All things in common: Participants investment and operations of NewVistas community agencies 

The NewVistas community concept is premised on individual stewardship and self-reliance. People who join the community must have a stewardship (individually owned business) which is able to satisfy their needs and wants and leave a surplus. They must also invest their net worth in the community, through the Capital Bank. The Capital Bank in turn invests in community agencies to offer chargeable services to participants.  

The community is at the same time led by a set of principles, two of which are “no poor among them,” and “all things in common.” All things in common, in its simplest sense, means that the community owns all factors of economic production.  

From a business perspective, the community is composed of, on one hand, around 40,000 limited partners – each of whom has invested at least $20,000, runs a business, and whose liability is limited to the extent of their investment. On the other hand, the Capital Bank, which receives and invests limited partners’ investment, is the general partner. Limited partners do not control the general partner’s investment or operational decisions. They receive a standardized profit share relative to their investment.  

Historical context and scripture references  

The NewVistas community structure is inspired by the Plat of the City of Zion, the design of the House of the Lord, and other revelations that Joseph Smith and his companions in the early LDS movement received in the early 1830s. At the time Joseph Smith was called (1824), and during his subsequent ministry, a wave of Christian revivalism was sweeping across the United States and especially New England. Christians were eager to live the Bible and other sacred scripture, feeling that the modern church had drifted too far away from the original teaching of Christ and his apostles.  

One key part of scripture that the revivalists were excited about was in the New Testament, in the book of Acts of the Apostles. Acts 2:44-45 describes how the apostles lived, saying, “And all that believed were together, and had all things common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.” Acts 4:32-37 further elaborates, with verse 32 saying, “And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things in common.” 

Early LDS leadership encountered other movements that took these verses literally and sought to institute communalism amongst their followers. Sidney Rigdon, who had at one time been a Campbellite was particularly enthusiastic about communalism. His charisma, knowledge of the Bible, and other personal qualities meant he had an enormous influence on the early LDS community’s theology, especially its economic teachings and practice.  

Biblical teaching of early Christian communities was supported by passages in the Book of Mormon which described a time when there was prosperity in the world, with people being united. 4 Nephi 1:2-3 describes the community, “”And it came to pass in the thirty and sixth year, the people were all converted unto the Lord, upon all the face of the land, both Nephites and Lamanites, and there were no contentions and disputations among them, and every man did deal justly one with another. And they had all things common among them; therefore, there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift.” 

Other revelations also sought to emphasize the “all things in common” principle. They included D&C 70, given on November 12, 1831. D&C 70:14 states, “nevertheless, in your temporal things you shall be equal, and this not grudgingly, otherwise the abundance of the manifestations of the spirit shall be withheld.”  

The application of “all things in common” by early Christians and copied by the early LDS and other movements in the 1830s was similar to communalism. People were expected to bring their property, or sell it and bring in the money, which would then be redistributed in a welfare system. This approach did not envisage any economic production, only consumption. As expected, such a system would have been popular with poor people, who had little to lose and all to gain, and resistance by those who had property, who were not comfortable with having their hard-earned property quickly disappear, regardless of the dine inspiration behind the move.  

It is however clear from original revelations that God had no intention of having LDS members redistribute wealth. A key verse to show this is in the Law, verse 30 (with editing changes): Behold thou shalt consecrate all thy properties that which thou hast unto me with a covenant and Deed which cannot be broken…” 

The verse clearly states that people would “consecrate” all the property they had “unto me” – the Lord and His community of believers. This was different from what the saints then tried to practice, and revised into the revelation, “…remember the poor, and consecrate of thy properties for their support that which thou hast to impart unto them.” The Law, therefore, was diluted to become a wealth redistribution and welfare system, rather than a complex economic system which would have guaranteed individual stewardship, self-reliance, and no poor among them, while still achieving “all things in common.” 

The verse continues that, “… & they Shall be laid before the bishop of my church & two of the Elders such as he shall appoint & set apart for that purpose.” The consecrated property would be laid before the bishop and two of the elders.  

The bishop was the recipient of the consecrated property. This designation is later emphasized in the Plat of the City of Zion, in which the three bishop houses are entitled the “sacred apostolical repository for the use of the bishops.” The plat also says that relation to the three central blocks, “the one without any figure is for storehouses for the bishop and to be devoted to his use.” 

The sacred apostolical repository was not to be merely a storehouse, since, as a repository might suggest, resources are retrieved, used, and returned to it. The bishop’s job was therefore to manage the repository on behalf of the community.  

Another key part of the initial revelation was that the members who “consecrated” their property to the community of fellow believers would be issued with “a covenant and Deed which cannot be broken…” A covenant is an agreement which signifies deep commitment between the parties to it. While commonly used in a religious context, in secular instances, it is legally enforceable and includes clear obligations for all parties. The wording of the revelation showed that both the “consecrator” and the community had legal responsibilities and a commitment to abide by the agreement, beyond legal penalties.  

A deed is a legal instrument that shows the transfer of property rights from one party to another. A deed is usually notarized and registered by a government agency. The agreement is also enforceable not only against the parties, but third parties too. By transferring their property rights to the community, members would have given it the legal right to utilize the property, including leveraging it.  

Members of the community were, in this capacity, the “body of Christ.” consecrating one’s property to the Lord and the community meant consecrating it unto all other members, transferring the individual’s property rights, but retaining a deed to show what they had consecrated.  

The verse continues, as quoted above, that consecrated property would be “laid before” or deposited with the bishop and two elders. This clearly indicates that consecration was not a haphazard process, with property merely being “consecrated” to the community. The process was orderly, with clear responsibilities. The “covenant and deed” that a participant in the community received was given by the bishop. The significance of the bishop’s role in investment was to be further expanded in later revelations, especially the plat and the house design, including their administration of the storehouse.  

The revelation further continued that, “it shall come to pass that the Bishop of my church after that he has received the properties of my church that it cannot be taken from you he shall appoint every man a Steward in as much as shall be sufficient for himself and family.”  

Earlier, the bishop was to receive and administer the consecrated property. He would appoint 2 elders to set up stewardships for participants in the community. The stewardships would be able to sustain the needs and wants of the steward and his family. This shows a subtle, yet clear distinction between the role of the bishop and the elders. 

Regardless of how minor the distinctions may seem, saints were commanded to maintain them, as noted in D&C 107, given in revelation in April 1835, D&C 107:99, “wherefore, now let every man learn his duty, and to act in the office in which he is appointed, in all diligence.” While addressing office-bearers, the revelation may also be argued to extend to all participants in the community.  

All stewards were expected to be diligent in their stewardship, not to be slothful, to learn their duty, so that they could be “counted to be worthy,” and be counted “worthy.”  

To further show that this was not a donation to other people, D&C 119, given on 18 July 1838, defined tithing as being based on interest – meaning that the consecrated property would indeed earn the “consecrator” an interest, on which they would then pay a tithe. For the member to be able to pay a tithe, the bishop, the elders, and all other community officials must have collaboratively but independently put the property to good use and earned a return.  

Application in NewVistas 

The NewVistas economic model is based on the “all things in common” principle. Adult members of the community, known as limited partners, invest their net worth into the community through the Capital Bank and start a business, also known as a stewardship, assisted by other community agencies. As they operate the business, they invest their surplus from their individual stewardships, adding further to their investment. The community invests the funds from limited partners in community agencies, which offer services to participants, operating with a profit motive. 

Investment by participants  

When they enter the community, limited partners invest all their net worth in community, through the Capital Bank. The Capital Bank, alongside the community and Commercial Banks, form the community’s economic bureau, and are the bedrock of the newVistas economic system. Just like members of the early LDS community were to lay their property before the bishop, and receive a covenant and deed which cannot be broken, so too do limited partners, investing their net worth in the community through the Capital Bank, opening savings and term deposits with the other two banks, and receiving solemn agreements which clearly indicate their investment and their commitment to the community, as well as the bank’s financial obligations to them.  

The minimum investment is $20,000 known as a unit of partnership interest. If they have fixed assets that are not easy to liquidate, limited partners have a three-year grace period within which they should be able to do so and invest the proceeds in the community through the bank.  

Immediately they enter, limited partners must start a business after the appropriate business and life planning. For the business to be considered successful, it must be able to generate enough for the limited partner’s needs and wants and leave some surplus too. The surplus is invested in the community, adding to their partnership interest. 

The Human Relations, Stewardships, and Business Operations agencies are essential in setting up and running a successful business. The Human Relations Agency handles entry and orientation of a participant and provides them with accommodation. The Stewardship Agency offers business training, maintains an optimal mix of businesses in the community’s economy, and has extensive business space where businesses can operate from. The Business Operations Agency leases equipment out to participants and offers inventory and accounts receivable factoring services.  

For their investment, a limited partner receives a solemn agreement in which their commitment to the community is noted. They are also entitled to a profit share of the community, relative to the amount they have invested. The agreement includes contractual obligations for both parties, and is enforceable in courts of law, being styled as a deed.  

The Capital Bank is authorized to offer banking and investment services in the community. Its core responsibility, besides receiving limited partners’ investments, is to channel the investment to community agencies, and act as a banking regulator. The bank invests in the other 23 agencies.  

The agencies use the funds invested for operations, including down payment for loans they take from one of the bank agencies. From the profits they make, they pay the bank a return on its investment. The bank in turn pays the investors, limited partners, a return.  

The bank pays limited partners an annual return of 12%. In the years it makes more, it retains the excess. When the return is lower, it is still able to pay 12%, using retained earnings from previous periods.  

The commitment to pay an annual return of 12% provides stability to investors. A regular return, which is significantly higher and secure than what similar investment plans can offer, serves to motivate existing limited partners and attract others to join.  

Operations of community agencies  

The implementation of the principle of “all things in common” is perhaps best seen at work in the operation of community agencies. Community agencies are designed to provide every service that a participant may need to succeed in life and business. Community agencies cover all aspects of a participant’s life, from education, health, business planning, life planning, business operations, entertainment, and everything in between.  

Agencies own, on the community’s behalf, all assets. To own these assets, an agency relies on the Capital Bank, which gives it operational capital, including funds needed for loans. With operational capital, the agency approaches one of the three bank agencies for a loan. Each of the 24 agencies belongs to one of three columns. Agencies in column 1 borrow from the Community Bank, column 2 from the Capital Bank, and column 3 from the Commercial Bank.  

With the assets, they can offer diverse services to participants at a fee. For instance, the Human Relations uses the capital and loans to build apartments, which it then rents out to participants. The Communication Agency (agency 10) owns communication infrastructure and equipment, which it leases out to participants.  

Even agencies without tangible assets, such as the Audit or Legal Agencies still own valuable automated systems through which they provide services. Besides paying ordinary operational costs and loans, agencies pay a return to the Capital Bank, the investor.  

Because agencies own assets, and the assets’ ownership is facilitated by the bank agencies, the community achieves the principle of “all things in common.” As explained, all things in common does not mean dividing up resources and consuming them but together owning tools of production. It also involves having a body of participants who have the same aim, and properly understand what the community intends to achieve, especially individual stewardship, self-sufficiency, no poor among them, and all things in common principles.  

In banking practice since the modern development of the institution, when a customer deposits money in an account, that money belongs to the bank. In return, the customer receives a version of an IOU, specifying the benefits of giving the bank the money – interest or other services, and when they can receive the money.  

In the NewVistas concept, the situation is not identical, though there are similarities. When a participant invests in the community and receive a “covenant and deed which cannot be broken,” or a solemn agreement that is legally enforceable even against third parties, they transfer the rights of this property to the bank.  

In addition, however, they are limited partners. In this capacity, they own a part of the community, relative to their investment, which entitles them to the profit share discussed elsewhere in the paper. They also have limited liability, and limited rights in management of the community, as their entry agreement explains.  

Participants also have business and personal accounts with the Commercial and Community Bank, respectively. Their relationship with these banks is similar to how modern customers relate with their banks, with the bank owning the cash but promising to return it on demand or as agreed in writing. 

The community also owns IP. Once an innovator has been helped through processing the intellectual property by the IP Agency, the IP becomes the property of the Commercial Bank. The bank considers IP to be an asset, which it can then leverage by giving out loans.  

This means that all assets, tangible and intangible, and financial resources are owned by the community. The community, by definition, is the entirety of its participants, and it can therefore be asserted that with the community owning all assets, participants own “all things in common.”