Lemmie wrote:bomgeography wrote:Wow I'm glad someone has finally figured it out in the case of Gordon b hinckley, thomas s monson , and Boyd k packer. You figured out their true motives behind their live long service love and dedication to the savior to people and the church. They were only motivated by money. They fooled millions of people but you. Senator Waters was able to identify their true motives. The one who posted a question about motives figured it out. Bravo
Use your public platform as senator to spread the truth.
You didn't answer the question:
bomgeography wrote:It's believed that general authorities make around 70k a year.
Maxine Waters wrote:What evidence leads you to that belief?
In 1996, the stipend was in the neighborhood of $50,000 per year.
In 1996,[2] the church altered some of the responsibilities given to General Authorities. Prior to this point in time, they also served on corporate boards of church-owned companies and for these positions they received a stipend. At that point in time, some of the financial information was disclosed, indicating that the stipend was in the neighborhood of $50,000.00 a year.
To give a sense of proper comparison, US Department of Labor statistics list the 1996 average salary of a civil engineer at $52,750, that of a computer programmer at $50,490, and that of the average junior college teacher at $49,200. Therefore, the living allowance, which provides for most of the normal day-to-day expenses of a full-time authority and his family (including house payments, personal transportation, food, clothing, entertainment, etc.), is in line with that of a professional employee. It is far lower than the large management salaries that might be expected for someone with the skills that these General Authorities must have and the responsibilities that they must shoulder.
These kinds of speculations as to money received almost always comes from disaffected and former members, and involves large round numbers such as $300,000, $500,000 or $1,000,000
They all claim (in true conspiracy theory fashion) to have an inside source. They always make claims with no evidence - and use nice big eye-catching round numbers such as $300,000, $500,000, $1,000,000, and so on. Should the church provide some data, it would almost certainly be dismissed as a cover up of the truth (protected of course by those NDAs, right?). There may be a lot of reasons why people become General Authorities, but it seems doubtful that getting wealthy is one of them. You would think, with hundreds of General Authorities, all supposedly getting excessive payments from the church (as the allegations go) for the last century, there might have been some sort of financial scandal that the critics could pin their speculations to. But it doesn't seem like it, does it?
http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_ ... ng_stipend