Feeling Deprived: A State of Mind
The previous letter that I posted has really been bothering me. I will save the primary reason for a future post (upon my return). But the other reason was the statement that a family should do "normal" to create a regular life so as not to feel deprived: "Again, I want to stress that it's very important not to feel deprived in your life as a family."
To me deprivation is a state of mind, and a bad one at that. (I will save the quote from Pirkei Avot). Baruch Hashem, we all live in relative luxury. Most of us have roofs over our head, food in our stomachs, and probably more stuff than we really need. I think it is far better to find a different angle to view things at and forget about even trying to be "normal." Normal in the frum world is a standard that is near impossible to attain, or as an anonymous commenter wrote, "I think observance is getting to be a mile long and an inch thick." Trying to be "normal" which is a standard that is imposed by outsiders is a quick route to unhappiness.
Sacrificing so much time away from your children as they grow up is something to feel sad about. Getting into routine of fulltime homemaking is a lot like learning a dance, you have to find your groove. So if you want to dedicate yourself to being a (happy) homemaker who doesn't feel "deprived," it is necessary to start re-defining normal, start learning some new skills (like making your own gourmet pizzas), and start socializing with some "abnormal" people.
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Monday, December 24, 2007
Tuition vs. Women's Working Hours
A reader send me a question asked and answered in Baltimore's frum publication the "Where What When." The question addressed to Rebbtzin Weinberg is very much like the questions from the Agudah Conference posed to Rabbi Shmuel Fuerst (see Tuition vs. Camp, Tuition vs. Vacation, Tuition vs. Kollel, Tuition vs. Retirement). So I figured I would put it up as a continuation of the topics discussed already.
DEAR REBBETZIN WEINBERG,
I want to stop working full time, because I miss my children and feel that other people are raising them, not me. My husband is fully supportive of my working only part time. Our question is that we will now have to apply for a tuition reduction. How important is it to pay full tuition as opposed to being at home to raise your children? And if it is okay not to pay full tuition for this reason, are we justified in going to a restaurant (very occasionally) or buying plane tickets for a family simcha, etc? I realize that there is a halachic aspect to this question, but I am asking hashkafically. I hope you can help us clarify this.
WORKING MOM
DEAR WORKING MOM,
You ask a very relevant and important question. I consulted with both a gadol and a Rav, and my answer is based on their opinions.
The Jewish community participates to a significant degree in providing a Jewish education for all Jewish children, regardless of their family's ability to pay. Scholarship assistance should be provided to families that cannot shoulder the overwhelming cost of their children's education alone.
When tuition help is provided, the assumption is made that the parents are truly in need. However, parents are not expected to deprive themselves of every possible extra or put every spare penny into tuition while living at a minimum subsistence level. Parents need to create for themselves and their children a reasonable, "normal" lifestyle. It follows that parents can occasionally exercise the option of eating out, taking a trip, etc., if not doing so would put considerable strain on the couple's relationship or the quality of life for the family. Such activities are part of this feeling of normalcy.
Another assumption that is made when distributing tuition aid is that the primary obligation of the mother is to nurture her family. So if she does work, we can assume that her true motivation is to advance the emotional and spiritual needs of her family, and that her working is not based on some other motives. (I did not get the impression that working part time is a problem.) Women differ in their ability to nurture their families while also working. Children need to have a mother at home, but a lot also depends on how she uses the time with her children, even if she is home all day. So, whether and how much you work is very much a subjective judgment, to be based on the above principles.
It goes without saying that parents need to be extremely responsible in their regard. They should pay what they can, and not take advantage of the fact that their budget crunch is eased by the generosity of the community. In reading your letter, I feel that you are very responsible, and that your concern for finding a proper solution is sincere. People who are not usually don't bother to ask. Again, I want to stress that it's very important not to feel deprived in your life as a family.
My comments: I am sympathetic to the letter writer. I think it is very important for children to have the presence of a parent in the home, not only when they are young, but even when they are teenagers (possibly even moreso). The rush, rush, rush life that many people live as they run between jobs and errands certainly isn't conducive to family life. However, I found the assumption that whatever the wife chooses to do, in terms of work, is to nuture the emotional and spiritual needs of her family, well, uh, interesting. In short, I think this is a broad, but flattering, assumption to make.
In addition, I wonder what the Rebbetzin would define as "normal" and what would be a "minimal subsistence level." From my own perspective, what is considered "normal" in the frum community is a darn expensive. I'm sure it varies by community and by circle, but I lived in a number of places and socialize with a wide range of people and what passes for "normal" looks pretty luxurious to me.
And finally, one wonders how the tuition committee will react when/if the wife stops working?
A reader send me a question asked and answered in Baltimore's frum publication the "Where What When." The question addressed to Rebbtzin Weinberg is very much like the questions from the Agudah Conference posed to Rabbi Shmuel Fuerst (see Tuition vs. Camp, Tuition vs. Vacation, Tuition vs. Kollel, Tuition vs. Retirement). So I figured I would put it up as a continuation of the topics discussed already.
DEAR REBBETZIN WEINBERG,
I want to stop working full time, because I miss my children and feel that other people are raising them, not me. My husband is fully supportive of my working only part time. Our question is that we will now have to apply for a tuition reduction. How important is it to pay full tuition as opposed to being at home to raise your children? And if it is okay not to pay full tuition for this reason, are we justified in going to a restaurant (very occasionally) or buying plane tickets for a family simcha, etc? I realize that there is a halachic aspect to this question, but I am asking hashkafically. I hope you can help us clarify this.
WORKING MOM
DEAR WORKING MOM,
You ask a very relevant and important question. I consulted with both a gadol and a Rav, and my answer is based on their opinions.
The Jewish community participates to a significant degree in providing a Jewish education for all Jewish children, regardless of their family's ability to pay. Scholarship assistance should be provided to families that cannot shoulder the overwhelming cost of their children's education alone.
When tuition help is provided, the assumption is made that the parents are truly in need. However, parents are not expected to deprive themselves of every possible extra or put every spare penny into tuition while living at a minimum subsistence level. Parents need to create for themselves and their children a reasonable, "normal" lifestyle. It follows that parents can occasionally exercise the option of eating out, taking a trip, etc., if not doing so would put considerable strain on the couple's relationship or the quality of life for the family. Such activities are part of this feeling of normalcy.
Another assumption that is made when distributing tuition aid is that the primary obligation of the mother is to nurture her family. So if she does work, we can assume that her true motivation is to advance the emotional and spiritual needs of her family, and that her working is not based on some other motives. (I did not get the impression that working part time is a problem.) Women differ in their ability to nurture their families while also working. Children need to have a mother at home, but a lot also depends on how she uses the time with her children, even if she is home all day. So, whether and how much you work is very much a subjective judgment, to be based on the above principles.
It goes without saying that parents need to be extremely responsible in their regard. They should pay what they can, and not take advantage of the fact that their budget crunch is eased by the generosity of the community. In reading your letter, I feel that you are very responsible, and that your concern for finding a proper solution is sincere. People who are not usually don't bother to ask. Again, I want to stress that it's very important not to feel deprived in your life as a family.
My comments: I am sympathetic to the letter writer. I think it is very important for children to have the presence of a parent in the home, not only when they are young, but even when they are teenagers (possibly even moreso). The rush, rush, rush life that many people live as they run between jobs and errands certainly isn't conducive to family life. However, I found the assumption that whatever the wife chooses to do, in terms of work, is to nuture the emotional and spiritual needs of her family, well, uh, interesting. In short, I think this is a broad, but flattering, assumption to make.
In addition, I wonder what the Rebbetzin would define as "normal" and what would be a "minimal subsistence level." From my own perspective, what is considered "normal" in the frum community is a darn expensive. I'm sure it varies by community and by circle, but I lived in a number of places and socialize with a wide range of people and what passes for "normal" looks pretty luxurious to me.
And finally, one wonders how the tuition committee will react when/if the wife stops working?
Friday, December 21, 2007
Fraud and Corruption from the Top to the Bottom
Sadly, a reader made me aware of a news story regarding the arrest of (a) Grand Rebbe of Spinka, his Gabbai, and a host of other people involved in a massive tax fraud scheme stretching from Brooklyn to Los Angeles, with money also being funneled through a bank in Israel. In 1994 or 1996 (?) a similar story of a tax fraud and money laundering scheme broke and arrests were made in both New York and Los Angeles. The pink tint on my glasses was chipped at that point. When Clinton left office in 2000 and pardoned the New Square men who managed to make off with$40 million dollars (this is a huge number for those that know fraud!) as well as a minority woman that got her hands on $8 million, the pink tint that was left was pretty much stripped off. [Facts disputed and oted that the men did spend time behind bars].
Over 10 years later, I wish I just want a little bit of pink tint back. While apologists on sites like VosIzNeis want to hang the "mosser," and ask everyone to be "dan l'chaf zechut," and pretend the government has just made a terrible mistake in these arrests, my professional background makes me 99.9% certain that the men arrested won't be walking free. (See the comments from the wife of a fraud specialist. I could have written the same thing, except my husband does not work in investigations. Rather, I've actually traced and detected fraud in what seems like a previous lifetime. . . . baruch Hashem, I've never, ever dealt with anyone Jewish).
Setting up a tax fraud scheme where hundreds of individuals "donated" millions of dollars and then itemized those donations when they knowingly received an 80-95% rebate is planned, deliberate, intentional, malicious, and illegal criminal activity. This isn't giving in to a small temptation such as deducting the price of your tickets to a Chinese Auction. This took massive manpower. Such a scheme perpetuated from the top and joined in by a hundreds of people speaks volumes about the lack of integrity, the worship of the dollar, and the precarious financial situation of the Orthodox Community as a whole, as the Chassidish community in particular.
Some people would like you to believe that massive defrauding of the government and the taxpayers of millions of dollars is a victimless crime. But, surely there are many victims besides the taxpayers as a whole (and given the amout of tax we pay year in year out, stories of fraud make me feel like I have been personally pickpocketed).
Certainly the wives (assuming they didn't participate in the scheme themselves) are victims. They now will bear the brunt of their husband's misdeeds, especially if there are children still in the home. The emotional and financial damage must be enormous. Since I have started this blog, I have planned to write a post on wives getting involved in the finances. I think it is important for so many reasons. This is yet another powerful reason.
Another set of victims are the children and grandchildren. And not just their direct descendants who will be without a father/grandfather, but other children who are starting to see the seedier side of Orthodox life, which can invite a bit of cynicism to put it lightly.
The news story notes that one of the men arrested was a scribe/sofer. One would assume that every mezuzah he has written/repaired as well as every Torah he has written/repaired during the time he was involved with this or other schemes is now possul. But that is a question for a posek. And, I'm not that posek. If so, there is another group of people who will have been directly defrauded.
And, lastly, every Jew is a victim. I, for one, just want my pink glasses back. There is so much to say, but I really just feel like crying.
Sadly, a reader made me aware of a news story regarding the arrest of (a) Grand Rebbe of Spinka, his Gabbai, and a host of other people involved in a massive tax fraud scheme stretching from Brooklyn to Los Angeles, with money also being funneled through a bank in Israel. In 1994 or 1996 (?) a similar story of a tax fraud and money laundering scheme broke and arrests were made in both New York and Los Angeles. The pink tint on my glasses was chipped at that point. When Clinton left office in 2000 and pardoned the New Square men who managed to make off with
Over 10 years later, I wish I just want a little bit of pink tint back. While apologists on sites like VosIzNeis want to hang the "mosser," and ask everyone to be "dan l'chaf zechut," and pretend the government has just made a terrible mistake in these arrests, my professional background makes me 99.9% certain that the men arrested won't be walking free. (See the comments from the wife of a fraud specialist. I could have written the same thing, except my husband does not work in investigations. Rather, I've actually traced and detected fraud in what seems like a previous lifetime. . . . baruch Hashem, I've never, ever dealt with anyone Jewish).
Setting up a tax fraud scheme where hundreds of individuals "donated" millions of dollars and then itemized those donations when they knowingly received an 80-95% rebate is planned, deliberate, intentional, malicious, and illegal criminal activity. This isn't giving in to a small temptation such as deducting the price of your tickets to a Chinese Auction. This took massive manpower. Such a scheme perpetuated from the top and joined in by a hundreds of people speaks volumes about the lack of integrity, the worship of the dollar, and the precarious financial situation of the Orthodox Community as a whole, as the Chassidish community in particular.
Some people would like you to believe that massive defrauding of the government and the taxpayers of millions of dollars is a victimless crime. But, surely there are many victims besides the taxpayers as a whole (and given the amout of tax we pay year in year out, stories of fraud make me feel like I have been personally pickpocketed).
Certainly the wives (assuming they didn't participate in the scheme themselves) are victims. They now will bear the brunt of their husband's misdeeds, especially if there are children still in the home. The emotional and financial damage must be enormous. Since I have started this blog, I have planned to write a post on wives getting involved in the finances. I think it is important for so many reasons. This is yet another powerful reason.
Another set of victims are the children and grandchildren. And not just their direct descendants who will be without a father/grandfather, but other children who are starting to see the seedier side of Orthodox life, which can invite a bit of cynicism to put it lightly.
The news story notes that one of the men arrested was a scribe/sofer. One would assume that every mezuzah he has written/repaired as well as every Torah he has written/repaired during the time he was involved with this or other schemes is now possul. But that is a question for a posek. And, I'm not that posek. If so, there is another group of people who will have been directly defrauded.
And, lastly, every Jew is a victim. I, for one, just want my pink glasses back. There is so much to say, but I really just feel like crying.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Stupid Tax for the Chareidim Too
Hat Tip: The Muqata
I wish I were making this up, but sadly enough, I'm not (although the first drawing does take place in Adar, so I'm still holding out hope that this is really just an early Purim joke).
YNet is reporting a new lotto system designed for the Chareidi public. It comes complete with endorsements from Rabbis Rafael Wint and Rabbi Yaakov Zonenfeld (names I am completely unfamiliar with). Tickets run a whopping $26 and proceeds will go to charity. The impetus for the lotto: a growing need for charity funds to help the poor.
This lotto not only plays on the "get rich quick" personality trait that many ticket buyers certainly possess, but it also allows players to feel good about playing the lotto as the profits will go to charity. As project founder Elisha Cohen states, "they can donate to charity as well as personally gain and keep donating from the same money they earn." [Emphasis added]. And, not only is the dream of winning nearly promised (no possibility of loosing has been mentioned), but one can win using ma'aser funds, as per the psak of the Rabbis endorsing the project.
As far as I am concerned this is an outrage! This is a segment of society that can least afford to introduce a vice into the mainstream, even for a "good cause." Does the Chareidi Public really need a "stupid tax" of their own? I'm sickened by this report.
Hat Tip: The Muqata
I wish I were making this up, but sadly enough, I'm not (although the first drawing does take place in Adar, so I'm still holding out hope that this is really just an early Purim joke).
YNet is reporting a new lotto system designed for the Chareidi public. It comes complete with endorsements from Rabbis Rafael Wint and Rabbi Yaakov Zonenfeld (names I am completely unfamiliar with). Tickets run a whopping $26 and proceeds will go to charity. The impetus for the lotto: a growing need for charity funds to help the poor.
This lotto not only plays on the "get rich quick" personality trait that many ticket buyers certainly possess, but it also allows players to feel good about playing the lotto as the profits will go to charity. As project founder Elisha Cohen states, "they can donate to charity as well as personally gain and keep donating from the same money they earn." [Emphasis added]. And, not only is the dream of winning nearly promised (no possibility of loosing has been mentioned), but one can win using ma'aser funds, as per the psak of the Rabbis endorsing the project.
As far as I am concerned this is an outrage! This is a segment of society that can least afford to introduce a vice into the mainstream, even for a "good cause." Does the Chareidi Public really need a "stupid tax" of their own? I'm sickened by this report.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Chanukah Gelt
I'm not sure how widespread the practice of giving Chanukah Gelt (cash gifts) to Rebbes is. The first time I heard about the custom was a number of years ago when I was a frequent guest of a family in a large community which a very wealthy block of families. These families were known to give very, very sizable gifts to their children's Rebbes on Chanukah. The discussion left me wondering about the practice.
This week, I caught this letter in the Yated, which brings forward numerous issues. Here is the letter below:
I like to write about "Orthonomic" issues that affect the lives of various sectors. Admittedly, Chanukah Gelt is not something we currently deal with. But, the public way that gifts are given from student to teacher directly strikes me as inappropriate (the letter writer was rubbed the wrong way by the teacher's comment. The teacher's comment does appear to be tasteless, but presenting a gift in class doesn't seem to classy either).
In the past, I have written about my distaste for involving children as the middle men when schools and/or teachers solicit additional money for a party or project. Here too I feel a similar distaste. I can only imagine that involving one's children in giving gifts to teachers in front of their peers makes for uncomfortable moments for other students (especially students who aren't presenting a gift, or are only presenting something "unrespectable"), as well as for the student presenting the gifts. G-d knows that we don't need to add to the material competition that many children, as well as adults, experience.
And, I'm sure many teachers experience discomfort too when they receive gifts directly. A teacher who receives less than others may feel slighted. A teacher who receives a ridiculous sum of money from a certain parents is sure to feel pressure. Knowing what parents gave what can feel like "too much information."
Now, I am not criticizing the practice of giving gifts to teachers, although if parents have not cleared their obligations to the school vis a vis tuition, I believe there would be a problem. But, I don't like the idea of students presenting gifts in front of other students and teachers receiving gifts directly. I think gifts of this manner are best presented discretely, although I'm sure teachers don't open them in front of the class.
And, of course, as an accountant, I can't help myself but to wonder about the tax issues surrounding these "gifts," especially where they are very sizable, as is the case at my friends' school. Being no expert in this area of tax law, I'll let the more experienced chime in.
Your comments?
I'm not sure how widespread the practice of giving Chanukah Gelt (cash gifts) to Rebbes is. The first time I heard about the custom was a number of years ago when I was a frequent guest of a family in a large community which a very wealthy block of families. These families were known to give very, very sizable gifts to their children's Rebbes on Chanukah. The discussion left me wondering about the practice.
This week, I caught this letter in the Yated, which brings forward numerous issues. Here is the letter below:
CHANUKAH GIFTS FOR REBBI AND MORAH
Dear Editor,
My husband and I have always felt that Chanukah is a great time to show our appreciation to our children’s teachers. How much is given and what is given are dependent on one’s financial situation. This year, we were not able to give as much as in past years.
When my daughter gave her teacher the envelope with the Chanukah gift, the teacher got up in class and told the students that this is the appropriate way for parents to show hakoras hatov to teachers. The comment rubbed me the wrong way completely. It made me think that there may be kids in the class whose parents contributed to the PTA gift, but could not afford to give more.
Why do teachers think it is their right and that we as parents are expected to give them gifts? As I recall, last year, the Yated printed letters going back and forth about it. The bottom line is that I don’t expect my boss to give me a gift when I make him/save him money, because that is what he hired me for. And if he does give me a gift, I have to show him my appreciation. The same applies here. We contract the teachers through the schools to give our children an education. The fact is that rabbeim’s and teachers’ salaries often don’t cover their expenses and they do deserve to earn more money. But parents do not owe them gifts and it is important for teachers to realize that.
Thank you.
I Tip When I Can
I like to write about "Orthonomic" issues that affect the lives of various sectors. Admittedly, Chanukah Gelt is not something we currently deal with. But, the public way that gifts are given from student to teacher directly strikes me as inappropriate (the letter writer was rubbed the wrong way by the teacher's comment. The teacher's comment does appear to be tasteless, but presenting a gift in class doesn't seem to classy either).
In the past, I have written about my distaste for involving children as the middle men when schools and/or teachers solicit additional money for a party or project. Here too I feel a similar distaste. I can only imagine that involving one's children in giving gifts to teachers in front of their peers makes for uncomfortable moments for other students (especially students who aren't presenting a gift, or are only presenting something "unrespectable"), as well as for the student presenting the gifts. G-d knows that we don't need to add to the material competition that many children, as well as adults, experience.
And, I'm sure many teachers experience discomfort too when they receive gifts directly. A teacher who receives less than others may feel slighted. A teacher who receives a ridiculous sum of money from a certain parents is sure to feel pressure. Knowing what parents gave what can feel like "too much information."
Now, I am not criticizing the practice of giving gifts to teachers, although if parents have not cleared their obligations to the school vis a vis tuition, I believe there would be a problem. But, I don't like the idea of students presenting gifts in front of other students and teachers receiving gifts directly. I think gifts of this manner are best presented discretely, although I'm sure teachers don't open them in front of the class.
And, of course, as an accountant, I can't help myself but to wonder about the tax issues surrounding these "gifts," especially where they are very sizable, as is the case at my friends' school. Being no expert in this area of tax law, I'll let the more experienced chime in.
Your comments?
Seeking a Potential Guest Reporter
OHEL Family Services is running an interesting series of lectures on strengthening families. The first lecture looks very interesting. It is entitled FINANCE AND FAMILY: MAINTAINING FAMILY VALUES IN A MATERIAL WORLD and will be presented by Dr. Norman Blumenthal, Ph.D with Opening remarks by Rabbi Kalman Topp, Associate Rabbi of the Young Israel of Woodmere on MONDAY, DECEMBER 17th 2007 at 8:00 pm Young Israel of Woodmere 859 Peninsula Blvd.
I caught the itinerary for the night at ImaMother and the questions that will be addressed are as follows:
- How do I balance supporting my family with being present in their lives?
- How to teach children strong financial values?
- How do we cope with the pricetag of living in the Jewish world?
- What are the myths and pitfalls of "keeping up with the Goldbergs?"
- When does money equal happiness?
I've written about these subjects at Orthonomics, but would absolutely LOVE to have a reader of my blog write a guest post for me about the event and the answers offered by the speaker. Anyone want to be a guest poster? (Sorry, I can't offer any pay. My last name is not Goldberg :) ).
OHEL Family Services is running an interesting series of lectures on strengthening families. The first lecture looks very interesting. It is entitled FINANCE AND FAMILY: MAINTAINING FAMILY VALUES IN A MATERIAL WORLD and will be presented by Dr. Norman Blumenthal, Ph.D with Opening remarks by Rabbi Kalman Topp, Associate Rabbi of the Young Israel of Woodmere on MONDAY, DECEMBER 17th 2007 at 8:00 pm Young Israel of Woodmere 859 Peninsula Blvd.
I caught the itinerary for the night at ImaMother and the questions that will be addressed are as follows:
- How do I balance supporting my family with being present in their lives?
- How to teach children strong financial values?
- How do we cope with the pricetag of living in the Jewish world?
- What are the myths and pitfalls of "keeping up with the Goldbergs?"
- When does money equal happiness?
I've written about these subjects at Orthonomics, but would absolutely LOVE to have a reader of my blog write a guest post for me about the event and the answers offered by the speaker. Anyone want to be a guest poster? (Sorry, I can't offer any pay. My last name is not Goldberg :) ).
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Retirement: The Million Dollar Question?
In the most recent posts, I've addressed the necessity of having something (sizable) put away for old age. The million dollar question is how much money is enough to take you through old age? And, of course, what do you need to save (and when) to reach your target?
Retirement calculators available on the web, such as this one at Yahoo, are ,fun downright terrifying even for the fiscally responsible (!) to play with. I find it informative to change some of the numbers around and to see what a difference an extra percent of salary put towards retirement makes in the long run. Of course, these calculators are simplistic, but they provide a good overview what you need to be doing now, even if the can only provide a limited amount of information as certain factors are unknown.
A difficult factor to estimate is how income you will need to replace during retirement. Financial Planners will tell you that you need to replace 70-85% of what you spend. This is probably a safe estimate. But, frum families might have a number of other factors to consider, especially if they have run up debt putting on smachot, sending children to school, or whatever else (remember debt spirals up). Another major factor is the amount of support you foresee providing your children during retirement. While I hope to give my children a nice debt-free start and will consider helping with certain things, I'm not intending to provide regular support. But, many of my friends consider regular support to be their pleasure. So, they might want to estimate a replacement income of over 100% of their current expenses (the math should put a damper on any future plans).
While I think these calculators are informative and helpful, I think the most important thing is just to put away something now, if you haven't already, and to try to increase your retirement savings, if you have already established the habit. The hardest dollar to put away is the first dollar.
Continuing with Parshat Miketz from the last post, it says that at a certain point the count [of grain being preserved] ceased. The financial planner I work with at a local bank told me a little anecdote. His wife discovered a huge stack (a few years worth) of unopened envelopes for his retirement accounts. She asks him, "aren't you going to open these." He tells her, "no, I'm not counting." She was taken aback by his relaxed demeanor. But the relaxed demeanor is a function of a consistent and disciplined approach towards saving. At a certain point you can just "stop counting."
In the most recent posts, I've addressed the necessity of having something (sizable) put away for old age. The million dollar question is how much money is enough to take you through old age? And, of course, what do you need to save (and when) to reach your target?
Retirement calculators available on the web, such as this one at Yahoo, are ,
A difficult factor to estimate is how income you will need to replace during retirement. Financial Planners will tell you that you need to replace 70-85% of what you spend. This is probably a safe estimate. But, frum families might have a number of other factors to consider, especially if they have run up debt putting on smachot, sending children to school, or whatever else (remember debt spirals up). Another major factor is the amount of support you foresee providing your children during retirement. While I hope to give my children a nice debt-free start and will consider helping with certain things, I'm not intending to provide regular support. But, many of my friends consider regular support to be their pleasure. So, they might want to estimate a replacement income of over 100% of their current expenses (the math should put a damper on any future plans).
While I think these calculators are informative and helpful, I think the most important thing is just to put away something now, if you haven't already, and to try to increase your retirement savings, if you have already established the habit. The hardest dollar to put away is the first dollar.
Continuing with Parshat Miketz from the last post, it says that at a certain point the count [of grain being preserved] ceased. The financial planner I work with at a local bank told me a little anecdote. His wife discovered a huge stack (a few years worth) of unopened envelopes for his retirement accounts. She asks him, "aren't you going to open these." He tells her, "no, I'm not counting." She was taken aback by his relaxed demeanor. But the relaxed demeanor is a function of a consistent and disciplined approach towards saving. At a certain point you can just "stop counting."
Sunday, December 02, 2007
Retirement: Goyish? Or Jewish?
I once mentioned to a friend that saving for retirement was a priority of ours, to which my friend opined that retirement is "goyish." I think her vision of retirement is one of idleness and hedonism and seeing no part in that lifestyle, she views it as "goyish" and sees no reason to worry whether they will be able to retire or not. I imagine many other frum people are of the same mindset.
My own vision to saving for retirement is has little to do delving into an inactive, carefree life. It is simply a way to ensure that as we physically slow down and can no longer hold the same schedule that we will be able to meet our expenses, many of which are sure to increase, medical being first and foremost on that list.
We are not planning on quitting work because when we are the magic age of 65. But, it simply might not be possible to continue working the same schedule. And it might also be fun to help our own children/grandchildren out here and there, volunteer in the community, or (in my husband's case) even learn Torah part time. If somehow we end up having saved too much, perhaps even a vacation would be in order. Besides trips to visit our families, we have never actually taken a vacation, in so much as that entails renting a hotel room. I highly doubt we will be hopping on and off of cruise lines, but if we do end up even enjoying a cruise, I'll consider it a belated "honeymoon." Seems every other newlywed couple of approximately 21 years of age seems to think jewelry, a vacation, and a new sheitel is the order of the day. I think a 70 year old couple taking a pricey vacation and maybe even enjoying a little shopping should get a little slack.
But back to the assumption that retirement is "goyish," I think we should take a look at this week's parsha Mikeitz. (Opening up a discussion on retirement was not purposely timed to fall out with Parshat Miketz, but it couldn't be more perfect). Pharoh has two dreams which Yosef interprets as one of the same. In the first, 7 beautiful and fleshy cows appear from the Nile, followed by 7 gaunt cows who promptly eat the former cows but do not fatten up. In the second dream, a beautiful stock was sprouting seven ears of grain and is followed by a vision of seven ears of grain were withered and beaten by to their husk by the harsh winds.
Yosef is summoned to interpret Pharoh's dreams and he sees that there will be seven prosperous years followed by seven years of famine where the abundance will be forgotten. Seeing Yosef's wisdom, Pharoh appoints him "chief economist," where he initiates a national savings plan. Yosef's savings plan is that for each year of abundance, food is stored away (and preserved) "handfuls over handfuls" (see the Rashi) or little by little. The future was known and planned for and it was not necessary to enter into "panic mode" as the time of famine drew near, because little by little, in the most effective way, the abundance was being preserved until the count ceased.
Another interesting halacha is who provides the funds for the needs of a parent. The mitzvah of kibud av v'em comes at the expense of the parent, which must imply that the parents should be setting aside for their own support. A child may have to support his parents should they be unable to meet their own needs to food, shelter, and clothing. But, the funds for doing so could well be considered tzedakah funds. The halacha seems to presume that a parent puts away for their future.
So, while I am quite open to mussar about living a far too material existence (I've given plenty of the mussar myself), my own take on planning for the inevitable (in this case old age) is that such is not "goyish" but quite "Jewish."
Just my own thoughts. Happy Chanukah all! Chances of another post in the next week are slim to none. But, I hope to address retirement savings and the mechanics more.
I once mentioned to a friend that saving for retirement was a priority of ours, to which my friend opined that retirement is "goyish." I think her vision of retirement is one of idleness and hedonism and seeing no part in that lifestyle, she views it as "goyish" and sees no reason to worry whether they will be able to retire or not. I imagine many other frum people are of the same mindset.
My own vision to saving for retirement is has little to do delving into an inactive, carefree life. It is simply a way to ensure that as we physically slow down and can no longer hold the same schedule that we will be able to meet our expenses, many of which are sure to increase, medical being first and foremost on that list.
We are not planning on quitting work because when we are the magic age of 65. But, it simply might not be possible to continue working the same schedule. And it might also be fun to help our own children/grandchildren out here and there, volunteer in the community, or (in my husband's case) even learn Torah part time. If somehow we end up having saved too much, perhaps even a vacation would be in order. Besides trips to visit our families, we have never actually taken a vacation, in so much as that entails renting a hotel room. I highly doubt we will be hopping on and off of cruise lines, but if we do end up even enjoying a cruise, I'll consider it a belated "honeymoon." Seems every other newlywed couple of approximately 21 years of age seems to think jewelry, a vacation, and a new sheitel is the order of the day. I think a 70 year old couple taking a pricey vacation and maybe even enjoying a little shopping should get a little slack.
But back to the assumption that retirement is "goyish," I think we should take a look at this week's parsha Mikeitz. (Opening up a discussion on retirement was not purposely timed to fall out with Parshat Miketz, but it couldn't be more perfect). Pharoh has two dreams which Yosef interprets as one of the same. In the first, 7 beautiful and fleshy cows appear from the Nile, followed by 7 gaunt cows who promptly eat the former cows but do not fatten up. In the second dream, a beautiful stock was sprouting seven ears of grain and is followed by a vision of seven ears of grain were withered and beaten by to their husk by the harsh winds.
Yosef is summoned to interpret Pharoh's dreams and he sees that there will be seven prosperous years followed by seven years of famine where the abundance will be forgotten. Seeing Yosef's wisdom, Pharoh appoints him "chief economist," where he initiates a national savings plan. Yosef's savings plan is that for each year of abundance, food is stored away (and preserved) "handfuls over handfuls" (see the Rashi) or little by little. The future was known and planned for and it was not necessary to enter into "panic mode" as the time of famine drew near, because little by little, in the most effective way, the abundance was being preserved until the count ceased.
Another interesting halacha is who provides the funds for the needs of a parent. The mitzvah of kibud av v'em comes at the expense of the parent, which must imply that the parents should be setting aside for their own support. A child may have to support his parents should they be unable to meet their own needs to food, shelter, and clothing. But, the funds for doing so could well be considered tzedakah funds. The halacha seems to presume that a parent puts away for their future.
So, while I am quite open to mussar about living a far too material existence (I've given plenty of the mussar myself), my own take on planning for the inevitable (in this case old age) is that such is not "goyish" but quite "Jewish."
Just my own thoughts. Happy Chanukah all! Chances of another post in the next week are slim to none. But, I hope to address retirement savings and the mechanics more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)