A priesthood quorum where some members don’t care about the rest of the quorum is a broken quorum. Even members who are not active with the quorum should care about the other quorum members if for no other reason than that they feel cared for by those quorum members. The quorum is not functioning if some of it’s own members feel left by the wayside. (Even not let by the wayside, just no connection like my boys—couldn’t care less about anyone in their priesthood quorums. Enoch likes Micah Boyer personally but even then, it’s more like “admires from a distance” because they don’t do anything together.)
Welfare patterned after UBI
I had a thought about how existing government welfare programs generally could be modified to more closely resemble and support the way universal basic income would function.
Run assistance on a 3-year cadence. When a determination is made that assistance is needed the assigned aid is guaranteed over a 3-year period. During that time, social workers continue to check in and watch for further need but during that 3 years the aid will not be reduced due to any change in circumstances (it can be increased, sparkling a fresh 3-year window, if such a determination is made but there is no “you got a job or a raise so your benefits will be cut” benefit cliff.). That doesn’t mean that they receive direct aid for all three years – the duration of aid is determined based on the need. Some needs may require aid for the full 3 years, others might be assistance for 2 years with continued monitoring for a further year (watching for anything that might spark a new window), still others might only receive 1 year of monetary assistance followed by 2 years of monitoring.
I don’t know exactly where any given thing might fall but I imagine that job loss would be in the 1 year of aid and 2 years of follow-up while a chronic disability like ALS would likely be 3 years of aid that can only be reduced three years after the latest fresh determination. Aid can also be a combination of cash and other assistance. For example, losing a job might bring monthly cash for a year and 2 years of medical coverage starting when employer coverage ended plus continued contact from a case worker for the remainder of the 3 years in case a need arises. Continued monitoring over the three year period also serves to gather information about how well the program is working beyond the months where they are receiving direct assistance. It’s even possible (taking job loss as an example) to have a moratorium on aid until the end of the 3 year window—1 year of cash and two years where they don’t get further financial assistance even if they remain unemployed (just like cash kept coming during the 1 year even if they got a job).
A ward should be striving to become Zion. They have no excess people available for callings outside the stake unless they are meeting the needs within their ward. If they have needs and people without callings they should be making callings to address the needs. That’s not too say they should refuse if someone is called to something outside the stake (BYU Bishopric, Mission President etc.) But they should not have people without callings (except people who can’t have a calling for some reason) unless they have no needs within the ward. Get creative with callings but use all your resources to address any needs.
Leave a Reply