad place to be and the only reason any LDS person should be there is AFTER they serve a full time mission. The only option is a mission and then you get treated like a hero when you get back---well for a couple days at least and then everyone reverts back to not caring.
I think if we just treated those who didn't go on a mission with a bit more civility instead of awarding them 2nd class citizen status in the church we would have a much better retention rate.
Just my 2 cents
-
This dreamer thing is a bunch of b.s.. the. Majority contribute nothing to society, are members of gangs or are flat out just common criminals. The balance, well they are fine, but need to get in line. I got a dreamer attempt to murder me a decade ago. He got away but I openly hope he died a miserable death somewhere at the hands of his fellow drug dealing dreamers. Documented gang member,married, had little kids and all...Just living the dream.
I grew up in a heavy illegal alien populated area. On occasion some go forth and do good. Most just export their money to Mexico and just exist here. Our local Spanish branches are full of illegals, but most are probably good people, but here illegally nonetheless. I just do nt know why we provide cover for them.
-
On 1/24/2018 at 6:24 AM, Sunday21 said:
Hi. I would consider a trip to a temple and a prayer in the celestial room. If the situation is causing you stress and the normal, read scriptures, bear your testimony to God, pray and fast, do not work; then you could consider praying to the Lord to take the desire away from you. As a last resort obviously!
Take the desire away from you...yea right. Other spouse wants to end sex in marriage they can count on an ended marriage. We were not put on earth to be celibate in marriage. Forget that.
-
-
On 1/19/2018 at 8:49 AM, zil said:
This is also contrary to what I've heard. The council I have heard is to not enter into a serious relationship prior to one's mission.
--Mebbe you ought to wake up and smell the coffee. This has been going on officially for years. I posted the link so I'm not making it up. The young women have always been used to leverage the young men's attitudes to lean towards mission service. Re the council part- I agree, but I never told him to enter into a serious relationship. Additionally, he is not a member so the council means jack squat. He isn't subject to the churches rules real or made up.
As for what you quote: that kind of letter is a whole lot different from "I'm madly in love with you and can't wait until you get home so we can get married and make babies."
- No kidding. Where did I suggest he write that kind of letter??
The OP is not asking about writing letters to encourage this missionary spiritually and keep her spirits up with cheerful news from home. He's asking about telling her he's attracted to her and wants to see where a romantic relationship between them will lead - now, not after her mission (since he already said he ain't waiting for that to happen). World of difference.
- well seems as if you can read too. I just suggested he write a note and ask if he can write her after she gets off his mission or transfers. Did I write something else? Please show me where if I did.
Clearly this is a sore spot with you and I'm sorry for whatever painful experiences you have in that regard. But no matter what experiences you had, but no one ought to be telling a missionary about their romantic desires toward said missionary.
- Now for this part. What in the world possessed you to just make up a fake psychological problem on my part as why i have an issue with people telling him he cant write a missionary??? While I'm at it, please refrain from lying about the advice I gave him. Go back and read what advice I gave him. Either you missed it or you are just making crap up.
The only sore spot I have is members of the church making up fake rules esp when it comes to an investigator. We have enough fake rules floating around the pews we don't need another one. My solution was perfectly reasonable. It is not against any rules for anyone to write anything to a missionary. The church leadership strongly discourages a serious relationship with a missionary., but doesn't prohibit it. Who are you to say what he can write to her?
If it was such a big deal to communicate with missionaries the young women would be the ones who would be told to not communicate with them. Instead it is the opposite.---just as I cited above
Something to leave you with re writing Missionaries:
-
3 hours ago, zil said:
I couldn't disagree more. What was said is, she's a MISSIONARY! She can't do anything good with such a statement. Keep it to yourself at least until she's off her mission.
Yep, all while the church is encouraging the young women to write the young men on their missions. If he were an LDS girl, she would be encouraged to write a missionary, but since he is a guy and not LDS- he needs to mind his own business. I get it.
Wait till we tell him that if and after he joins the church and if he then has to go on a mission himself before he is worthy of her attention.
Source:
-
What kinds of letters should young women write to missionaries?
Young women should share spiritual experiences with the missionaries, as well as tell them cheerful news of friends and home"
http://ldsywideasandactivities.blogspot.com/2012/07/how-to-write-to-full-time-missionaries
-
-
On 11/30/2017 at 4:37 PM, Nick0123 said:
I have been dating this girl for awhile now. I have bought a ring and everything and we are deeply in love. There is one thing that has come up a couple of times that has been a source of contention. We always get over it but I just want some advice about what I should do. Okay so we will call her Susie. Susie loves to go tanning. I know it seems harmless to her. However I have read the statistics and just how dangerous indoor tanning actually is. Increased chance of melanoma by 75%. I expressed this concern in the nicest way I knew how but she did not like what I said. She reassures me that she will not get skin cancer but I dont know how she could know this. I just want her to be around when we have kids and not laid up in the hospital or recovering from skin cancer. Anways any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks!!
This is a unique topic.
Only input I'll give ya. Back in my days of being a cop I was prob 25/26 or so, married and working the beat. Went to a homicide one day and in the apartment was this young lady (maybe 35) laying naked on the floor with a bullet in the face. Completely naked and quite clearly a sun worshipper. She had also had some other surgery done if you know what I mean. I had run into her a few times as she was an ER nurse at the hospital I used to bring DUIs to. She was a good looker except you could tell she was always catching the rays. I actually thought she was about 50.All I can say is after seeing that complete picture I am sure that you will not like what she will end up looking like. That is self inflicted skin damage. After some time her hide will tan right up and it will look ugly.
-
On 11/30/2017 at 4:37 PM, Nick0123 said:
I have been dating this girl for awhile now. I have bought a ring and everything and we are deeply in love. There is one thing that has come up a couple of times that has been a source of contention. We always get over it but I just want some advice about what I should do. Okay so we will call her Susie. Susie loves to go tanning. I know it seems harmless to her. However I have read the statistics and just how dangerous indoor tanning actually is. Increased chance of melanoma by 75%. I expressed this concern in the nicest way I knew how but she did not like what I said. She reassures me that she will not get skin cancer but I dont know how she could know this. I just want her to be around when we have kids and not laid up in the hospital or recovering from skin cancer. Anways any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks!!
This is a unique topic.
Only input I'll give ya. Back in my days of being a cop I was prob 25/26 or so, married and working the beat. Went to a homicide one day and in the apartment was this young lady (maybe 35) laying naked on the floor with a bullet in the face. Completely naked and quite clearly a sun worshipper. She had also had some other surgery done if you know what I mean. I had run into her a few times as she was an ER nurse at the hospital I used to bring DUIs to. She was a good looker except you could tell she was always catching the rays. I actually thought she was about 50.All I can say is after seeing that complete picture I am sure that you will not like what she will end up looking like. That is self inflicted skin damage. After some time her hide will tan right up and it will look ugly.
-
Kami,
Basically what many here are saying (my interpretation)is since you are not already LDS, then you have no business contacting her. That was not said, but it is implied.
LDS young men and women write missionaries all the time, maintain relationships via letters/email and etc... No rules against it. Happens all the time. In fact, many LDS return missionaries end up going back to wherever their mission was and marry some girl. How they can just go back to some foreign country (my friend went back to Brazil and came back married a week later) and return with a bride tells me writing and having a relationship (via written correspondence) is not out of bounds. Sure mission presidents. mothers and some on this forum are against it, but whatever. I have not seen any female return missionaries do that, but I'm sure it happens. The rules (whatever they are) apply to her, not you.I don't know where you are from, (country). I also do not know where she is from. If she is from the US and you from elsewhere you will likely never see her again once she gets home. Possibly she already has a boyfriend / fiance (prob not since most girls on missions took off because they are not married yet in my opinion).
As for you writing her after she leaves... who is going to give you her address? The mission president surely wont. Ex companion likely wont either so you will have to try and find her. Good luck with that.
Here is my advice:Don't let anyone tell you who you can and cannot talk to or write. While she is on a mission she cannot date. Just because she is LDS and you are not does not mean she would not want to date you later. No one knows anything about either one of you. Tell you what, write her a note saying you would like to write her once she gets home or transfers and ask for her home address or email. Just leave it at that. She will know you are interested in her. Guys don't ever do that just because they want to be friends and girls know that.
If she gives you her contact info then there is a slight chance. If not - well then I would move on. If it gets awkward afterwards, then different missionaries can teach you if you are still interested. Ward missionaries can teach you also.
Good luck and don't let people tell you you cant/ shouldn't contact her...that's baloney. Just be mature and don't say/write anything inappropriate. Just ask her if you can write her..thats it
-
-
1 hour ago, JoCa said:
Sigh ... yes dumb luck. 92 right about the beginning of the greatest bull market in history . .. dumb luck. Had you start in '98 different story. Go ahead why don't you go through a 20-year rolling time span and show me what the returns look like . . .I've done it and it really does depend on when you start and when you stop.
Here ya go
http://allfinancialmatters.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/SP-500-Rolling-Period-Returns-2013-Edit
1992 was nowhere near the best despite it being at the beginning of a bull
Like I said earlier- tell us what the next winner is. You are the smartest at this game. Help out themorons
-
On 11/18/2017 at 5:31 PM, JoCa said:
Because passive investing in the stock market is for fools-it violates the 1st rule of owning stocks: don't play with money you aren't afraid to lose! and the 2nd rule of owning stocks . . .know what you own!
Actually passive investing routinely does very well- When we are not a certifiable expert like you that's what we do as it has been proven over time to be EFFECTIVE and profitable.
https://www.schwab.com/resource-center/insights/content/does-market-timing-work
Who said I was afraid of losing the money I have invested? and who says I don't know what I own? Maybe I do.
You are the sucker that the big boys prey on. His advice is downright idiotic b/c he is assuming the future will be like the past (i.e. stock market returns will average 8%/year). In fact it's the same lie that most pension funds have based their rates of return on (i.e. 8%/year stock returns).
Yea his advice is so poor, he is one of the top financial advisors in the country. you don't get that way by losing everyone's money. The market average return has been approx 8% which btw is a reasonable assumption since nearly every annualized 20+ year investment period actually returned more than that. Invest for more than 20 yrs and compound and your growth is even better...at least it has turned out that way.
There is an extreme high level of risk that is associated with this advice that is just plain dumb for most people. Yes that is great it has worked out for you . . .but I hate to break it to you that is b/c you have been lucky;it's not the strategy it's just dumb luck.
Not dumb luck. I've been a buy/hold, dollar cost average , passive investor since 1992. I definitely have made way more than I contributed. All while dollar cost averaging the whole time.
Because if you really study markets, you find out that what has happened over the last 25 years is actually really rare. Markets can stay dead for a very, very long time. Look at the Naz . . .all those suckers who bought in 98'98 had to wait 20+ years just to break even. Same thing happened with the Japanese stock market.
Theres been 57 market corrections since 1928. Ive been invested during 5 of them, never pulled my money out. Stocks are on sale during a correction/crash. As for those who bought in 98...if they stayed invested and bought all the way down and all the way back up they have a lot of money now. It will go up/down/up/down ... Are you saying it wont?
The other thing is violates is that housing is not an investment . .. it's an expense and you minimize expenses. Yes if you lose you job you could lose your house . . . that's why you buy below your means and have at least 6 months of savings built up in cash.
So who said housing is an investment? Ric didn't and neither did I. Also who said I bought above my means? You have no idea when I bought my house, what I paid for it, how long I have left to pay for it, how much equity is in it or if it is paid off. You also have no idea what my debt to income ratio is. There is a possibility i may have purchased a house or two in a Self -Directed IRA after the housing crash, renting them out and not pre-paying a cent. Maybe...and now they are worth almost triple what I paid. You never know. All you know is not enough to judge my financial position.
The biggest flaw you have is that when you are fully invested in the market, everything is connected, stocks, recession, housing, etc. So when it goes down and you lose your job and you need to pull money from stocks to live or make mortgage payments you are now selling at (what most likely will be a loss). Stocks are all about timing.
Who said I am fully invested in the market? You have no idea what I have in my portfolio other than the few blue chips I have mentioned. You also have no idea if I have been rebalancing for the past decade skimming profits into cash. You know nothing about my portfolio.You don't make money in the market only with timing. That certainly helps, but a market timers are morons because they rarely win.
As for needing my stocks to live or make mortgage payments- that's why I have a dividend portfolio in a taxable account. Throws off enough to make a house payment every month. All I need to do is turn off the "reinvest" switch in the account. Doesn't reduce my position. Could the stocks stop paying dividends? I suppose. In the 09 crash and after they didn't. A couple froze the increases though IIRC.You've had great timing . . .awesome, but don't let it fool you into thinking this strategy is a winning long-term strategy; for some people it works, for most it totally sucks. Oh and having a pension . . .bully for you, baby boomers were the last generation to really have pensions (unless you are a government employee).
Just because I have a pension doesn't invalidate my strategy. It should be considered a cash position when building an investment strategy. You can get one too btw. Police depts and the military are hiring and you can go earn one yourself.
You know it's funny . . .the crowing is all the stuff that happens at tops . . .it's actually quite hilarious. More signs of a top:
I agree and I cant wait for another 2-3 corrections so my dividends can be reinvested at a discount. I still have at least 15 yrs before I will need my money so let it ride.
CNBC: Profits don't matter for investors anymore, only whether a company can beat Netflix or Amazon.
Yep flawed concept. I own AMZN (and BABA and JD.com), but they are a minor percentage of my portfolio.
GM CEO goes on CNBC says Tesla isn't making money and can't make money . . .gets laughed out of the room.
I agree people are a little overboard with that one. I'll buy it if they ever make money and start producing cars near the rate they promise. Until then, I'm on the sideline. They have very high demand for the cars so we will see. Also- GM is a poor rep to go up there bad mouthing. The only reason they are still around is the bailout.
Lol you've got to be kidding me . . . these things only happen when you are close to a top. Markets can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent so it could keep going up for another 6 months . . .but we are very, very close. Yield curve inverts and boom we are done-6 months. Personally I'm getting ready in the next 6 months to deploy some capital.
Well since you are the omniscient expert in the room- please share with us the next big winner
I'll put my strategy against your strategy any day of the week. Once you have a house paid for . . .welfare could cover tax payments!
Yea perhaps you make more profits than me in the market. Never said you didn't. I have more than sufficient for my needs and have no reason to compete- that's a stupid thing to say anyway. I did this on a cop salary so it works and doesnt take tons of money, just time and discipline. You have no idea what the market will do and neither does anyone else. If you did you would be on the list of world's richest people. Since you are on here waxing on about this I highly doubt it.
Bottom line- I find it priceless that you think you can effectively evaluate my portfolio with only a couple statements I have made. You know nothing about my situation, how much cash I have on hand, what I'm invested in, what I owe etc... passing judgement with no info. Sounds like you have been sucking on the glass pipe a bit before that post.
-
On 11/16/2017 at 9:09 AM, zil said:
One does not need to ignore prophetic counsel in order to save or earn money and have sufficient for their own needs and generous offerings. (Do it if you want, that's your business, but it's not necessary.) If you need me to post details to demonstrate that statement, I can, but it feels like bragging and I don't like it (tried two different write ups and deleted them both). It's enough to say my mortgage is paid off and I'm in a better situation than you describe.
I didn't say you need to ignore prophetic counsel in order to have sufficient ....etc... I presented this as an option and it does work.
A few million lost their homes during the mortgage crisis as you know. I'm sure there were many who were paying their mortgages early so they could escape the debt earlier. Great concept, but if you lose your job and don't make the payment, the bank wont care how much you have paid down. In fact, the more equity you had the less likely they would work with you. If you can show me how the equity in your home is more valuable than being in your account while in the middle of an extended crisis AND you wont lose your home then I would conceded that the early payoff is a much wiser choice. Additionally, someone with a paid off home who doesn't pay their taxes anymore can have it seized and sold off in a state tax lien auction. Paid off or not, it can still be lost.
My situation- I'm not paying one red cent early. I will follow my mortgage contract to a t with one exception (early pay my mortgage ...possibly). Since I have an incurable illness and a significantly reduced life expectancy the fact I use Edelman's ( and have used it for a long time) concept has come to be a major benefit. I started all this waaay before I was diagnosed and it just worked out good just like good ole Ric Edelman says:1- long mortgage,
2- I have a permanent pension that lasts as long as I live and also for my wife. At the death of the last person the pension goes away.
3- We have maxed out our 457 / 401K / IRAs for about 13 yrs now. Stayed in the market during the three crashes since 1999 and have been buying it on sale all the way up to about two years ago. Now it is just token purchases as my income is much less than when I was working.
4- Have a good size taxable brokerage account which at this time throws off almost a house payment every month in dividends. They are all blue chips with some very lucrative sin stocks to boot. I have had this account for over 20 yrs. All dividends have been reinvested to this date. When I reach the point where I cant pay the taxes on them, I'll take some as income.
5- Long term life policy which ends long after my expected life expectancy which is less than 10 yrs. Policy face amount is over 2x the amount we have mortgaged.
6- If my wife passes before me, her policy covers 100% of the mortgage amount, plus a six figure sum for whatever...rest home maybe.
7- We don't have debt on cars, credit cards or anything else other than the home
That being said, the life policies will pay off the home in the event of either one of our deaths. Since life insurance benefits are tax free, the money will be tax free to the mortgage and is in effect "cheaper money." Much better than paying 15% income tax on it just before putting it in my mortgage to save 3.5% interest as I would be doing by prepaying right now.
I have enough in savings, investments, taxable account income streams and pension to easily cover all of our expenses even with about a 50% market downturn. My investments alone will cover 10-15 years of all expenses if my pension disappears and we don't work. I structured it this way so that we would have income during tough times instead of having to do a reverse mortgage and/or a viatical settlement in order to cover expenses. Also that will keep the elders and priests from having to mow our lawns for the next 25 yrs or so. We can take care of it ourselves.
I think the prophetic advise in respects to debt is to keep people in general out of debt. Frankly most couldn't tell you what good, bad or advantageous debt is much less how to leverage it. It is much easier to address the issue so the least common denominator can understand the concept. Once you start waxing on about different strategies people check out.
Bottom line is people need to know what they are doing. If they choose to be ignorant and not learn ways to make money then they need to just flat out pay everything off an not leverage their situation to their advantage. Problem is with many people is they don't save anything anyway. They can pay off their house and then spend as opposed to invest/save and in the end they are living only on soc sec and saving coke cans to make ends meet.
Both paying off and leveraging work- and both situations require discipline.
I'm curious in your situation- how old were you when your mortgage was paid off and how long ago was that? I'm not even 50 yet. Most people who are that well off after paying off a home early in my experience have six figure incomes and have compounded for a while. I was in that situation, but now am just compounding my investments as my income is a third of what it was before I got sick.
As for ignoring prophetic advise- they have no problem cashing my tithing check paid for with my dirty money so I think we are ok. -
On 11/16/2017 at 8:13 AM, person0 said:
I can tell you some:
-
Assumption of the rate of investment returns. There is a historical pattern, but never a guarantee. Also, returns - taxes - broker fees may net you a much smaller return, and you have to pay broker fees regardless of gain or loss
- How is an assumption of a rate of return a lie? To guarantee a rate of return in equities would be a bit closer to a lie and illegal for a financial advisor to do-- at least so says the SEC. Assumptions are allowed to be made in order to illustrate to a client what the investment MAY do. In fact an advisor may be committing malpractice of sorts by not illustrating an assumption because they have not made the effort to ensure a client understands an investment. As for the fees etc- of course those have to be factored in. In regards to high fees, an investor has to use his own due diligence to determine if an investment is appropriate. If he does not do the research and relies on someone selling equities or other "investments" such as whole life ins, variable annuities, front end loaded funds with 12b1 and other fees etc, then he deserved the ripoff that will happen. Buyer beware.
-
Saving $0.35 on your taxes for every $1.00 in interest means you still lose $0.65 of every interest dollar.
- Uh yea he explained how that works. Not a lie and yes the dollar is gone. The loss is offset by the anticipated growth AND compounded growth over time to compensate for the realized loss of the interest dollar on the front end. The value of investments compounds.
-
Just because a mortgage interest rate is low means you should have one as an investment vehicle for your other money - False!
- Not false, it is an option and it has been proven over time to work. Just like paying off a home has worked over time for many people. What makes you sleep at night is what you should do.
-
Payments only get 'easier' *if* your income rises, and if you aren't stupid with the rise in income and actually save it rather than spend it. In reality there are too many unknowns.
- Still not a lie. Inflation reduces the value of your dollar and with inflation wages and prices also generally rise. The concept is that the percentage of your paycheck going to the mortgage will be less and less over time. Just because there are people out there who are irresponsible with their money does not make his statement untrue. As for the *if.* If after 10-15 yrs in a job you still have not had a raise and have done nothing to find an increase in wages- you deserve to not have a raise.
-
Paying Taxes and Insurance is the same as a mortgage payment - False!
- His point is that your "house payment" never goes away even if you pay off your mortgage. The taxes are always there as is the homeowners and other hazard insurances. You knew that though. This is an important topic because some people actually think they are done and suddenly get a semi-annual notice from the county or state for property taxes due. In the case of my current home, that would be approx. $220 / month. Homeowners insurance is $60 I think so yea, i pay off my house I still have to pay about $280-300 per month.....and that goes up nearly every year too. That said, you are never done "paying for your home."
-
Assumption of the rate of investment returns. There is a historical pattern, but never a guarantee. Also, returns - taxes - broker fees may net you a much smaller return, and you have to pay broker fees regardless of gain or loss
-
I'm curious what makes lds people automatically more business worthy than others. Problem is the affinity thing makes it easier to prey on others of the same religion. I think it is noteworthy there was a letter from the churches presidency read over the pulpit years ago addressing this.
I don't trust mormons more than anyone else. In fact I can name a contractor who is a prominent member in my area who is well known by members and local code enforcement officers as a big time shortcutter and he does bad work...on purpose to save money for the customer and increase his margin. Everyone knows this but since he is lds he still gets their business. There are meny others, he just happens to be open about it and people still chance it with him. Freaking stupid. They end up fined and having good to pay someone else to go back and fix the wreck.
There are non lds who are dishonest too,but to assume since they are lds they are honest is naive.
https://www.lds.org/church/news/affinity-fraud-called-a-destructive-crime-at-conference?lang=eng
-
1 hour ago, JoCa said:
What . . .wow. What a total complete pack of lies. Man people are stupid when it comes to money. There are so many assumptions baked into this cake (and lies) . . .oh my goodness.
Financial idiocy. This guy is just plain stupid and is just working to enslave people, very unfortunate so many people listen to snake-oil charmers.
Do you mind listing which of the 11 reasons is a lie? Obviously I'm an idiot so I need it in black and white please.
I have followed a theory close to his and yes I have a long mortgage, but have also amassed enough in 401K and 457 money to pay cash for the home (after taxes and early withdrawal penalty) if things get that bad. Even with a 50 % market downturn I could make my house payment for at least 30 years. People end up with a home by paying early but miss out on market returns by investing in a dead asset. Disaster comes and they still don't have enough only to fund their daily living expenses even without the house payment.
https://www.moneyunder30.com/why-your-house-is-not-an-investment
-
No matter what happens, we will be sitting it out anyway. Not the US...lds
-
-
On 11/5/2017 at 11:25 PM, Ironhold said:
Actually sat through it this morning... the parts I stayed awake for, at least.
There were four speakers, and the bulk of it was about the recent hurricanes and the various relief efforts that were undertaken in their wake. In a nutshell, while the speakers praised everyone who helped out with refugees and the recovery effort, it was noted that there's a lot we need to be doing on a daily basis to help others; it shouldn't take a hurricane to get people up and moving.
Yea I saw it. Here I was with popcorn ready for some big change like gays allowed to have the priesthood or something (lol) and find out it was just back patting for volunteers. They did a good job btw, but if it was such a big deal why not broadcast to the whole church???
-
44 minutes ago, Traveler said:
I agree with this observation but do not understand why you have left out the Republican Party?
The Traveler
Well when the repub party openly supports, advocates and promotes abortion (baby murder) then perhaps I will. In the meantime, they don't even compare.
-
22 minutes ago, zil said:
...because even though "Behold! A Royal Army" is a great hymn, neither Guido plays the violin that well.
are these the clowns were talking about here?
-
Democrats and Hollywood. Oh that's one in the same
-
Well it was a "nothingburger" relatively speaking. Was announced last week and no one knew what the purpose of the broadcast was and we were not told. Come to find out friends and family in other stakes were given the same info. They had no idea what it was about. Anyway we were all thinking there was gonna be some grand announcement. There wasn't.
It was a broadcast specifically to the "North American - Southwest Area"
Weird how this was communicated to the people in the pews.
Should have slept in.
Getting lost in Statistics in retaining membership
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
Tell that to bro David beck. He went on a speaking tour to scout leaders about 5 yrs ago....or maybe more. Was banging on the pulpit on a sat afternoon telling us we suck as scout leaders cuz not enough boys were getting their eagles. And because of that they also would be less likely to go on a mission.
I never bought into to it esp since there are so many merit badge factories and fake eagles in the church anyway. Strange correlation to cheat on merit badges and the eagle and somehow you are more likely to serve a mission....hmmm wierd