Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Why are Utahns such suckers?

KSL's piece on the latest fraud news out of Utah mentions the propensity of many residents, especially LDS members, to fall for anyone in a suit who promises low risk and high returns. Ironically, we have a state full of gamblers. The same people who would be aghast at shelling out $50 for an evening in Wendover will hand over $10,000, few questions asked, to people like Linda Woolf and David Gengler ("Teach Me to Trade"), or Val Southwick. "Wow, 200 percent return per year with no risk? Sign me up!"

In light of these fraud schemes, the First Presidency of the LDS Church recently passed along a message, which in part reads, "We are concerned that some Church members ignore the oft-repeated direction to prepare and live within a budget, avoid consumer debt, and to save against a time of need." It goes on to recommend members invest with responsible and established financial institutions.

Will it do any good? Hard to say. As the saying goes, "There's a sucker born every minute, and most of them in Utah."

3 comments:

Ed said...

It's the same reason so many Utahns are lured by the siren song of Multi-Level Marketing/ponzi schemes...making money for nothing.

An LDS friend of mine says it's the result of the Church encouraging large families, which means lots of stay at home moms, which means only one "regular" income, which means something's got to give...hence, MLM's, risky investments schemes, get rich quick schemes.

Anonymous said...

I won't argue that a lot of Mormons HAVE large families. And I'm sure leaders at some point encouraged Mormons to brings lots of spirits to earth (phrased something like that).

But I can't recall hearing any church leaders encouraging large families any time recently. Just because so many are doing it doesn't mean that the church is encouraging it. Take the topic of this post as an example.

And since this post really was about poor investments, not big Mormon families, I'll comment on that as well: hmm... I don't know why we're so stupid. ed is probably onto something (even if I disagreed with his use of the word "encouraging").

Perhaps some of the Mormons that believe in bringing lots of God's spirit children to a good family should consider having one or two less in favor of bringing them to a family that isn't so poor that they feel the need to risk their life savings on ridiculous investments.

Anonymous said...

Does that mean the church is going to return the money they received in tithing from Southwick, Moore, Layton, Hammons and Craig?