Ask Orthonomics:
High Income Earner Wonders Where to Go From Here

It isn't every day that I receive a note from a reader that is doing very well financially. This email underscores just how much of a bite tuition for is and just how important it is to make good financial decisions right from the start, whether you are learning in kollel or earning well into the six figures. The burden of tuition leaves very little room for error.

I think the letter also underscores the importance of being careful with the property of one's fellow, an instruction in Pirkei Avot. It takes incredible earning power for a couple to jointly earn $350,000. (The income this couple earns is split nearly evenly). There are few with such great earning power and just like they need to guard their own finances, we need to make sure that we are using their tuition and tzedakah dollars with care.

I am going with the writers numbers regarding after-tax income, as well as some of the estimated expenses, although I'm sure we can quibble. Taxes take a huge bite out of those in the upper income brackets. Normal employees can't do much to escape that. And, more children and greater itemization don't have the impact they do on those in the lower tax brackets.

Hi, I’m an occasional reader of your blog. I could use a bit of your help and perhaps help from your readers. Let me explain: My wife, two children (hopefully we’ll have more children soon) and I live in Manhattan and are looking to move in the not-so-distant future out of Manhattan. My wife asked me to figure out how much we could afford to borrow for a house, so I did the math, and I determined that we could reasonably afford to live in most places in the New York Metro area. Then I started
looking and asking around how much were the tuition costs in various
neighborhoods.

I nearly fell over backwards. There were very large disparities between neighborhoods with Northern New Jersey averaging over $15,000 per child, but schools in Brooklyn and Queens were considerably less. I did the math and figured that although my wife and I are very fortunate and collectively earn approximately $350,000 per year, if we were to have a total of four children and send them to school at $15,000 per kid per year, we really wouldn’t have much room for much else in our lives. Before you say WHAT?, please look at the numbers:
After we pay taxes and contribute to our 401k plans we’re left with about 55% of $350,000, or about $192,500, which is about $16,000 per month. Here’s a sample starter budget, BEFORE TUITION COSTS :

Income $16,000
Mortgage (3,000)
Property Tax (1,000)
Food & Household Items (1,200)
Heat, Electric, Water, Sewer (750)
Life, Home, Auto Insurance (600)
Student Loans (600)
Medical & Dental Bills (350)
Car Repairs, Gas, Tolls (250)

--------------------------
GRAND TOTAL BEFORE
TUITION $8,250

Now let’s assume we have four kids and we spend $18,000 per child ($15,000 tuition + day camp + books + clothes). This totals to $72,000 for four kids or about $6,000 per month. So let’s go back to our budget:

GRAND TOTAL BEFORE
TUITION $8,250
Tuition & Other (6,000)

------------------------
WHAT’S
LEFT $2,250

So we’re left with $2,250, but that is without:
· Giving anything to charity;
· Saving for college
· Saving for other events such as Bar Mitzvahs or weddings
· Clothing
· Shul Dues

So here’s my conclusion: move somewhere where the tuition costs are moderate.
The schools don’t have to be prep schools or top notch or have all the bells and
whistles. Nor am I endorsing public schools or the Chasidishe Yeshivas. However, as long the school provides a decent education, that’s good. If sending kids to what is considered an “excellent” school means cutting back on retirement savings or charity or college savings, maybe it doesn’t make sense to send kids to an “excellent” school.

I realize we’re extremely fortunate to have what we have, but I want to make sure to use it wisely. I’m sure we could reduce some of the numbers above, but it won’t make a ton of difference. However, getting the $6,000 per month tuition cost down to let’s say $4,500 per month would make an extraordinary difference.

So where am I going wrong? Or maybe even right?
Thanks!!!

Dear Reader,

First off, please forgive me if it seems like I am "talking down," I'm not used to giving advice in this type of scenario. That said, I am as stunned by the numbers as you are. It only goes to prove that everyone must be careful with the income Hashem has blessed us with.

I don't know that my advice will sound particularly profound, but then again, the ins and outs of healthy personal finance aren't particularly complicated. So I will put forward a some rules of thumb that will hopefully help you build wealth quickly so that you can more freedom to choose the schools and their neighborhood you feel is really best for your family.

I don't think there is anything wrong with choosing a school with fewer bells and whistles, but I think it would be far better if you really positioned yourself to be able to have freedom of choice when it comes to the chinuch of your children. Ultimately you want to get rid of the debt you do have, buy a home, and then put away money like there is no tomorrow. Paying off your home before you have more tuitions staring you in the face would be a fine idea too. Money put away earlier, as you know, will yield incredible dividends and give you far more freedom, so that is the basis of my advice.

• Pay off the student loan really quickly, preferably before you take on any additional debt (i.e. a mortgage). Things will look a bit more rosy when the student loan isn't taking up its own line item in the budget.
• Budget all regular expenses around (less than) a one income.
• While you still have "only" two children, you should be attempting to bank as much as possible for 1) an emergency fund, 2) college funds and other long term expenditures from the next car to the weddings, and 3) paying off your home. As your kids get older, more of your current income will be eaten up by day to day expenses and it will get harder to save. So the quicker you can put away funds, the better.
• Build an emergency fund of one years worth of expenses to insulate you from downturns in income, changes in the tax code, and job loss. The additional interest your emergency fund earns can be designated to fund the college savings plans.
• Don't overbuy when purchasing your first home purchase. It is easier to sell a more average home that is in nice condition with some nice cosmetic updates than it is to sell a more custom home. There is no reason not to buy a home that will suit your families needs and wants in the future, but until you know where you want to live and where you want to educate your children, you likely don't want to "marry" a home. So steer clear of anything too custom at this point.
• Make sure you are sufficiently insured: life, disability, and an umbrella policy beyond liability. Those in high yielding professions are very vulnerable, so make sure you are well protected in cases of liability.
• Frugality is the underpinning of getting ahead financial, no matter how much or how little you earn. Frugality is how you will build passive income streams (interest, dividends, capital gains) that can be used to fund future expenses. The quicker you get out of debt and start to build passive income streams, the more choices you will have
• Speaking of frugality, I most certainly do not expect high income earners to exercise the same types of frugal behaviors as I do. Chazal tell us we should eat at our means, so I don't expect those with quarter million dollar incomes to be making the same choices as those with five figure incomes. The saying "it takes money to make money" is a true one. But even where you do have to spend additional money to maintain the sanity needed to do your job, maintain whatever image and social expectations might be required (e.g. inviting the entire office to a daughter's wedding), you can still exercise frugality, albeit on a different level, through patience and preparation. A good read is the book The Millionaire Next Door.
• Make sure you have a great financial advisor and tax advisor on your team. I am not familiar with the all of the ins and outs of the AMT, but certain investments that might provide little return can throw you through loops, so you need to have a reputable advisors.
• While I normally do endorse using competent professionals in the community where the prices and expertise are competitive, when you have high income levels, you definitely want to maintain a great deal of privacy. Don't feel bad about employing outside of the community.
• Continue to maintain relationships with other high income earners, but also make sure cultivate friendships with a more frugal crowd to eliminate some of the pressures that come with running with a wealthier crowd.
• Don't be afraid of your wealth. Hashem has given you an incredible gift to do many things, from building your own tuition "endowment" to giving tzedakah generously. Don't feel pressured to support everything because you have a high income. You still have the right to be prudent even if blessed with wealth.

I am really most interesting the advice my fantastic commentors will offer. But before I open the forum, I want to make one more note. This particular family is fortunate that they work a fairly normal work week. Other families with similar incomes often work crazy schedules that leave their additional funds tied up in hiring around the clock childcare, even as their children grow.

Comments. . . . . . . .

Perhaps the Worst Example of Entitlement I've Ever Heard Of

Rabbi Ginsberg, the chinuch columnist in the Yated, whose columns I find interesting has a question and answer session about camp. This question send my jaw dropping to the countertop (ouch!).

You know the insane are running the asylum when kids are pressuring their parents to take on debt!

This is just beyond ridiculous! But I can imagine such a scenario happening since so many adults haven't quite made the separation between needs and wants and when it is no secret that "big purchases" that are "necessary" are funded through debt (read: weddings-here and here-, beis medrash, etc).

From the Yated [emphasis mine]:

Question #5:
My children are pressuring me into taking a loan so that I can send them to camp. They point to the fact that I used a loan - a mortgage - to pay for our house.
Answer:
Just like children need an education as to how checks work and how there needs to be cash in the bank to back up the checks, they also need to understand how loans work. The details of how interest works and how loans have payment schedules are things that children can and should learn. They should also be taught that a mortgage is a necessity, while a loan to pay for camp may not be.

How to be sensible in managing money, how to live within one’s means, and how to be debt-free are perhaps some of the most important lessons you can teach your children. Personally speaking, I grew up in a family that never had a credit card and my mother still gets by without owning one.

My guess is that the kids who are pressuring their parents to take out a loan have parents who debt finance, and not just the home.

A Business Owner Puts a Lot of His Money Where His Mouth Is

I have tried to cover the battle for the Bnot Shulamith Shulamis Brooklyn school on my blog in months past. The battle involves a lot of factors an outsider cannot get a good grip on. The Jewish Star has another installment on the story and this one leaves my mouth agape.

There is a business man who believes that he can save the Brooklyn school (not the campus which is the subject of a legal battle) and is planning to put up his own money to do so. Mr. Abilevitz, a parent of a student and owner of a pharmacy on Kings Highway in Flatbush, believe he been reviewing the financial records and believes he has identified the source of the steep losses. He claims that by eliminating inefficiencies and tightening up tuition collections that he can turn the school around and get it out of the red.

And, he is willing to put hundreds of thousands of his own dollars into the school during the turn around.

I don't quite know what to say except that it is likely that the same inefficiencies that he has identified are the argument that one of my commentors made in a previous post about the need to bring in outside consultants to make the hard cuts and tighten the bolts is likely true.

Read and leave your comments.

Please Don't Do It

Hat Tip: Ezzie

Sorry to overwhelm my loyal readers with three posts in one day. But just one more before I switch gears. I have a busy week in front of me. If anyone wants to guest post, let me know.

Dear Editor,
I would like to address recent discussion regarding high tuition costs.

I believe I have bitachon especially in parnassa issues because of events that have taken place in my past. That having been said, last year, after receiving scholarships from the various yeshivos that my children attend (I have 6 children in 5 yeshivos - 3 different levels: bais medrash, high school, elementary school), my total tuition bill came to approximately 82% of my take-home (net) salary. My mortgage payment put me over 100%. That meant that even if I totally gave up everything in my life except the house, I would still be running in the negative. For the record, although I’m not going to give out my salary, I am receiving a high five-figure salary in a major New York financial institution.

While I don’t advocate any sort of ridiculous alternative to a solid - and necessary - yeshiva education, clearly, something has to be done about exorbitant tuition
costs.

It is good there’s plastic, I guess.

Shalom W.

This is a letter to the editor at Matzav. I know the letter writer is not alone in charging it to the card. I know other families that charge and move the debt from one card to the next as they chase 0% introductory rates. But such a scheme can't last forever.

Please, please, please Shalom W, don't charge it.

What Are Educators Saying About the Tuition Crisis? Part II

Please read part I in the prior post before reading the remainder of Rabbi Teitz's comments that make up part II of my post. This comment of Rabbi Teitz's is from the perspective of staff and my comments are once again in orange. Also an interesting trip into the minds of school administrative staff.

Post 2

My earlier comments were written from a parent's perspective, having heard almost all of what I wrote in conversations with parents over the past year or two.

Personally, I feel many teachers (and I am lucky to count many of them on my staff) are selfless in their devotion to their students. They do not know the meaning of punching a clock. Many are the graduates of JEC that still call their rebbeim and other teachers, at times even late at night, to discuss life's important decisions. There is no way to put a dollar figure to what that is worth.

But that does not mean that parents are not reaching a breaking point. And my post was intended to express that concern, from their point of view. We, as educators, must understand their perspective, because they are the purchasers of the service we provide. The consumers of our service, our students, probably do not stop to consider a cost/benefit analysis, but the purchasers certainly do. And they want to buy our product, but we might be placing it out of their reach.

So much for the parents' perspective.

There is a significant flaw in that outlook. And it is a challenge that extends to the entire spectrum of Jewish living, as well as the greater world around us.

We live in a world of entitlement. Everyone feels they have things coming to them. The sense of sacrifice has mostly been lost. Yes, there are remarkable example of the opposite, but by and large, people today expect to have without having to give up to have it. [Rabbi Teitz is certainly not the first to say that parents are unwilling to sacrifice today. Rav Schachter, RY of REITS, made the same point a few months back. But I just can't agree].

Sleep away camp has gone from being a luxury to a necessity [Guess who marketed such as a necessity? Try this post for an answer]. Pesach at a hotel. Winter vacation at Disney. Summer vacation on top of that, for those who can manage the days away. High-six and seven digit 401Ks and IRAs. A fully vested college fund. [I don't even know how 401ks and college funds can be put in the same sentence as Pesach and Disney vacations. Old age (let's stop calling it retirement) requires money and likely lots of it. Should schools give limited financial aid to those with substaintial retirement accounts? I don't believe they do, so it seems like a non-issue. If anything, we should be begging people to put away what they can while they can because if they don't it will be the next "crisis."]

With all of these absolute, indispensable necessities where is there room for tuition?

People purchase houses and calculate how they can manage their mortgage payments without taking into account that there are tuition payments as well. No one forgets to calculate the bite taxes take out of income in calculating available income for mortgage payments. But tuition, there's always a scholarship for that. [Perhaps those who bought at the top of the market can be blamed for paying too much. But you could also yell at families that did not scrimp and save to buy a home and now have rent that is double the mortgage of a similarly aged counterpart].

In past years, people worked two jobs to pay their educational obligations. Many of us took out loans to get through college. Today's parents won't hear of it. Let the day schools carry me so I can put money away for my child's college. Or, more accurately, let the day school raise tzedaka to pay for my child's college education. [Many people still work more than one job. I'm always amazed just how many members of the klal are trying to sell something on the side. As for college, student debt isn't "free" to the klal either, it is just a matter of timing].

Gone is the feeling that tuition assistance is actually a request for charity. If communal rabbis would only do one thing, it should be to stress that taking a scholarship in a situation where there was not absolute need is tantamount to stealing from tzedaka. [See where the calculation of tuition increase on a 3% tuition raise was made in Part I. This is one reason why tuition assistance is not always viewed as a request for charity. If a $300 per student salary raise translates into a $450 per student tuition increase, than those requesting a discount from $450 aren't asking for "charity" but rather equability].

The biggest difficulty with that message is that there are those who really do need the help and these very words might embarrass them into not asking, which would be criminal. For there is a real need in the community for help in paying tuition. The abusers of the system make it so much more difficult for those in true need. [True].

In the long run, though, we are reaching a tipping point. Three children in day school can, and in some communities does, cost upwards of $50,000. That is, to most families, the single largest expense in their budget. And they are collapsing under the strain. And there is no end in sight. I was at a meeting the other night where the tuition crisis was discussed. One person asked that there be some sort of formula so that he would know that with an income of $150,000 there would be some maximum bill to pay for education. It is a reasonable request. Problem is, it can't be done. Because one family earning $150,000 might be able to put away $25,000 annually into a retirement fund (I have yet to see teachers be able to put that much away regardless of their pay[why in the world not if the pay is high?]), while another family has unreimbursed medical expenses of $15,000. There is no valid basis for comparison based solely on the bottom line. So we can not give that relief.

But we have to talk to the issue. With compassion. With understanding. And, true to our calling, with education. We must find a way to open the eyes of our community to our feelings of entitlement. Without defensiveness. With warmth. The message we have to give is not an easy one to accept. But if we are to change this one aspect of the culture of our community, we must be understanding of the other's perception and concern. We must also step outside ourselves and check what our feelings of entitlement are, because rare is the person who is totally selfless. We all have needs, but are some of our needs as necessary as we might like to think they are.

But even if the lesson will be learned, it will not solve the problem. We will only delay the day when parents will not be able to pay to educate their children. Large communal funds are not the panacea they seem. A well managed endowment with $100 million in it will spin off between $5 million to $7 million annually. How many donors will it take to get to the $100 million? And how many schools will get a piece of that pie? And in the era of Madoff, who will manage the fund, and how do we know it will be properly managed?

So I leave where I left last time.
Just as much worry and just as few answers.

Eliyahu Teitz

What Are Educators Saying About the Tuition Crisis? Part I


I was curious what educators might, or might not, be saying about the tuition issues facing schools and families today. So I headed over to Lookjed, a forum for Jewish educators. The subject of the proposed "no frills" school had come up, and it appears that not one educator thought that the idea was actually one that could be put into practice successfully. Reading the comments was interesting because it allowed me, as a parent, to look inside the mind of administrators/educators.

I picked out the following two posts from Rabbi Teitz of JEC in Elizabeth, NJ because I found them the most interesting/revealing. The first reads as a conversation between administration and parents. The second is the same administrator speaking from the perspective of staff. I will post that one shortly after I post this first comment. I have put a small number of comments in orange.

Post 1
Allow me to put the matter into very specific terms.

In my school we have around 900 students, preK-12. Our salary budget is around $10,000,000, or about 83% of our $12,000,000 budget. [Per student cost: approx. $13,333. Website gives no information that I can find on tuition schedules at JEC (Elizabeth, NJ).]

An across-the-board 3% increase in salary, which is hardly huge, translates into $300,000+ additional expense (the extra is the 7.65% FICA and Medicare tax, about $23,000, which is a hidden factor but adds up).

Assuming a balanced budget (and even if not balanced, the cash flow must be maintained), we need to find another ~$325,000 to cover the raise. [I believe a balanced budget is the only way to maintain cash flow unless there are significant reserves or taking on debt is a consideration].

Dividing that out over the 900 students means raising tuition by $360 per student. Factor in scholarships (and 20% scholarship is also not unheard of) and the real increase has to approach $450 per student. [I think that more than 1/2 the tuition issue can be summed up right here. Those who can carry are being asked to carry more and more. But, eventually some of those parents need carried too].

And this is just to give the teachers a 3% raise. [I'm a bit confused why a potential across-the-board raise is being discussed while the average parental income is falling].

We're not factoring in overhead, programs, etc. Cutting programs is enticing, as it can be lead to cutting staff positions. But as others have mentioned, do we cut our social worker or learning lab staff? The reality is that school staffs are significantly larger than they were even a decade or two ago. We hope that the additional staff improves our product. I would not risk cutting the programs to find out.

One suggestion that I heard was to not give across the board raises. There are certainly staff members, teachers and administrators, who are earning well above what our parents earn, especially when looked at on an hourly basis. Does everyone need an annual increase? While this is not as difficult a matter as merit pay, which has yet to find a way to judge the full value of a teacher's input into the growth of a student, one has to wonder how we would decide who needs the money most. Do we ask staff to justify their need for a raise, as we ask parents to justify their need for a scholarship? I'm sure many parents would see poetic justice in that arrangement - having teachers submit their income and expenses to a group of parents for them to divide the fixed pot of tuition dollars allocated to salaries. [Wages are normally set by the market, not by the "needs" of the employee. Merit pay is something difficult to determine in the education sector. But if pay is being set by an employee's needs, and in some Jewish organizations I believe it is, then it is no wonder that salaries are taking up more and more of the budget.]I'm sure there are some members of our staffs where only one spouse works. When looking at parental scholarship requests, we ask parents in similar situations why they expect the school to carry the burden of supporting such a life style; we expect that, barring exceptional situations, both parents will be gainfully employed. Parents can justifiably turn that back on us and our assumptions of fair salaries and the number of wage earners in a family. [Homemaking is really getting a bad rap lately. I guess it is an easy target].

One answer given to this challenge is to increase outside funding. That is easier said than done. Many donors are moving away from general donations, preferring targeted giving to specific programs. While this is wonderful for gaining gifts of equipment that are beyond our reach (could we really afford smartboards for all our classrooms at $4000-5000 a pop?), it does nothing to help the bottom line. And there is not an endless supply of outside donors either. Many of the biggest givers are hit up by a growing number of institutions, so that even if actual giving goes up, each school gets a smaller piece of the pie. [To say nothing of the growing number of institutions].

Finding new donors is like searching for a needle in a haystack. If someone has enough money for a big gift, chances are others know about the person as well, or will in short order. And the really big gift takes years to cultivate; it is rare to get a letter in the mail from a lawyer with a multi-million dollar check from an unknown donor's estate. The larger the gift, the longer the development time, the more opportunity others have to approach the donor as well.

PEJE has tried to nudge schools into sharing costs where possible. I think that statistics bear out that most day schools have less than 100 students. Schools such as these might be able to find ways of sharing certain back office expenses: does each school need an executive director? can schools share office staff? But mid-size and larger schools have more than enough to maintain full-time executive directors, controllers, maintenance managers, technologists, and social workers. Joining with other schools just doesn't work. [I really don't think sharing resources should be dismissed as impossible. It would be nice is the suggestion of PEJE was at least given a fair trial in a pilot program. Many companies outsource certain functions because taking care of them in-house is far too pricey. At least in smaller (public) school districts, certain administrators/employees are shared by numerous schools].

The only real way to stop the inexorable creep of salaries is to cap them. That way we know that there is a maximum salary load that we will achieve, within reason. This does not address newly created positions to address student needs. But schools will set different caps, or they will lure away a prized teacher by making a salary cap exception. I am gaining a stronger appreciation for professional sports owners and their problems with run-away salaries. And our salaries are hardly exorbitant. Do we go to a system where we declare "franchise" teachers and any school poaching one has to pay a penalty or open its protected teachers to being approached by other schools in return? And how do we balance less affluent schools against the more affluent? And how do we decide on a cap- a per hour rate? What about positions that are harder to fill? Is there one rate for language arts teachers and another for science teachers? Do limudei kodesh teachers get a preferential rate? [Perhaps this is where combining resources can help. Salary ranges could be set in a "district," rather than in individual schools. As I understand, salaries have been driven up by the competition for prized staff.]

Reality also has to play a role. In searching for a new principal over the past few years, I was struck that a thirty-something applicant, without any experience as a principal, only some limited work as an assistant principal, expected to earn over $175,000 in salary and benefits.
Where does that leave a school moving forward? And the number of teachers we all have that are approaching or who have surpassed $100,000 annual salaries is increasing. [Perhaps promoting from within at lesser salaries, rather than trying to recruit principals from the outside that demand incredible salaries, despite inexperience, is a route that should be pursued. Who better to understand the inner workings of a school, the needs of the students, and the expectations of the parents body that someone who has already been in the trenches?]. In the real world, those salaries are not common. [Hear, hear!]

I am not advocating for salary caps. I am just at a loss looking to the future for a way to continue to make ends meet. The real world work force does not have automatic annual increases. They do not have a 10-month a year job structure. There is increased expectation that jobs are not 9 - 5 any more. People stay at work until the job is done, no matter how late it gets. And they give up weekends when needed. And there is no extra compensation for work that has to be taken home to be completed. And vacation days get eaten up by the chaggim. These are, increasingly, the realities faced by our parent body. And these have been the reasons we have given for justifying our salaries (teaching is more than just classroom time, we do research and prepare over the summer, etc.).

Charter schools, after-school programs and no-frills schools are not the answer. The first two will wilt as soon as final exams and other high stakes tests are encountered. Do we really expect the same effort from students who are in a program that does not affect their GPA when the SAT is a month away? We need to be realistic. No-frills schools have other, external costs, as has been discussed already. The system we have is the one with which we must work.

We need to be much more sensitive to parental fears. The current financial crisis has actually given us that opportunity. Cutting costs where possible, holding staff salaries in place, making a serious drive to increase gifts from donors, and a minimal increase in tuition shows that we are looking to spread the burden across all stakeholder groups. That worked this year.

My real worry is what to do if next year is equally economically dismal. Where will we cut then? I have no answer.

Not for 2010-11. Not for further down the line. [It is obvious to me that day schools don't really view themselves as part of a free market system, despite being funded directly through fees, rather than through taxes. If those running schools in this environment did relate to the free market, I believe they would be looking try new ideas.]

Eliyahu Teitz

No Matter What Your Financial Circumstances

A reader of this blog kindly sent me this fascinating article from the NY Times. As the economic winds shift, the very pricey Reed College in Portland is finding that it cannot grant aid to all those in need and some rather unpleasant realities are sinking in.

Admissions are no longer contingent on academics, extra curricular activities, diversity, and whatever other factors play into picking the next class of students. In fact, the admissions staff was assigned with the task of removing 100 students seeking financial aid and replacing them with 100 students who could pay their way in full before acceptance letters were sent out. Additionally, the only students admitted from the wait list were those who could pay in full.

The money quote from the article is this: "Reed has for now cast aside its hopes of accepting students based purely on merit, without regard to wealth, and still meeting their financial need."

I'm afraid that this realization that Reed College is coming to is one that our own yeshivot and day schools will also need to grapple with. Stacking classes according to who can pay is an idea completely foreign to the Jewish world. Even the idea of minimum tuition has not been received well by all. And with the exception of preschools, I'm not sure that there are too many schools out there that charge a simple (low) flat fee as some other parochial schools do.

But, I'm afraid that if you don't make sure that each class can cover its direct and indirect costs, you will be left in the hole, unable to meet obligations, and ultimately unable to continue to operate. Just last week I pointed out the absurdity of an admissions process that leaves schools wondering just how much money they will have to work with come August/September, after staff has been hired. A pet peeve of mine is when budget planning begins with expenses.

I too am uncomfortable with stacking classes according to who can "carry their weight." If a numbers person like me is queasy, I can only imagine others would be completely repulsed. But, the alternative (admit, hire, and then worry about the money) leaves an entire 'system' at-risk. And, unlike Reed College, I'm not sure there are many schools sitting on endowments that can cushion them when money does not follow.

Readers: comment away. Let's try to keep civil too.

Guest Post: Crossroads

It took me a while, but I finally convinced a reader of this blog to share her experiences of living life deep in debt in hopes that her story, as presented in brief here, can help other avoid similar pitfalls. Keep reading. If you have questions, I will forward them to her, although I cannot promise a reply.

This could be really long so I'm going to try and stick to the highlights. This was hard to write because it is of course, much more complex than can be expressed in a short essay.

Where we are now

$40k in credit card debt. 3 kids ranging 10 to 5. Our ages: mid-40s (me) mid-50s (spouse). Own our home with $130,000 mortgage. Spouse currently not employed due to an injury. Spouses' business owes IRS $20k and credit cards $50k. We have a $50k HELOC. Future feels very precarious. We are not saving enough for "retirement" (whatever that is). Due to this stretch of spouse unemployment we are almost draining the meager emergency fund. No other assets other than modest house. We have payed down about $40k in debt via Consumer Credit Conseling Services, but at $1500/month this is unsustainable and since I care not about my "credit score" I will probably declare chapter 7 bankruptcy in the next few months.

How we got here

In the interest of sticking to the point, I will divide this section into 2 subsections:
1) mindset/attitude and 2) crossroads, ie events where we could have gone one way or the other and what we chose. Why we chose it can be explained by mindset so I won't bother going into the mindset at every crossroad.

The Mindset

Here are several catchphrases that described the mindset that led me here. I don't think any of these are particularly unusual just like I don't think the end result (deep debt) is particularly unusual.

1. It can't happen to us. Other people go broke, but not us.

2. Comfortable with debt. My spouse was in the process of changing careers. How do you pay for schooling? Student loan of course! Starting a business? How do you fund it? Credit, of course. Need a car? Car loan. When you are comfortable with using credit to buy things, the criteria is no longer "Can we afford it?" because you can afford anything you want, rather "Do we need it?" And when you have a seemingly bottomless pit of money to pull from, that line between want and need becomes fuzzy indeed.

3. Everyone's doing it. But of course when you reach a certain stage in life you 1) buy a house, 2) buy a car. Of course if you are frum your kids go to day school. Again, no objective criteria for determining affordability. Other people can do it -- surely we could, too.

4. Frum Welfare mentality. When we started dealing with the issue of paying tuition and were starting to glimpse the foundering of our financial house of cards, in the back of my mind was this sense that The Commuity would help us out. Whatever that means. :-) It's in the interests of The Community to have happy, stress-free, home-owning families with kids in day school. The Schools being an extension of The Community would surely not let us flounder. That same mindset was reflected in that financial profile of the frum family where the woman expressed something about The Community taking care of her for a couple years in the event of her husband's untimely demise so they didn't need [more] life insurance.

5. Spending on the future. At the time we had our first kids and bought our first house, we still had not really established ourselves financially. We took on a lot of debt because we knew we'd be making more money in the future. Well, we are making more money now (or were until April), but the debt load was so high by then that a huge portion of it went to servicing debt.

6. This isn't really a mindset, but lack of communication between husband and wife on financial matters contributed greatly to this situation.

7. I should mention that I've had a credit card since college (mid-80's) so the credit spending habit has been loooonnng established.

The Actual Mistakes

Bought a house. We had enough for a modest down payment on a modest house (<$100k). But the house needed a lot of repairs and we are not do-it-yourselfers. Credit card debt +$30k. The house was a deal we "couldn't pass up", but in reality we couldn't afford it because we hadn't really established ourselves financially. We had >$50k in student loans and no emergency fund. That $30k eventually was paid off with inheritance money. Lesson learned: Do not buy a house when you are already broke from debt and have no emergency fund.

I stopped working full-time after baby #2 was about 14 months old (#1 was almost 3).. I was losing her mind. We 2 young babes (under 3) and no help from hubby, an 8 to 5:30 work schedule is a straight path to the nuthouse. However, this meant losing employer healthcare. Healthcare costs including insurance ended up being about $1200/month. We could not afford that so much of it went straight onto the credit card. Husband, in 2nd career till not financially established. I have to admit that it really gets under my skin when people (or schools) suggest that household help for dual-fulltime working famlies is a luxury. FYI I can not afford household help now and sometimes it's - ahem - very difficult. The stress of running the house myself and working full-time surely contributes to the current mindset (read on for more details on that). Let's leave that subject for another day.

Maintained faith that things would improve and anyway, people like us don't live like "that" so we continued to incur credit card debt. Lesson learned: where there is a will, there is a way. If you don't have the money, don't spend the money!

Refinanced home to consolidate some CC debt. Our monthly payment rose by $400. I did not understand the difference between secured and unsecured debt. Lesson learned: Do NOT TRADE UNSECURED FOR SECURED DEBT. I go nuts whenever I hear someone on the radio give that advice to someone with a lot of cc debt.

Took HELOC to finance business. As Dave Ramsey says, the cash flow should be from the business to the home and not the other way around. Lesson learned: Do not use your home to finance anything other than your home. I think many people have learned that lesson in the last year!

Bought brand new toyota sienna with inheritance money. Should have stuck with something WAY cheaper. But at least there is no car loan.

The Turnaround

We were in marriage counseling. And when I spoke to a therapist about our financial situation he got very alarmed. Clearly we were overspending and needed to stop. I decided at that point that I was not going to charge another cent even if it meant losing the house, which for me was the worst possible outcome to this situation. It was a turning point for me. At this point I was forced to confront some very uncomfortable situations, such as bouncing a lot of checks and begging the bank to cut down my overdraft fees, calling the kids' schools to say I had no money for tuition, told my cleaning lady not to come back because I had no money to pay her.etc. I also became fed up with my marriage and that enabled me to put my foot down a little more because I no longer cared what my husband had to say about it. It was all very liberating.

Read Total Money Makeover (Dave Ramsey) and started listening to the podcast. I finally started learning what it means to be able to "afford a house". Dave Ramsey provides many useful rules of thumb. Hearing stories of self-sacrifice and paying down debt was very inspiring. He also is very systematic about personal finance and I need that.

Increased work hours to qualify for healthcare. Signing that medical insurance form lifted a significant weight from my shoulders.

During a conversation with our accountant he disabused me of mindset #3 (see above). He pointed out that as far as he knew, everyone was struggling and many many people were not "making it". I felt better knowing that.

Spoke with a financial "big wig" in town. He runs a major charitable organization and is of an entrepreneurial spirit. However, he firmly told my husband that while dabbling in business projects was fine he needed to stay focused on working 40 hrs/week. This made the light bulb go off in my husband's head and he has been diligently putting in those hours since then though as a free-lancer so the benefits remain my responsibility.

The Here and Now

Though we are very frugal now, we still do not adhere to a budget successfully. I don't know where the mental block is. SL I'd like to pick your brain privately on this matter. [My pleasure]. The immediate financial picture is on hold due to temporary unemployment of spouse due to an injury. All creditors have been put on hold. We still owe a couple months tuition and only necessities are being handled. B"H we can handle necessities. The silver lining to the injury is that it will lower our income to the point where we can declare bankruptcy. Sad when bankruptcy is the silver lining.

Good News!

I like positive news and it seems that today there is some! The Va'ad of Queens has informed a Pita Shop that a pedophile who plead guilty to molesting a boy that frequented the store, may not return to work and must terminate all ownership in the bakery.

Only VIN commentors will concern themselves about his parnasah prospects in a show of misplaced compassion. VIN commentors never cease to amaze. Some even criticized Von Brunn's son for not having proper kibud av. My word! Of course, nothing is new under the sun as misplaced compassion is a theme we are introduced to as a people in Tanach.

I think the rest of us can just smile about the news and this show of moral clarity and commonsense. Let's hope this is a sign of good things to come.

Just Sad

Last week I wrote a post about the potential elimination of an after-school voucher program intended for families unable to care for their children for mental health type of issues. The program seems to basically benefit yeshiva/Bais Yaakov type schools and the proposed elimination has the Agudah screaming bloody murder. While the Agudah screams about funding cuts (delivering 30,000 letters from community members), I'm screaming about the tremendous level of dependency which is quite detrimental to the Orthodox community, certainly as detrimental as funding cuts.

Now the NY Times is running yet another installment on this budget issue and I can't help but just feel a great amount of sorrow. Here are some quotes on record:

• A mother of 11 who has 5 children on Priority 7 vouchers says: "If I didn’t have it, my head would spin. It gives me time to take care of my other children.”
• An administrator of a school with an after school program: “People don’t earn a lot of money. In some small apartments, some children come home to 11, 12 people in the family. I really think without after-school care, the children will probably go crazy. There will be parents and children who have to start taking pills. It’s really going to affect them tremendously.”

Let me make this clear. I like large families. But this is just a sad "report" (if accurate and in context) on the State of the Union. I can't even imagine being an elementary school child and being unable to return home after school to my own home where my own mother/father is because she can't handle having me around.

If there are so many families are truly in over their heads (article mentions another 1422 families on the waiting list in addition to the 2000 using the program), I think the community leadership needs to actually deal with that issues beyond trying to protest funding cuts. The solution to all problems can't be to spend money, either government funds that might be cut or personal funds that might run short.

I don't have the solution on how to raise a family of 11 or 12 children in an apartment in Brooklyn. I do know that when you are facing difficult issues, that it is ultimately better to learn a new skill set.

Taxpayers aren't going to be happy to read this report either.

I'm Nauseous

Taxpayers are going to be none to happy about this story, and as a Jew the entire episode is simply nauseating.

A "frum" scam artist flees the US while out on a quarter million dollar bail, while his brother is sentenced to 3.5-10.5 years in jail. After 20 years on the run and serving out another sentence for future theft in Brazil, he is returned to the US and has been awaiting trial. (See news report from 2008).

Unable to secure bail for obvious reasons, he has been sitting in the Manhattan Detention Center. (NY Post Story) Somehow the man was able to get the chaplain Rabbi and an Imam to sign off on a behind bars Bar Mitzvah, complete with a kosher caterer, known singer Yaakov Schweky, Rabbonim (thankfully, no names have been released). Guards were paid overtime. Anyone who knows about prison security standards can only wonder how this happened under those responsible for prison security (knives and cell phones being two of the reported breaches). After the Bar Mitzvah, he held a vort in the same "hall."

Where has judgement gone? This is a shocking story. Those who allowed the party certainly knew that word could get out. The security breaches no doubt could end up with a repeat of a man family on the run. Certainly an invitation to such an event should raise eyebrows amongst supposedly "prominent Rabbonim."

Where has busha gone? The arrogance is astounding. Who in the world would think of requesting to host a catered Bar Mitzvah complete with Yakov Schweky in prison. When I saw this story, I honestly thought it was a joke.

I'm just left feeling sick to my stomach. I guess the saving grace is that the affair was peaceful.

And when stories like this get splashed all over the news, it is no wonder parents have a difficult time raising children where crime seems to not carry much consequence because the party goes on.

Guest post: Cooperative Camps
by A Mother in Israel

I'm always thrilled when I can convince a blogger or commentator to write a guest post (I have another guest post soon to follow). I've been too busy planning my own "Camp Mommy" and trying to get my clients on auto-pilot to write about our plans for a low cost summer, which will hopefully include a bit of co-oping. So I managed to convince my friend to share her experiences. Working parents who are looking to save themselves a large lump sum should take a look at the link I have highlighted from the money and frugality blog The Simple Dollar. The potential summer savings on daycare/camp could well be worth the effort it would take to rearrange schedules and/or take vacation time.

A Mother In Israel's post follows:

Are you wondering about your kids' school vacation? Camp is expensive, but two or more months without a daily schedule can throw even experienced parents into a panic. And if both parents are working you need a reliable arrangement.

Over the last few years our family was part of a cooperative summer camp, where each family took responsibility for part of the programming. Beyond that, anything goes as long as everyone agrees. Usually we had all of the children together, ranging from ages 4 to 12. Some years we split by gender or age with some joint activities. Families usually hosted once a week. We met every day, or three or four times a week.

It doesn't even have to be a full-blown camp. You could cooperate to make a weekly cooking class, a sports afternoon, or whatever the parents decide.

In our camp the mothers--and two fathers--were mainly at home during the day (some were teachers) and we were all involved. Enthusiastic parents are key. Trent from The Simple Dollar described his camp, where each couple took a week off from work to take a shift. They invested a good chunk of money, and hired teenage counselors. As a form of daycare the camp needed to be more formal. But they still saved a lot of money.

In our camp, we gave parents flexibility to choose activities that interested them. One year we made passports and "visited" a different country each day. We went on field trips once a week, with extra adults. We cooked and baked, did science experiments, played games, made up quizzes and scavenger hunts, prayed and studied, visited a firehouse and a bakery and went on various hikes. We spent time in local and distant parks. We got the older children involved in making decisions and gave them responsibility for projects.

Once you find interested parents, write down some ideas and call a meeting. Every family has its own concerns, but with goodwill and flexibility you can work things out. Families with rigid ideas about what camp should look like may not be a good match.

I don't think summer camp is necessary. If kids are never allowed to be bored they won't come up with their own projects. But if you are looking for structured summer activities at low cost this could be a solution.
More tips form A Mother in Israel:
Staying Home and Staying Sane (some tips apply to summer vacation)
Our Cooperative Summer Camp (2006)
Cooperative Summer Camp (2007)
More on Camp (2008)
Frugal Strategies for Young Families that Pay Off as Your Family Grows

Houston, We Have a Problem!

Rabbi Tip: Ezzie

Funny, I was just hearing a news report about (irresponsible) parents who are holding post-prom parties, complete with drinking, under their supervision with the reasoning that " [isn't] it better that they should drink under supervision?"

Perhaps these parents aren't suffering from a "goyish kop," rather they are unknowingly following "da'as Torah!"

Yes, Rabbi Landesman, we do have a problem. And, no, you are not the first to witness this problem. Nor are you the first to bring it to the attention of a "higher authority" only to be told you really shouldn't be so alarmed.

Read Rabbi Landesman's observations for yourself.

Better and Worse Ways to Help Adult Children

Yet another gem from the past Yated. It sounds like the father-in-law is trying to give his son-in-law a hint. But the son-in-law, never having managed money, can't really pick up the hint. And, it probably isn't reasonable to expect him to pick up the hint because he really has no concept of how money works. In another publication I read the words of a prominent Rav who mentioned that "support" should not be given with strings or guilt trips attached. Those who read my blog are no doubt aware that there are parents who do use money as a mean to control and/or keep their children "close."

It might come as a surprise to some of my readers, but I am not opposed to parents with the means to provide financial help to their children. But, I do believe there are better and worse ways to provide that help, and I think whatever financial help a family undertakes should be done with a great deal of thought.

CHECK - WITH A DRASHA
Dear Editor,
How do I write this brief letter without sounding like a kafui tov? I don’t know, but I will try. Let me first say that I am exceedingly grateful to my in-laws for providing financial support to my wife and me since we got married just under two years ago. With one beautiful child and another on the way, and the myriad expenses, their support is vital and immensely appreciated. I make it a point to express my thanks to my father-in-law each and every time he gives us or mails us a check.

However, each time he gives us a check, I hear a lengthy drasha about how difficult the economy is and how the future looks bleak. Now, as far as we know, and from observing everything going on in the life of my in-laws, there is no reason to believe that my father-in-law is experiencing any economic hardships. He is quite a successful fellow, and the $1,000 a month that he is so kind to give to my wife and me should not be affecting his bottom line in the slightest.

So why the drasha? Why make my wife and me feel like nebach cases? We thank you a million times for your help. We are kind, considerate and thoughtful. We even told you that we don’t take your support for granted and that if the economy is takeh so bad, we do not want to cause any hardships on you and would figure out a way to live without the support if we needed to. We only want to bring nachas, not hardship or disappointment.

So please, to anyone out there, if you are so kind to provide support to someone, whether they are a young couple or a family of married children, don’t make the people feel like shleppers. Don’t tell the people how hard it is for you. It often makes them feel so awful that they’d rather subsist on water and bread than have to take the check given in such a manner or accompanied by such a speech. In our case, we’d rather live in a shack than continue taking support in such a manner, but we know that expressing that would create an even more uncomfortable situation.

I’d like to conclude by saying that we realize that things could be worse for us and that this should be the worst thing in the world. We are indeed blessed. But if people would be a tad more aware of what they say or do, it would go a long way to making life more pleasant for others.

And yes, we are aware that in next week’s Yated, every shver and shvigger this side of the Atlantic is going to write in about how we are young, spoiled and lacking any hakoras hatov. We figured we’d write the letter anyway.
A Young Couple Trying to Do What’s Right

I believe the worst way to provide help is through a monthly check. Somehow, those receiving a monthly check end up in a master-subject relationship, not unlike those on various welfare programs who wonder if pursuing a career will hurt more than it could help. Those who receive financial help through the means of a monthly check, or combination of checks, appear to lose a great amount of confidence in their own abilities, especially as the funds are being used to prop them up in the present, not to help them build an independent future.

Few parents enter into a monthly check arrangement with a formal agreement (that they are ready and willing to enforce) stipulating how much and for how long. Not doing so is to the detriment of everyone involved. Fluid arrangements make it very hard for the provider to turn off the valve, even when the leak is causing havoc, and the receiver has little urgency to get to a certain level of independence by a particular point in time. In Orthodox families that are growing quickly, parents often feel that they can no longer turn off the valve, or in the words of a friend of mine who would like to actually close the value, "what? And my grandchildren should starve!"

Another problem with the monthly check is that it feeds into a lifestyle. Many parents, not wanting to see their kids live anything less than a middle class lifestyle, provide money for certain upgrades. Whether it be a yearly vacation, camp, smachot, or a larger apartment. Chazal tell us just how hard it is to change a "middah" and financial experts talk about how difficult it is to change a "lifestyle."

Another form of support that can be problematic is when parents take on certain bills for their children, such as auto insurance. I think parents might be better off gifting a certain amount yearly (with a firm cut off date), rather than picking up the tab for a particular bill, especially one that strips the receiver of involvement and choice and potentially inflates a lifestyle. It isn't healthy to be uninvolved with certain finances. Learning to budget and having the ability to make choices about each major area is important in the life of an adult (e.g. should I drive an older car to save on insurance? should I bother with a car at all for the time being?).

Working backwards, "better" help would include help that:

• does not make the receiver dependent on the giver
• does not rope the receiver into an inflated lifestyle
• allows the receiver to exercise independence and make decisions (additionally, allows the receiver to make mistakes and suffer the consequences)
• allows the receiver to use the funds for the future, not just the present

Loans/gifts to start a business, funds to help a student graduate from college debt free, help with a down payment on a home for which the mortgage is in current reach, or a one time lump sum are methods that I find to be less problematic than the monthly check. These scenarios mostly share a theme: the money given is being used not just in the present, but as an investment in the future.

And a final note, parents who extend support, but do not take care of their own needs, I believe do no favors for their children or themselves. I think an argument can be made that this is a form of deception. The receiver imagines the giver to be well-off, and ultimately the receiver learns the truth, perhaps to his detriment.

Your thoughts please.

Also: on a related note, see ProfK's recent post Overlook Us At Your Peril.

I'm Confused: Fundraising is "Underdeveloped?"

Yet another Tuition Crisis article, this one in the Five Towns Jewish Times. It concerns the new initiative being led by Yeshiva University's YU’s Institute for University–School Partnership and Affordability Teams.

The conclusion reached by the affordability team is that schools need (drum roll please) MORE MONEY! The main initiatives are restoring/maintaining government funding, energy efficiency, and (you guessed it) fundraising. The article states, "At the end of the day, however, the major focus of this effort has to be generating additional funds, both from the community that sends children to that yeshiva and from the school’s traditional donor base. " Mr. Bloom, the director of planning and performance improvement on the Affordability Team, who is leading a fundraising seminar for school professionals, is on record saying “Our research has found, that fundraising is our day schools’ and yeshivas’ most underdeveloped resource.” Dr. Goldberg states, “There definitely is money out there, [it is just a matter of being out there and] asking for the money in an organized and professional way.”

I am quite sure I am coming off as rather flippant (I don't like my tone either right now), but I'm getting more and more confused. With the exception of the "no frills" types of schools out there, nearly every larger school is knee deep in "development." We have paid fundraisers, "development directors," staff paid to coordinate volunteer activities and administer volunteer/parent organized fundraising. There are parental led fundraising initiatives. There is student fundraising. Grandparents are solicited. The wealthy in a community are most certainly asked to sign onto efforts. Even students are highly involved with fundraising (a pet peeve of mine).

Perhaps techniques can be improved. But for years plenty of $$$money$$$ has been poured into "development." How in the world can "development" be so "underdeveloped?" And where is all of this money going to come from? I can tell you this: it isn't going to come from an already tapped out parent body, of which 1/3-2/3's are receiving discounts of some type. So where is this pot of gold? And, why, haven't the staff of "development directors" been able to get their hands on that pot of gold in the past 10-20 years? What will be different going forward? I'm confused.

A Disaster Waiting to Happen:
Enrollments are In, But Money Isn't Likely to Follow

This NJ Jewish News article, Day Schools 'Knee Deep' in Scholarship Requests, details an enrollment and tuition assistance process that looks likely to backfire this year. One would presume that enrollments for the coming school year would be slow to come in with increased unemployment, slashed wages, etc. But, where day school is the only option, that is not the case. Enrollments remain strong, but after the enrollments come in, the tuition assistance process starts and the demands on schools are higher than ever.

The yearly price of day school education for a medium sized family can easily be compared to the price of a down payment on a home. But, the process procurement is far different. When making a bid on a home, the buyer is comes to the seller with a some serious money in hand (a realtor will often advise the buyer how much will show serious intent in the current market) to hold the seller's attention and make their interest more interesting. When stating your intentions to acquire a (Jewish) day school education, you simply enroll and pay whatever enrollment fee(s) and pre-paid tuition are applicable. It is a matter of faith on the school's part that the parents will come through. (Other private schools, incidently, seem to rely less on monthly payments, asking for tuition either up front, in bi-annual installments, or quarterly installments. It seems that in many private schools, monthly payments are the exception, rather than the rule). In Jewish schools, the scholarship process follows/runs parallel to the application process. In the past, perhaps, this has worked just fine, but for the upcoming school year of 2009-2010, it is looks like this process could turn disasterous. Remember, that while the scholarship committees are trying to figure out how to distribute the limited discounts/scholarship dollars, the school is in the midst of their hiring and contract process.

The Executive Director of JEC of Elizabeth is on record stating:
“We are knee-deep in scholarship application forms,” said Steven Karp, JEC’s executive director. “We have plenty of people applying; it’s just that nobody can pay.”

The dean of JEC is on record saying: “Our parents are known for procrastinating, I can think of 50 parents off the top of my head who always receive assistance but whose forms are not in yet.”

Unless a school is sitting on significant reserves that can carry them through much of the year is things don't work out as planned, I don't know how it is possible to set a budget, enter into commitments and contracts, hire staff, lay off staff where applicable, when it is impossible to even begin estimating what the enrollment will be.

The director of Livingston's Kushner Hebrew Academy is on record saying: “Just because students are registered doesn’t mean they’ll be here next year. It could be that people will say we’re not getting enough aid” and will then withdraw. He estimates that the dust will settle sometime in mid-August, “when people make their final decisions.”

I imagine that some of those "final decisions" have the potential to leave a lot of damage in their path.

Dependency is Ugly

I never heard of this Priority 7 program until I saw a small blurb in the Hamodia (my husband's friend gave my husband a copy for reading on the bus). Now VIN is running the story about the same program. As a non-NY'er, I'm always flabbergasted by the number of programs NY funds.

The Priority 7 is a welfare program that provides vouchers for after school care to private school students demonstrating a particular need (as per Hamodia the public schools already provide "free" aftercare). Apparently, the overwhelming number of recipients are Orthodox Jews, likely concentrated in select communities and the Agudah is running terrified that if this program is cut off it will spell doom for certain yeshivot.

While the Agudah is calling the elimination "unfair," what I believe is unjust is how such a great level of dependency has been allowed to develop within the klal. The $15 million entitlement program gives up to $7000 per student. That means there are a minimum 2,143 students benefiting from this program, most of whom are Orthodox according to the Agudah.

Yes, we have funding issues for our schools. But there is a bigger issue looming in an increasing number of communities and is the level of dependency on entitlements. From wic, to food stamps, to government health care, to welfare entitlements that funnel through the federal, state, and even local tax systems, to section 8, to childcare vouchers and aftercare vouchers, to the numerous government grants funding social services. . . . . one must wonder what kind of financial/social collapse would happen if the rug were pulled from underneath. Government can't continue to expect "the rich" to keep opening their wallets.

While I have nothing but sympathy for the schools scrambling to save themselves as an outside source of money potentially dries up, I am increasing upset by the level of dependency that has developed (not passively, mind you). This level of dependency is far more threatening to the klal than any cut will ever be.

Breeding Disrespect

I'd like to focus some attention on one answer given to a "hardball" question at the Torah U'Mesorah convention. The question being addressed is if a Rebbe can take a kid out of morning Torah shiurim for a diversion such a trip to the park for singing, commiserating, playing ball, etc. The second speaker (I am unable to pinpoint voices) mentioned that if the Rebbe and principal decide it is necessary to partake in a diversion for a particular class, that the time should be taken away from limudei chol, not limudei kodesh. [Updated: A reader pointed out that perhaps I am interpretting the answer as too broad and pertaining to what I address below. As such, I'm striking this part of my post, but my comments about the practice on the ground still stand].

Anyone who has ever taught in a classroom, given a shiur, or coached a sport is well aware that diversions are sometimes necessary for health of the class, group, or team. I used the word "diversion" only because that is the way the question was posed. I see no reason to micromanage competent, hardworking, or prepared teachers, instructors, or coaches. If their gut feeling tells them that a *regrouping* is needed, I think that their should be a respect for their instinct. On top of that, when a class needs regrouped, it generally needs regrouping in the present, not later that afternoon during math class, and certainly not on the cheshbon of another staff member.

I'm not sure that Rabbonim who share the opinion of the speaker (and by what I've witnessed, I'm afraid this opinion is not uncommon) understand just what impinging does to the morale of limudei chol staff and to the behavior of the students in class and towards staff. I have no major objection to spending more time on limudei kodesh than limudei chol, so long as a standard quality is maintained vis a vis general studies. If a school decides to dedicate 70% of the day to kodesh studies and 30% to chol, that is the prerogative of the school.

I do have an issue with the casual treatment of limudei chol in general. Such casual treatment is what leads kodesh teachers to impede on the time of fellow staff, infringe on the authority of other staff, and it ultimately leads to a lessening of respect, job dissatisfaction, and high turnover, all of which lessen the quality of the school as a whole as well as cause greater expenditure.

As far as I am concerned, every adult worthy of employment, deserves to be given a certain level of deference and authority. Their opinion should be valued as they are in the front lines. Their discipline should be supported. Their subject should be respected. Their time should be respected. They should have the authority to enforce their own (perhaps approved) classroom policies. In other words, their classroom should be as sacrosanct as the next.

I know it is very popular today to "teach middot" and I do know that many limudei kodesh staff are quite appalled by the level of behavior and chutzpah in many classrooms. I think the best place to start teaching middot is to review school policies and the environment and make sure that they are not undermining the lessons being imparted. As it has been said, "actions speak louder than words."