Hey John, contact me and you can start giving right here!
no one is stopping Buffet or Huntsman from writing out a check to the IRS for
80% of their wealth. So I say to Buffet and Huntsman and all the Hollywood
flakes go ahead and open your check book and write Uncle Sam that HUGE check -
give it all away if you want and then watch it get squandered by the incompetent
federal government!!! If you are so certain that the federal government is so
super efficient then go ahead and donate Jon Huntsman - EVERYTHING YOU HAVE.
What you will see is the BIG UNION boss's getting more than their fair share
along with other corrupt organizations such as moveon.org and others. I swear,
the stupidity of people never ceases to amaze me. Huntsman really ought to
change his political affiliation to democrat in the mean time.
Why can't more Republicans think like the Huntsman's?
Rich need to give more sure.Poor need to get up off the couch and
stop making excuses as to why they can't do something. Instead of
blaming the rich, lets blame the poor for being poor its about as logical. I love it how government punishes success.
Very thankful, and impressed, as well, with all the Huntsman family has done,
and is doing in their goal to find the cure for cancer.
BravoCudos to this man and the good he has done and continues to do.
Mr. Huntsman has it all wrong. The members of the "occupy" movement
don't want billionaires going around building hospitals and engaging in 3rd
world development. The only philanthropy they care about is their own
pocketbooks. They feel entitled to cushy jobs, fat paychecks and generous
benefits and they don't think they ought to have to work very hard or sacrifice
for it. They want the government to step in, take your money, and give it to
jonny jr. you could give more money. no one is stopping you unless Jon sr won't
give you a larger allowance
Certainly Jon Huntsman Sr. has been extraordinarily generous over the years and
should be commended. The timing of the statement, however, seems politically
Jon Huntsman needs to stop this game he is playing! He is a Democrat! Simply
admit it, formally switch parties, and run against Obama. It is just silly for
him to continue wasting time and money on this charade. He is irrelevant to the
vast majority of Republicans.
Patriot - turn down the radio and read the article. JMH has poured hundred of
millions of his own wealth into this community and is the sole reason why we
have a world class cancer hospital in our great state. 1 in 3 of us will be
affected by cancer. I am sure one of your relative has been treated at Huntsman
Cancer Hospital. Think before you type.
@LDS Liberal:First of all, it's Huntsmans, not Huntsman's.
Secondly, he DOES think like Republicans. Hunstman Sr. said that the rich
should not be required to give the money through taxes, that they should give
from the goodness of their heart. The Liberals believe that the rich should be
taxed more and more (socialism??). By the way, that's the difference between
Socialism and the Law of Consecration. With Socialism, you are required to
give. With the Law of Consecration, you give because you want to, not because
you are taxed. Don't misunderstand Hunstman's words.
If there is to be sacrifice, why shouldn't the rich sacrifice too?
I do think the ultra rich should give more, but not to the government. I think
Jon Huntsman Sr's Huntsman Cancer treatment center has done much more to better
society than the government would have done with that same money. If you are a
multimillionaire there is so much good you can do without handing everything
over to the wasteful mess the government is. You can start foundations, support
scholarships for education, donate to medical research, help assist families who
have difficulty paying large medical bills, etc. I don't think they should be
required to give 80% of their wealth so that the government can hand out more
entitlements, and pay for massive wasteful spending projects that do nothing to
make this country great. We don't need bigger government, we need more
@patriot | 1:56 p.m. Oct. 17, 2011 Oops, this is Jon Huntsman SR,
not Junior. He is not talking about giving it to the government but to
charities.Not for my comment:If you do three things;
Graduate from high school, wait until you are twenty to get married, and wait to
make a baby until after you are married, there is an 80% chance you will never
live in poverty. Miss any one of them and there is an 80% chance you will live
in poverty.If you really want to impact poverty you need to convince
people to study in school and teach them to have a little bit of self
control.While I do not believe in limiting a persons income, I do
believe that if each of us received a plot of land (say an acre) and were to
build a small, simple home on it (rules would apply, like homesteading) things
would be far better.If you had a home that nobody could take away
and a garden plot it would go a long way toward ending human suffering.Give me the land of inheritance like in the Old Testament.
I believe that Jon Huntsman - not silver-spoon Jon Huntsman - is right, as a
moral stand. However, this story seems to lead to confusion as to who said that
the rich should give more. It also lends confusion as to how this might relate
to the Occupy movement. I don't think that Mr. Huntsman advocates either
taxation (redistribution) or Occupy. He simply has proclaimed his belief that
it is better for everyone for the wealthy to become generous by giving their
accumulated wealth away (at least 80%) rather than to have it taxed or
inherited. This is conservative ideology.
What I keep finding ironic is that the Huntsman Cancer Institute does not accept
charity cases. The Jon Hunstmans can get their financial investment back
anytime they decide to sell.
@patriot,It appears you did not read the article or you lack reading
comprehension skills. Mr. Huntsman did not say anything about taxes. He spoke
about the need for super wealthy people to be more generous about donating their
wealth to good causes. How can that make you so angry?
Huntsman sr has done many great things for our state and is a very generous man.
It is too bad jr lacks his dads character and integrity.
Oooooh. Jon just sealed his fate!
Notice the key word he used is GIVE. Rich should GIVE, it shouldn't be TAKEN.
Huntsman senior said: "I SUGGESTED they give 80%". I don't think he
meant for them to give more money to the corrupt government. John Jr. is
playing into the leftists ploy of having the government take a little more from
the OTHER GUY. Thinking that someone has a right to anybodys property or wealth
is ludicrous. To our government leaders; clean your own house and stop spending
Hey Huntsman! How about instead of whining about the "rich" giving
more, talk about how the government needs to SPEND less! Why? Because no matter
how much money we give the government, it will never be enough to pay for all
their blunders,bailouts, welfare entitlements, incompetance and Solyndra
debacles! We will never tax the rich enough to pay for everything the other half
demands, never! There isn't enough money on the earth for socialism to continue!
To all those who say, "if they want to give more, they can write a
check," grow up. W gave the upper class tax cuts in hopes that they would
invest more in America--you know, trickle down economics. What did they do?
Shelter their money, invest in overseas jobs, use it to buy even more influence
in government legislation. Do you really think most of the rich are going to
give out of the goodness of their hearts--HA! I remember reading
how well the Pharisees were in helping out the people with their extra income
:-). The bible said something about it would be harder for a rich man to enter
heaven than a camel to go through the eye of the needle--WAIT A MINUTE, that's
class warfare. That no good community organizer that roamed the middle east a
couple millennium ago is trying to start class warfare against the good and
decent money changers?The law of consecration isn't open to
interpretation, much like the word of wisdom isn't a voluntary guideline. I
remember reading about people who left the church because of the sacrifice of
living the law. Excessive richness now, or treasures in heaven?
Don't worry folks, I have sounded off too without actually reading the article.
I guess Mr. Huntsman said the rich should be more charitable. Nothing wrong
with that per se, in fact I have heard that in church a few times myself...
and the article was actually about Jon Huntsman Sr. who has more than walked the
walk on this one...
It is wrong to get angry at people who are rich and do not use their money the
way many of us, including me, should by helping others. If they are greedy, they
will have to live with the choices they have made in this life. They have their
agency to spend their money the way they want.
The idea that the rich shouldn't pay taxes because the government is wasteful is
the most ridiculous, ill thought out idea in our society today; it's also one of
the most destructive to our economy. Do these people have any clue what America
would look like if none of us paid taxes?I am so sick of middle
class republicans defending the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.The top 5% are currently paying about half the amount of taxes they were
50 years ago while the middle class's taxes have stayed virtually the same, yet
middle class republicans think it's not fair to tax the rich. Anyone
who believes that giving the rich tax breaks will somehow benefit them someday
doesn't understand basic math, or history for that matter.
A better solution to the unprecedented wealth/income gap between rich and poor
would be to outsource to other nations all CEO and executive positions (the same
as they are doing to us, the working class). I am sure they can find plenty who
would work for a fraction of what they take in compensation and this will save a
bundle of money that then can be used to pay the masses something resembling
more of living wage, thus decreasing poverty.
The elephant in the donation center is this: when these monstrously large checks
are written and these terrific causes, foundations, and centers are
underwritten, they serve only the intended recipients, and others are left out.
Ultimately, large chunks of needy humanity fall through enormous cracks in the
donation floor. No matter how well-intentioned, no way can every deserving
person be helped. The most efficient way to do it is through government
programs, and, in spite of what the noisemakers would like you to think, the
silent majority are law-abiding and work as hard as they can if they are able
and have something to do, even if it seems insignificant to someone else. And
the people who do benefit are, as a group, grateful for what they receive. If
you have never been part of this group, never had to take help such as I mention
here, I thank you to not make assumptions you cannot possibly have the knowledge
WildcatIt's their money. If they don't want to give it to charity,
what business is that of yours? If they want to make overseas jobs why is that
your business? I don't think it's right either, but it's nobody's
business but theirs. Let them do with their money what they want. The
government has no right to tell rich people what they can and can't do with
@Wildcat,"The law of consecration isn't open to interpretation,
much like the word of wisdom isn't a voluntary guideline. I remember reading
about people who left the church because of the sacrifice of living the law.
Excessive richness now, or treasures in heaven?"So sad. Sounds
like Syrian law almost. Treasures in Heaven, like a 1000 virgins for being a
martyr? Sorry, don't mean to relate your faith with the Middle East faith.There's another way too. A way without what you faithfully cling to as
the 'truth'. Just saying your statement is not mandatory to everybody. Maybe
you should "grow up".
I have had the pleasure of meeting Mr. huntsman, several times, and he is a very
generous and impressive man. I am sure he knows what he is talking about.Several of the posters here, probably don't understand the difference
between, rich people giving their money away and having it taxed. I do agree,
the rich need to give more and the government needs to spend less.
"He sympathizes with the protestors in New York City who have resolved to
"Occupy Wall Street"Anyone who has watched this filthy and
phony debauchery on the occupy wall street "reality TV series" and
actually takes it serious has no business running for president. These young,
clueless, dirty punks are getting paid by the socialist monster himself George
Soros and Unions to go down there and cause havoc and that is a fact - follow
the money trail as they say. The DMC is also knee deep in this phony action and
all in an attempt to cause more "hate the rich" class warfare which
coincidentally folds nicely into Obama's latest 400 billion tax the rich budget
tax fiasco. This occupy Wall street nonsense is as genuine as professional
wrestling and the majority can't begin to explain why they are there or what
they are trying to accomplish other than they get free drugs, sex and a nice
check from Soros. Huntsman's misplaced sympathy for occupy wallstreet is more a
key indicator of his unfitness for the presidency than anything else. I am happy
that Jon donates millions but so do many other billionaires - Bill Gates!!
Why don't the wealthy people who feel that everyone should get give up their
money, just give up their own money and call it good?Why is everyone
greedy and fixated at stealing other peoples money? I have no problem with
someone becoming super rich through their hard work and using their brain. That
disparity doesn't bother me. It does bother me, when I my money is taken from
me, to give to those who refuse to work and live off of the welfare system.
Where is the protesters for that? Oh yeah they're they occupy protesters
demanding that the government steal from other for them and give them other
peoples money.If the occupy group feel like they have had money
stolen from them or have been wronged then there would be a clear court case to
pursue. So why aren't they?
Sooooooooooooo Republican!Most comments here discussing money and
what a rich fellow wants to do with it.What Mr. Hunstman wants to do
and what he thinks is his personal opinion... why does it bother you?.... Is
that making you feel stingy and petty perhaps?
I hope this paper's own CEO, Mark Willes, reads this article.
Oh geez, another Soros comment.Other than playing for different
teams, how is Soros any different from the Koch brothers?If you cant
see the similarities, you are politically blind.
I do wish someone would explain to me the rationale for some of the middle
class, working class, and downright poorer than a country church mouse folk who
side with the Ebenezer Scrooges hanging on to their dead presidents with a death
grip. It makes no sense why these folks, many of them barely hanging in there,
are willing to see their fellow man and woman go without in favor of keeping
favorable tax status for the uber-wealthy. The semantic game-playing of saying
"raising taxes" when someone wants to move the tax code back to when
the most favored among us paid more is a fancy bit of wordsmanship but not fair
to the majority, and no one is asking to return to the rates of earlier years.
If all these supporters are truly believing that the day is just around the
corner that they, too, will be uber-wealthy, I would suggest they enter
sweepstakes. The wealthy don't spend money to grow the economy. It didn't happen
before and it isn't going to happen now.
The view of many economic winners, is that people only get rich because they
live in a society that helps them make their bundle. Andrew Carnegie famously
argued that wealth creation was a collective enterprise in his essay Gospel of
Wealth, which called for an estate tax. Warren Buffett who says he was deeply
influenced by Gospel Wealth is just one of many wealthy Americans who attribute
their success to such public goods as universities, infrastructure, and
government-funded scientific research. If you stick me down in the middle of
Bangladesh or Peru, Buffett has said, youll find out how much this talent is
going to produce in the wrong kind of soil.The divide among the rich
over taxes has sharpened as America has moved into the Information Age.
Entrepreneurs who work in a complex knowledge economy are more likely to view
wealth creation in collective terms and, as a practical matter, depend more on
public structures. It makes sense to them to pay higher taxes to bolster these
Something to think about.....If the wealthy give more to charity, they can
deduct more frome their taxes, which would decrease the amount of tax
@patriotYou should do some investigating on your own about the
Occupy Wall Street movement and quit getting your opinions fed to you by Hannity
and Limbaugh, etc. Are you not aware that this movement has spread,
not just around the entire country, but around the globe? It is made up of
people of all ages, race, and economic status who, unlike yourself, have finally
woken from their slumber and are insisting things change. No more of this
'privatize the profits and socialize the losses' evil. No more bailing out the
big banks and then paying them to use our own debit cards. No more corporate
financing the politicians who are then forever indebted to their financiers. And
yes, I'm speaking of all of them R and D. I'm sorry, but if you are
wealthy and vote Republican you are selfish. If you are NOT wealthy and vote
Republican you are not thinking clearly. BTW, should I judge the
entire Tea Party by the loons with the guns and the racist signs? And, how many
people have you seen at all the OWS protests who are openly carrying guns?
Okay show of hands... how many people know whether or not the Jon Huntsman in
the title is running for president? How many people know whether or not the Jon
Huntsman advocated for tax increases in this article?Does there need
to be a cliffnotes version of this article or would that still have been too
much for some of you to have read?
Joseph B. Wirthlin: The Great Commandment"Nothing you do makes
much of a difference if you do not have charity. You can speak with tongues,
have the gift of prophecy, understand all mysteries, and possess all knowledge;
even if you have the faith to move mountains, without charity it won't profit
you at all...."Without charityor the pure love of
Christwhatever else we accomplish matters little. With it, all else becomes
vibrant and alive."I'd say Mr. Huntsman is correct. Thank you
so much for being a good example, Mr. H.
@Too It is their money. I'm not telling them what to do with it. I
am merely suggesting they were given a chance to trickle it down, they didn't.
We should go back to Clinton tax rates since the tax cuts didn't work for the
upper bracket to get more money in the treasury. Just a little fairness,
millionaires can write off depreciation for jets, joe blow can't write of
depreciation for his car. Small business can't get help with loans. Big Oil
gets millions of tax dollars subsidies.@LVAlfreActually,
the stuff I was talking about comes out of the Bible. It has nothing to do with
the Middle East faith you brought up, but way to set up a straw man for your
argument.I was just pointing out the parallel of thinking and how it
coincided with the Bible. You can interpret it how you want. Where much is
given, much is expected. I think there are some rich people who are great
examples of helping the community, but in my opinion, many people might need a
loophole or two closed to see the light. Shared sacrifice includes the
"In February of 1831 the Prophet Joseph received a revelation in which the
Church was commanded to remember the poor, and consecrate of thy properties for
their support that every man who has need may be amply supplied and receive
according to his wants (D&C 42:30,33). This has been the standing law of the
Church from the beginning to the present, repeated and amplified in revelations
and discourses." Gordon B. Hinckley, 9/5/01"commanded" ... "amply" ... "wants" ...
"subject to ... presidents" ... (If you say)"The man has brought
upon himself his misery (and do not repent you have) no interest in the kingdom
of God" ... "be ... free with your substance that (your brethren) may
be rich like unto you." Words have meaning. Plain and simple
meaning. The question none of my more conservative friends answer: "Why do
you have a problem with the government commanding you to do something you've
already been commanded to do?" Redistribute it yourself (as Huntsman has
done) or, if laws demand it, let less efficient bureaucrats redistribute it. Or
change the law. Or suffer. During or after this life.
Anyone who looks at the amount of money the federal government takes in and how
much it spends will soon realize that we don't lack income. The feds just won't
quit spending it!
Right attitude, wrong methods. While he is glorifying himself and all his
generosity of being a philanthropist, which only serves as a measure among the
rich bragging to each other, he enslaves and indentures his employees. He should start giving back by giving to the economy and not selfish self
interests. This man is using his wealth for power and political purposes,
Huntsman did not build the cancer hospital(s), he donated to them so his reward
was putting his name in them. Taxpayers built and run these institutes so don't
let this man mislead the work of others.The rich should not give
back in glorifying themselves with public donations or taxation, they should be
giving back by giving to those who made him his riches, his employees working
for minimum wage and living in poverty. The rich are exploiting the workers and
stripping the economy of growth by suppressing workers of any prosperity. Being
fair and honorable to employees has nothing to do about education or years in
public training school system, its about treating your subordinates with
prosperity and just wages as well.
John has always had a great sense of fairness for all. As governer he never
tripped over himself trying to please any group or political party. He has the
best mind of any of the current crop running for president. He has
"All of Americans", in mind when he talks about our country. I
can say without a doubt: AM radio, and all of talking heads would never be
listened to by the likes of Huntsman. I doubt he would sign G. Norquists evil
I agree that the title of this article is misleading and confusing. I agree with
giving more, but it shouldn't just mean money alone. I think the poor should
give more time, effort, and hard work to helping the economy. How? By stop
expecting handouts from everybody else and learn to be self reliant and self
sufficient. This is the real reason our economy is hurting. Greed is also a
factor but as a society we all worry to much about what everyone else is doing
and we don't focus enough on our own efforts.
Kargirl:What you are suggesting is what Lenin tried to do in the
Soviet Union--force the rich down so the poor could rise. One just has to read a
little history of Stalin's forced collectivizations that killed millions to see
the result. It didn't work and never will. I like the appeal that Jon Huntsman,
Sr., is making--a free will offering to bring to pass much good in areas of his
choosing. I think we would do better by inspiring rather than taking. Some will
rise to the occasion; others will not. But just taking it will make us all the
poorer in the long run. At the end of "A Christmas Carol", we see
Scrooge gleefully going about doing good of his choosing, not just turning it
over to an impersonal government. That's where the joy comes in.
To LDS Liberal: It is a known fact that conservatives give far more in
charitable donations and donated time in service than liberals. See Arthur
Brooks' study. Even though liberal family incomes average 6% highter than those
of conservative families, conservative families give 30% more to charity on
average. So push your liberal hypocrisy somewhere else.I admire Jon
Huntsman Sr. He has found ways to use his money to bless the lives of other
people rather than giving it to the government to have it completely wasted.
Anyone who thinks the answer is giving more to our corrupt government to waste
away (see the story about $16 muffins at DOJ conference) is out of their mind.
Jon Huntsman Sr. was my LDS Mission President many years ago.He lives his
life under the creed: "Because I have been given much, I too must
give."Many do not know his Father taught school in a little
one-room school house in Blackfoot Idaho. He didn't get his 1st pair of new
shoes until he was 7 or 8 years old.Although wealthy now - he always
said he was never happier than when his dear Mother was still alive.She
died from cancer while he was very young.All the money in the world could
not bring her back - He always felt the if he had it, maybe he could use it to
keep some other little boy or girl from feeling the grief and loss knew growing
up.God Bless you President Huntsman.
A good example of how capitalism should work.
When you give to the least you have given to me. Thank you for compassion and
Re: ". . . [Elder Huntsman] believes increased generosity among the
nation's wealthiest could 'go a long way toward fixing things'."Agreed.But advocating or acquiescing in the fleecing of other
people, be they the Nation's wealthiest, poorest, or anything in between, by the
use of whatever "yours-is-mine" sophistry one chooses, is NOT
generosity.It will "fix" nothing. It will destroy
everything.Taking by force the property of another, whether done at
the point of a gun, or by means of some "progressive," due-process
hustle, is a mugging.Each is the moral equivalent of the other.Justifying either is socialist sophistry and, as Marx, Engels, and more
modern socialists admit, leads inevitably to chaos, bloodshed, and genocide.Always has. Every single time it's been tried.Occupy Wall
Street is just the most recent mad dash to ruin. If embraced, the unavoidable
result is a "liberation" of America, indistinguishable from
1917-Russia, late-20s Germany, late-40s China, early-50s Korea, mid-50s Cuba, or
mid-60s Africa and Latin America.
So go ahead, send out a fat check, but stop usurping the right to make this
decision for ME.
Wow,I applaud Mr. Huntsman for making his statement, it is sad that
so many on here attack him for suggesting those with "excess" share
that with those less fortunate. I am a member of the predominant religion in
this state, and I thought that concept was gospel doctrine, not only in the LDS
church, but many others as well.Maybe I missed something, I am sure
I will be enlightened soon.
@Owen: "Why do you have a problem with the government commanding you to do
something you've already been commanded to do?"Where to begin
with this logical fallacy. The commandment was to give what you had for the
building of the KINGDOM OF GOD on the earth. Your whole argument is shot to
shreads right there, but I'll continue. In consecration, people give
back to God because He blessed them to begin with. If you adhere to the notion
that the president is God and we should give all we have back to the president
and congress to distribute, then this is a valid argument, but you might have a
hard time reasoning that Obama=GodWith any commandment, all
adherents have agency. If you obligate me to do something, then the whole
premise of obeying a commandment is taken away. I am all for
reasoned discussion, but honestly, if you think taxation and consecration are
the same thing, there is just no hope.
Re:Built2lastBrooks study is flawed. For one thing, he didn't factor in
cost-of-living. Research by the Center on Wealth and Philanthropy at Boston
College identifies New York, Utah, California, Connecticut, Maryland, New
Jersey, Georgia, Massachusetts, Hawaii and South Carolina as the ten leaders in
charitable giving among the 50 states. In addition, the District of Columbia was
second only to New York in the new report, released this week by the Boston
Foundation.Furthermore. According to the Bureau of Labor statistics,
the poor are the most charitable as a percentage of income.As for
the $16 muffins, it was a nice talking point without any basis in reality. We ought to be concerned about how much time our elected representatives
spend merely raising money for the next election. We could eliminate a lot of
corruption by having voters contribute $50/yr for financing campaigns and
limiting donations to $100 maximum, an idea put forth by Prof Lawrence Lessig of
Kudos Mr. Huntsman, Kudos.
If rich need to give more, how about those in the "welfare system" and
"entitlement system" taking less.How about polititians earning what
the "medium US income" is and having to pay for their own insurance
and their only retirement would be what they could save in their 401K like the
rest of us. No Pensions, after all most companies do not have pensions any more
only 401K plans. Show me ONE polititian who leaves office anything less than a
millionaire and then tell me to give more. I am sorry, if I gave to every
charity or person standing on the street, I would have to issues IOU's. People
need to start to take some responsibility on their own behalf. If somebody wants
to give everything they have go for it, write you check out but leave my money
to do with what I choose that is what Freedom IS.
The super rich can't give away their money and keep control over others too,
money is power. Poverty stinks.
These comments show who reads articles and who only reads headlines.
LDS Liberal thinks liberals are generous. That's a good one.
To "skeptic | 11:17 a.m" you can't control others when you are DEAD
either.To the rest of you who are bemoaning the fact that Huntsman
wants to give to charity, and not the government, what is wrong with that?
Currently 25% to 30% of the federal budget is taken up in salaries, so that
means that the overhead rate for the federal government is at least 25%. There
are many charities who operate with overhead rates much smaller than that. So,
why complain when somebody wants their money to go to a charity that is more
efficient than the government.From the LDS scriptures Jacob 2:19
"And after ye have obtained a hope in Christ ye shall obtain riches, if ye
seek them; and ye will seek them for the intent to do goodto clothe the naked,
and to feed the hungry, and to liberate the captive, and administer relief to
the sick and the afflicted."It sure sounds like he believes in
the LDS doctrine.
I think there is nothing wrong with giving to Charity even to the point of 80%
if they use it to help US citizens. But giving it to the government is wrong.
All they will do is waste it, give it to other countries, spend it on needless
war or use it to restrict the citizens even more. Big Government is as bad as
banking, even worse.It is time it should stop.
@Redshirt1701Last year the federal goverment spent $1.91 for every
$1.00 they increased in taxes. There are millions of charities out there and I
would like you to show me one, just one, that has sustained that kind of
spending. It is people who feel that government is a charity and that people are
entitled to everything that are a huge problem. If you want to keep throwing out
scriptures that in no way support your argument, how about a quote from
President Benson: "There is, however, a far more common ailment among usand
that is pride from the bottom looking up." Show me one place in
the Constitution, Federalist Papers, or writings from any Founding Father that
suggests that government was set up to be a charity. Last time I checked, they
were terrified of big government... but that's just how me and the Founders
feel.. you are probably right.
I find that if someone wanted to do the most good with their money in current
society they could try to change and influence the entertainment culture by
having real virtous opposition movies to the entertainment of Hollywood! And
Fight hollywood like a mad! All wars are cultural wars! Society is determined by
the culture it immersis it self in. Hollywood pop culture with it's doped up,
dumped down, drunk, cyclical broken middle school marriage marry go round
dribble, high school gossip culture, animal relm, not the relm of Children of
God, this is what is blasted at high volume on every media outlet that is what
destroys society! I think it is good you are curing cancer but look at the real
cancer the bigger problem! Are any of the so called wealthy people taking on
hollywoodobamabiden complex that is at work finishing the work of 60's debased
cultural revolution! If civilized society is destroyed whatever you put money in
will be a empty whole. See president Monsons recent general confrence talk about
the moral revolution. Fight by producing intertainment that teaches trueth and
is wholesome. What is being painted on the blank slate of the childrens minds?
Is this from the same article that Huntsman, Sr. SLAMS Romney? I'm saddened to
see him be....."ugly" w/Romney. " Mr. Huntsman, a
longtime Republican stalwart, had plenty to say, in the wide-ranging interview,
about politics and the field of presidential candidates, notably Mitt Romney.
Republican primary voters, Mr. Huntsman said, are ignoring the best and most
qualified candidate, namely his son, Jon M. Huntsman Jr., a former Utah
governor. Mr. Romney, who led the 2002 Winter Olympics here, is
hugely popular in Republican-dominated Utah, as is Mr. Huntsman Jr. Mr. Huntsman
Sr. was a national finance co-chairman for the Romney campaign in 2008, but
those days, he said, are over. Ive worked for three different
Romneys, he said. One time Mr. Romney was a liberal, in running for the Senate
in 1994 in Massachusetts against Edward M. Kennedy, Mr. Huntsman said, the next
time he was a moderate in running for governor in 2002, and now he is a
conservative in seeking the presidency. If you need to win that
badly, he said, I guess you just kind of do what you have to do get a vote.
Wow I am flabbergasted by the comments on this article. A rich guy suggests
that the rich should share some of their excess money, and people go crazy. The republicans are truly the party of the rich and for rich and will
roundly criticize anyone who suggests that the rich share any of their money. I
can't imagine the criticism who would be getting if he suggested that they also
pay a bit more in taxes. I think Mr. Huntsman Sr. should be immediately kicked
out of the republican party for such inappropriate comments. Maybe the Utah
legislature should convene another special session, send the republicans into a
closed caucus and come out and revoke Mr. Huntsman's party membership and then
suggest that he move to California with others who have the same crazy thoughts.
Maybe they could even offer to have the state pay for his transportation to the
I totally agree with Mr. Huntsman. And, I applaud
I disagree. If a person is forced to give. They are not giving, they are being
taxed.If you mess with Religious giving a lot of people get hurt.
Asking for Money is the greatest fear of most Pastors with the
exception of their becoming Divorced, which is a Death Sentence to their Paid
Job in Religion. Weather you Teach full blown tithing or Chomp Change in the
Offering Plate you are still subject to offending the Board.The only
way around this is for the Pastor to own the property and building and a RTM on
the name of his Church.Indie Non De Noms are the best at this. Mormons are supposed to give 10% just to keep the TR punched. I have not
been a TR Mormon for many years with no intention of changing anytime soon. Mostly because I would Not stand in Circle in Laie with those that do
go. Because many support those that Support Abortion. There is not enough soap
for me to wash my hands clean of them. Because of that I will miss my daughters
endowment session. I will go to the BYUH Cafe and cry in my Dim Sum.
Amen! What a great and inspired man!
Whom does Jon (big non issue) think is Rich and what is considered enough?Lets take that alone. What is considered enough?10% for your
Tithe, and a decent Fast Offering. Whats Decent? That is up to the person
giving.I give my money mostly to the Church, because i know it goes
where I send it. I evan did this prior to joining the church.A
person may not ask a visitor for Money or pass the Plate but they will sure take
it when offered. Nothing Wrong With That by the Way. Religion is a Business get
over it. I goes back to the Member of the 1st 12 that kept the purse. To the
point of Jesus and him having words about it.The Mormon Church keeps
its business side and Non Profit Side Seperate and pays Taxes where needed. Have
servive many attacks and audits and I am Extremely Proud of that.Almost No One is in anything that there is No Money in.i worked in
a place that some said that "they do it for the kids". My answer was
"can I have your pay check its more then mine".
I agree with Awe. What is enough??? If I was Rich and I gave
millions some one would say you need to give more.When
Fundamentalist get their tithe they then start working on the Love offering. Socialism and Religion do not work. Religion is a Capitalist Idea,
everyone progresses and does better.Like pres Hickly and his RM
Education Fund. Millions poured in to include some of mine but the Church will
be much better off for it. Notice South American Stake Presidents,
They are often Young. There #1 and #2 are often older, sometimes much older.
Reason All have great faith. Young President has great faith Education and knows
how to use the Toys. Result growth. When I read about them being called in the
Church News I pray for them.Its a lot and its a lot soon.
Who is fighting Hollywood ?? WHO? Who is fighting the real war!? Who, Where are
you? We need you!! Where is the warrior on the big screen to fight
Hollywood's movies and shows and the music industry, by making virtuous
acting! And Fight Hollywood with virtue, love, and good deeds! All
wars are cultural wars! Society is determined by the culture it immerses itself
in to a large extent. I think it is really good you are trying to cure cancer
but look at the real cancer the bigger problem!!! Are any of the so called
people with so much means taking on the Hollywoodgoodisevil piedpiper complex
that is at work finishing the work of 1960's debased sexual revolution? Lets
look at President Monson's talk from conference! Are people misdirected to
where the real war is!? Are we letting the devil and his murderous shows in
through the TV to our temple homes. The war for spirituality in our children
is many times determined in front of the TV? Are we in lalala land? Or have
we lost the passion for your own children's spirituality, happiness and success
now and in the hereafter. Lets pray for the wisdom we need.
This is the Huntsman I wish were running for president - Jon Huntsman Sr. that
is. He is a man of principle and character - as well as very business savvy.
Yes ideed. We need to help those poor wealthy corporations and people. Those
poor people, having made their fortunes (or some family member) off the backs of
the working people in America don't have to give back anything. I love to
support the wealthy, as the poor and middle class gets to pay for everything.After all,look at all the jobs the republicans have created, the better system
of health insurance they have created, the positive stance on public education,
(chough, gasp). The republicans only want personal wealth. Yes Im all for that.
I dont want any workers rights either. My masters, I will help you!Golly,
what AM radio brainwashing can do. Go Glen Beck.
My Step dad lost his leg to cancer years ago and had to go in to get treatment
for an infection of the stump a couple years ago. They were having trouble
getting out of the car and an older man ran over to help them. He asked how
everything was going and after a couple minutes he wished them good luck and
left. When they walked in there was a picture of John Huntsman and it was the
same man who had just helped them. He treated my family like any other
person and did not ask for anything in return. When they got the statement from
the center my parents were worried about how much it would cost because they did
not have insurance coverage for it and were shocked that it was all covered. Before you continue your criticisms remember that not all rich people are as
cynical and selfishly minded as you are.
@ Cora SmithBefore you are judgemental regarding Jon Huntsman Sr.,
you should realize that he started with virtually nothing. His family was poor.
He did not marry into money. He created success with significant hardwork, an
attitude of never giving up, sacrificing early on many of the more "fun
living" persuits, and creating a success story like few other have or will
in the future.Corporations to not make their "fortunes off the
backs of the working people of America". They reward their employees based
on the market wage, based on the skills and service provided from the
employee.Why do those who are successful accomplish what many of us
(including myself) do not? Because they are willing to sacrifice their time,
take the risks of failure, and a whole lot of their own personal blood, sweat,
and tears, never giving up, to achieve that success.John Huntsman Sr
gives back - not because he is compelled to through taxation, but by his own
choice. Someday, we may see advances in overcoming cancer because of his
charity. John Huntsman Sr. is the best example of a hero that I can think of -
an ethical corporate man of character!
@Russ,Love it! I get that kind of vibe from Huntsman .. i really
like that guy.
patriot | 6:39 p.m. Oct. 17, 2011 Cedar Hills, UT "He
sympathizes with the protestors in New York City who have resolved to
"Occupy Wall Street"...Huntsman's misplaced sympathy for
occupy wallstreet is more a key indicator of his unfitness for the presidency
than anything else.patriot | 1:56 p.m. Oct. 17, 2011 Cedar
Hills, UT ...I swear, the stupidity of people never ceases to amaze
me. Huntsman really ought to change his political affiliation to democrat in the
mean time. =============================== You must not
realize this enitre article is about Huntsman Sr. not Jr. right?or did you
just read the title and go off on a rant?Amzaing is right.....
Conservitave Veteran: If you read my first post today you would have learned
that I like the Huntsman's. Jr, also has a fair mind towards all of us.I
try not to paint with a broad brush, but sometimes it's hard not to. In being
snide, it was because I don't understand why more of the wealthy do not have the
Huntsman attitude towards their fellow Americans. Look at the Koch bros. and
Murdock and the rest of that particular brand of American. Those boys are paying
millions upon millions to protect wealthy citizens and corporations at the
expense of the poor and middle class. Instead of jobs, they have sent the jobs
overseas for even more profit. Without a viable middle class we are going to be
sunk. Children and grand children even worse off.I know its not simple, but we
need revenue to put people to work.
One thing I see a lot of is harking back to what seems more like "horse and
buggy" days. Do you want to still have women be allowed to vote? Can
everyone get educated? Can we still have computers? When I see people refer to
times in the past, and see it again and again, it leads me to wonder whether
there is any thought to what changes they are willing to make in order to also
change the political structure of just a few points. As the phrase goes,
"be careful what you wish for, you might get it". And those of you who
would like to see the wealthy saved from the nasty poor people--you may think
you aren't among them, but eventually, without regulation of those with the most
power, you will be. There's another expression, and before you bemoan
regulations regarding business, remember it: Power corrupts, and absolute power
And who's going to pay for those Canadian buses Pres. Obama is riding in as he
concurently runs for office and touts his concern for American jobs? The buses
were purchased with our U.S. tax dollars, in Canada, and we need now to tax the
rich, take money away from charities, to pay for them. This makes perfect sense
to the Democrats, why cant you other guys see it?Sorry for the
sarcasm, I'm grateful for Huntsman Sr.'s charitable donations and his
suggestion, yet it is true that we cannot, should not, force the rich, because
then we are taking by force of law, and more freedoms are eroded.
The guy that is Occupying Deer Valley.
I define Rich as being everyone who earns a dollar more than me. Tax 'em, take
it all. How do we define rich...the Democrats are after salaried people who
are successful. By the time Obama is through the defination of rich would
probably start at about $50K. HIs problem is that he never did anything in the
real world, he never earned any real money previously, so he is very jealous of
all those who work hard and achieve success. Liberals, if you want to pay more
to the government... go right ahead, don't wait.
Starting new businesses or expanding existing businesses provides long term
sustainable employment. These jobs are sustainable because they produce a
profit.While giving to charity is wonderful, and many charities are
very necessary and do work that businesses cannot do, if you really want to
provide long term employment you need to invest in wealth generating
activities.Government consumes wealth, it does not create wealth.
All wealth is created in manufacturing, mining and agriculture. (Don't
believe me? Just get rid of everything produced with manufacturing, mining and
agriculture and just see what is left.) Government over regulation has just
about outlawed wealth producing activities.Let's bring our
manufacturing jobs back. If we do not we can kiss America good bye.
What vision, what commitment and what a great man.Thanks Jon for
being that kind of guy.
And to all the critical republicans who say give your money to the gov. read
the article. he says you shouldn't be compelled to give it way through taxes,
but that you should give it as charity.