Dayeinu or Enough Already?
I hope this version of Dayeinu never makes it into any Haggadah. I think "Enough Already" would be more appropriate than "Dayeinu." Please keep commenting away on the last post. Don't let it this take away from that. Nevertheless, a gem from this week's Yated:
Dear Editor,
Dearest Mommy and Abba amush,
I know Pesach is over, but it’s sefirah so we could still be in the Pesach spirit, right?!
Dayeinu!
If you would’ve brought me into the world,
And not have loved me from the time I was born,
Dayeinu!
If you would have loved me from the time I was born,
And not have given me food and sustenance all my life,
Dayeinu!
If you would have given me food and sustenance all my life,
And not have bought me clothing (and lots of it!),
Dayeinu!
If you would have bought me clothing (and lots of it!),
And not have given me a warm and loving home,
Dayeinu!
If you would have given me a warm and loving home,
And not have helped me blossom into a bas Yisroel,
Dayeinu!
If you would have helped me blossom into a bas Yisroel,
And not have guided me through my school years,
Dayeinu!
If you would have guided me through my school years,
And not have spent hours and hours worrying about my welfare,
Dayeinu!
If you would have spent hours and hours worrying about my welfare,
And not have done my laundry, cooked and cleaned for me,
Dayeinu!
If you would have done my laundry, cooked and cleaned for me,
And not spent thousands of dollars to let me go to seminary,
Dayeinu!
If you would have spent thousands of dollars to let me go to seminary,
And not given me even more money to spend over here,
Dayeinu!
If you would have given me even more money to spend over here,
And not have called, phoned and spoke to me all the time,
Dayeinu!
If you would have called, phoned and spoke to me all the time,
And not have sent me packages with every known soul going to Eretz Yisroel,
Dayeinu!
If you would have sent me packages with every known soul going to Eretz Yisroel,
And not bought me clothing and stuff even while I wasn’t there,
Dayeinu!
If you would have bought me clothing and stuff even while I wasn’t there,
And not have helped me with my plans for next year,
Dayeinu!
If you would have helped me with my plans for next year,
And not have been the best parents ever…
Dayeinu isn’t necessary...Because you are the best parents ever!
Love you tons, Rivky
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
A School Without Bells and Whistles
I have been reading the numerous, and nearly weekly, installments on the movement regarding Jewish Schooling coming out of Teaneck. All tuition related articles in the Jewish Standard can be reference through this link. I'm not quite sure to start since I did not jump on top of the movement that seems to be in place in Teaneck, but I figure I will turn my attention to the seemingly controversial plan to provide a school without bells and whistles, which will now be known as the "Chevrolet School" in reference to a statement by Rabbi Saul Zucker, director of the OU day school services division.
A committee has been formed, lead by Abby Flamholz, has been formed to explore options for lower cost Jewish schooling. Currently the committee, which has sought and gained some Rabbinic go ahead for exploratory work, is looking into a scaled down schooling plan. I have a lot of admiration for any group of parents to formally meet and attempt to even bring new ideas forward on a public level. And I wish this group hatzlacha and they try to muddle through the challenges ahead.
In short, the current idea on the table is for parents to team with school to create a low cost school either within an existing school(s) or an entirely new school. Low cost, for these purposes, is as low as $6500. To achieve this goal the ad hoc committee is looking at calling for fewer layers of administration, larger classes, cutting back on the drive towards the latest technology, fewer extracurriculars, and mandatory parental involvement.
Rabbi Zucker posed four questions (how appropriate as the committee formed before Pesach):
1. How the school would handle tuition assistance especially if it charges less than $10,000 per year?
2. How to address special-needs education?
3. How the community would avoid creating a class system dividing the wealthy school from the non-wealthy school, in addition to creating positive relations between the Rolls Royce and the Chevrolet?
4. How a school can be implemented inside another school without tension between students if that is the direction the committee opts to take?
I thought I would play the narrator for Maggid and attempt to lay out my vision of how an alternative schooling system will develop and how it won't develop. Perhaps it is easier to start with how it won't develop. I do not believe that an alternative schooling system will develop from the top down. Until attrition reaches a particularly "dangerous" level (which has not happened yet) and/or tuition contracts are being breached in mass (this could happen sooner than the former), I see no reason for administrators to implement any "radical" changes which could involve shedding layers of administration, combining smaller schools which will also results in lay offs, or going to a radically different schedule or type of educational system. Change is always difficult. It is even more difficult when you are married to a present model, for better or for worse. Somehow, I don't see an alternative school gaining adherents within the educational sector of the community, and not just because their jobs might be on the line, but because educators believe that there is a specific approach to education and that deviations can cause irreparable harm.
In fact, two educators, in reaction to the formation of a committee wrote to express their horror. The first writes: "Reasonable class sizes, access to technology, and competent teachers are not luxury items, but rather educational necessities," and writes that this proposed new school will be an educational failure, not might but will fail, and will push parents away from Jewish education. The second writes that a lower cost school will fail to attract qualified educators, provided up to date materials, and fail to provide necessary education and states " I urge all who care about the next generation of Torah Jews and leaders to think long and hard before creating an educational system that will undermine their future." I think the parents who are looking at alternatives believe that the current system is also undermining the future because it appears to be unsustainable, places great pressure on families and their shalom bayit, takes both parents out of the house for many hours, and indebts them for years to come.
Now, to address the four questions and to address how a school might develop.
1. Whether the school is a new school, a group school with an overhead charge, or a school within a school, I believe that any initial school will require everyone to sign on as equal partners, either through fees and/or services. Adding scholarships into the mix is likely unfeasible and will only cause strained relations between those who need to cooperate to make what will likely be a "cooperative school" a success.
2. Special education is very expensive and many decry what is already lacking in current schools. What should be clear is that a low priced alternative school will not be funding special education. The organizing member of the committee has stated so, as I predicted, in a recent installment, to the consternation of this letter writer who writes in conclusion, "a program that denies these services is not a meaningful contribution to the discussion of the tuition crisis, but rather an experiment in social Darwinism that is sure to hurt more families than it helps."
3 and 4. I don't believe that a low priced school will be welcomed into an existing school, as such is not in the best interests of the school in the present. If a school develops, it will likely develop independent of any existing "Rolls Royce" schools. It will likely develop where parents are willing to give tremendous amounts of time, as well as space in property they own (basements, vacant office space or homes). Therefore, I don't really see a class system as something to worry about because I don't envision a second track developing inside an existing school. If it does, I imagine that everyone will just have to deal with the fact that we aren't all cut from the same cloth and the kids will have to live side-by-side. As a public school graduate, I've been exposed to far more economic diversity and don't harbor the same fears about rich kids co-existing next to average kids. There will always be tension, I don't think it is particularly ideal. . . . but I'm pretty sure that there is plenty of tension now. In addition, I also don't believe that relationships between a newly develop school and an existing school, at least in the beginning, will be particularly cordial. If anyone has sat on a shul board where competition is discussed, they will know that competition doesn't particularly induce good will. Nonetheless, we live in a free market economy (and I'm thankful for that).
In summary: I believe that if an alternative school movement were to begin, it will begin from outside the walls of the current school, will open parents up to options they perhaps haven't imagined and are perhaps scared of. Some parents will make the jump. If the programming is sucessful, others will join them and other schools will look to compete. If not. . . .parents will be back to the square one.
Hatzlacha to these parents!
Comment away.
I have been reading the numerous, and nearly weekly, installments on the movement regarding Jewish Schooling coming out of Teaneck. All tuition related articles in the Jewish Standard can be reference through this link. I'm not quite sure to start since I did not jump on top of the movement that seems to be in place in Teaneck, but I figure I will turn my attention to the seemingly controversial plan to provide a school without bells and whistles, which will now be known as the "Chevrolet School" in reference to a statement by Rabbi Saul Zucker, director of the OU day school services division.
A committee has been formed, lead by Abby Flamholz, has been formed to explore options for lower cost Jewish schooling. Currently the committee, which has sought and gained some Rabbinic go ahead for exploratory work, is looking into a scaled down schooling plan. I have a lot of admiration for any group of parents to formally meet and attempt to even bring new ideas forward on a public level. And I wish this group hatzlacha and they try to muddle through the challenges ahead.
In short, the current idea on the table is for parents to team with school to create a low cost school either within an existing school(s) or an entirely new school. Low cost, for these purposes, is as low as $6500. To achieve this goal the ad hoc committee is looking at calling for fewer layers of administration, larger classes, cutting back on the drive towards the latest technology, fewer extracurriculars, and mandatory parental involvement.
Rabbi Zucker posed four questions (how appropriate as the committee formed before Pesach):
1. How the school would handle tuition assistance especially if it charges less than $10,000 per year?
2. How to address special-needs education?
3. How the community would avoid creating a class system dividing the wealthy school from the non-wealthy school, in addition to creating positive relations between the Rolls Royce and the Chevrolet?
4. How a school can be implemented inside another school without tension between students if that is the direction the committee opts to take?
I thought I would play the narrator for Maggid and attempt to lay out my vision of how an alternative schooling system will develop and how it won't develop. Perhaps it is easier to start with how it won't develop. I do not believe that an alternative schooling system will develop from the top down. Until attrition reaches a particularly "dangerous" level (which has not happened yet) and/or tuition contracts are being breached in mass (this could happen sooner than the former), I see no reason for administrators to implement any "radical" changes which could involve shedding layers of administration, combining smaller schools which will also results in lay offs, or going to a radically different schedule or type of educational system. Change is always difficult. It is even more difficult when you are married to a present model, for better or for worse. Somehow, I don't see an alternative school gaining adherents within the educational sector of the community, and not just because their jobs might be on the line, but because educators believe that there is a specific approach to education and that deviations can cause irreparable harm.
In fact, two educators, in reaction to the formation of a committee wrote to express their horror. The first writes: "Reasonable class sizes, access to technology, and competent teachers are not luxury items, but rather educational necessities," and writes that this proposed new school will be an educational failure, not might but will fail, and will push parents away from Jewish education. The second writes that a lower cost school will fail to attract qualified educators, provided up to date materials, and fail to provide necessary education and states " I urge all who care about the next generation of Torah Jews and leaders to think long and hard before creating an educational system that will undermine their future." I think the parents who are looking at alternatives believe that the current system is also undermining the future because it appears to be unsustainable, places great pressure on families and their shalom bayit, takes both parents out of the house for many hours, and indebts them for years to come.
Now, to address the four questions and to address how a school might develop.
1. Whether the school is a new school, a group school with an overhead charge, or a school within a school, I believe that any initial school will require everyone to sign on as equal partners, either through fees and/or services. Adding scholarships into the mix is likely unfeasible and will only cause strained relations between those who need to cooperate to make what will likely be a "cooperative school" a success.
2. Special education is very expensive and many decry what is already lacking in current schools. What should be clear is that a low priced alternative school will not be funding special education. The organizing member of the committee has stated so, as I predicted, in a recent installment, to the consternation of this letter writer who writes in conclusion, "a program that denies these services is not a meaningful contribution to the discussion of the tuition crisis, but rather an experiment in social Darwinism that is sure to hurt more families than it helps."
3 and 4. I don't believe that a low priced school will be welcomed into an existing school, as such is not in the best interests of the school in the present. If a school develops, it will likely develop independent of any existing "Rolls Royce" schools. It will likely develop where parents are willing to give tremendous amounts of time, as well as space in property they own (basements, vacant office space or homes). Therefore, I don't really see a class system as something to worry about because I don't envision a second track developing inside an existing school. If it does, I imagine that everyone will just have to deal with the fact that we aren't all cut from the same cloth and the kids will have to live side-by-side. As a public school graduate, I've been exposed to far more economic diversity and don't harbor the same fears about rich kids co-existing next to average kids. There will always be tension, I don't think it is particularly ideal. . . . but I'm pretty sure that there is plenty of tension now. In addition, I also don't believe that relationships between a newly develop school and an existing school, at least in the beginning, will be particularly cordial. If anyone has sat on a shul board where competition is discussed, they will know that competition doesn't particularly induce good will. Nonetheless, we live in a free market economy (and I'm thankful for that).
In summary: I believe that if an alternative school movement were to begin, it will begin from outside the walls of the current school, will open parents up to options they perhaps haven't imagined and are perhaps scared of. Some parents will make the jump. If the programming is sucessful, others will join them and other schools will look to compete. If not. . . .parents will be back to the square one.
Hatzlacha to these parents!
Comment away.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Public Service Annoucement: Yeshiva U's School Affordability Team
Upcoming Event on Energy Solutions
A press release I received from YU via email detailing an upcoming program this Thursday, April 30, at Yeshiva Ketana Long Island follows below. I will be watching what the YU School Affordability Team works in the future. In the meantime, I have a deadline hanging over my head, so my posts on what is going on in Teaneck will be held off until this project is finished.
YESHIVA UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE HELPS LONG ISLAND
DAY SCHOOLS FIGHT RECESSION
New York, NY, April 23, 2009—Yeshiva University’s Institute for University-School Partnership has undertaken a bold initiative to make day school education more affordable for Jewish families in this time of economic crisis. The Institute formed the YU School Affordability Team to develop research-based methods and programs to ensure the long term viability and vitality of day schools and yeshivot in Jewish communities around the nation. The Team includes a wide variety of experts from YU and other organizations.
Dr. Scott Goldberg, director of the Institute at YU’s Azrieli Graduate School of Jewish Education and Administration, is spearheading this effort. “We need to ensure that providing our children with a quality Jewish education remains a priority for our community.”
In addition to work nationally with schools, support of schools in the Five Towns and Far Rockaway in Long Island was launched with a December conference attended by 10 local schools representing the spectrum of Orthodox Judaism, as well as rabbis of three major synagogues. The Institute’s Regional Coordinator for this community, Eli Shapiro, has continued to provide guidance and information since that time as a liaison to the School Affordability Team.
The next program will be Thursday, April 30th when the Institute will hold a conference at Yeshiva Ketana of Long Island at 8pm focusing on energy and utility usage. Presentations will be made by the Long Island Power Authority, National Grid and other energy consultants on incentives for energy efficiency, renewable energy and rate classification and analysis. Schools will also learn about a grant opportunity where up to three Long Island schools will receive in-depth consultations involving detailed financial analysis, operational reviews and scenario modeling by experienced consultants to help identify affordability enhancement strategies.
In March, a grassroots campaign organized by Teach NYS, with support from YU’s School Affordability Team, led over 50 yeshiva administrators and board members from across New York State to Albany in an effort to restore CAP (Comprehensive Attendance Program) funding. CAP is a mandated program for all schools. Governor Paterson and Democratic legislative leaders Sheldon Silver and Malcolm Smith agreed to reinstate funding of $30 million to yeshivot in this year’s budget. This successful effort resulted in real money for day schools and yeshivot in New York State.
“Our experiences on Long Island and in other communities are informing our recommendations for schools and communities nationally,” added Goldberg.
Schools desiring to learn more about the April 30th program or desiring to apply for the grant program should contact Eli Shapiro at shapiro4@yu.edu.
Upcoming Event on Energy Solutions
A press release I received from YU via email detailing an upcoming program this Thursday, April 30, at Yeshiva Ketana Long Island follows below. I will be watching what the YU School Affordability Team works in the future. In the meantime, I have a deadline hanging over my head, so my posts on what is going on in Teaneck will be held off until this project is finished.
YESHIVA UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE HELPS LONG ISLAND
DAY SCHOOLS FIGHT RECESSION
New York, NY, April 23, 2009—Yeshiva University’s Institute for University-School Partnership has undertaken a bold initiative to make day school education more affordable for Jewish families in this time of economic crisis. The Institute formed the YU School Affordability Team to develop research-based methods and programs to ensure the long term viability and vitality of day schools and yeshivot in Jewish communities around the nation. The Team includes a wide variety of experts from YU and other organizations.
Dr. Scott Goldberg, director of the Institute at YU’s Azrieli Graduate School of Jewish Education and Administration, is spearheading this effort. “We need to ensure that providing our children with a quality Jewish education remains a priority for our community.”
In addition to work nationally with schools, support of schools in the Five Towns and Far Rockaway in Long Island was launched with a December conference attended by 10 local schools representing the spectrum of Orthodox Judaism, as well as rabbis of three major synagogues. The Institute’s Regional Coordinator for this community, Eli Shapiro, has continued to provide guidance and information since that time as a liaison to the School Affordability Team.
The next program will be Thursday, April 30th when the Institute will hold a conference at Yeshiva Ketana of Long Island at 8pm focusing on energy and utility usage. Presentations will be made by the Long Island Power Authority, National Grid and other energy consultants on incentives for energy efficiency, renewable energy and rate classification and analysis. Schools will also learn about a grant opportunity where up to three Long Island schools will receive in-depth consultations involving detailed financial analysis, operational reviews and scenario modeling by experienced consultants to help identify affordability enhancement strategies.
In March, a grassroots campaign organized by Teach NYS, with support from YU’s School Affordability Team, led over 50 yeshiva administrators and board members from across New York State to Albany in an effort to restore CAP (Comprehensive Attendance Program) funding. CAP is a mandated program for all schools. Governor Paterson and Democratic legislative leaders Sheldon Silver and Malcolm Smith agreed to reinstate funding of $30 million to yeshivot in this year’s budget. This successful effort resulted in real money for day schools and yeshivot in New York State.
“Our experiences on Long Island and in other communities are informing our recommendations for schools and communities nationally,” added Goldberg.
Schools desiring to learn more about the April 30th program or desiring to apply for the grant program should contact Eli Shapiro at shapiro4@yu.edu.
Friday, April 24, 2009
So Long As We Are On Wedding Overload. . . . .
(Yes, we will move over to the subject of what in the world is going on in Teaneck!)
It must be "wedding season" because I'm not the only one talking about weddings. Head on over to SerandEz where a young seamstress (glad to know there are still young ladies pursuing something beyond OT and ST) tells about her experiencing servicing kallahs and their mothers and the two year old sisters who must also get their hair done!
Leave your comments here. Once again, I recommend the book NO! Why parents need to say it and Children Need to Hear It. This book has an important chapter on the wiring of the brain, impulse control, etc. Saying NO is extremely important in the development cycle. Read the book, recommend it to your friends. Don't be afraid to say no to your children when they are young so they will be able to say NO to their own impulses when they are older.
(Yes, we will move over to the subject of what in the world is going on in Teaneck!)
It must be "wedding season" because I'm not the only one talking about weddings. Head on over to SerandEz where a young seamstress (glad to know there are still young ladies pursuing something beyond OT and ST) tells about her experiencing servicing kallahs and their mothers and the two year old sisters who must also get their hair done!
Leave your comments here. Once again, I recommend the book NO! Why parents need to say it and Children Need to Hear It. This book has an important chapter on the wiring of the brain, impulse control, etc. Saying NO is extremely important in the development cycle. Read the book, recommend it to your friends. Don't be afraid to say no to your children when they are young so they will be able to say NO to their own impulses when they are older.
Guest Post: Young Marriage Isn't the Problem!
Thank you to yet another eloquent guest poster!
I am a reader, but non-commenter on your blog. I read many of the 75 comments that the most recent post generated, and one thing I noticed was that everyone seemed to be attacking the concept of marrying young. As someone who married at 20 (spouse was also 20), I think your readers should hear the other side of the story.
We married the summer between junior and senior years of college, and we had been going to school full time up until that point, never having really worked at anything other than summer jobs. We lay in the fuzzy gray area known as right-wing Modern Orthodox and left-wing Yeshivish, so this was perfectly normal and acceptable in our circles. When we got engaged, we sat down with both sets of parents to discuss money. It was agreed that we were to have a modest wedding, with silk flowers, a small band (and not one of the more sought-after ones), a family friend for photography, and very simple food. I could detail the rest, but you get the idea- no extra expenditures there, no debt, paid for by both sets of parents who were thrilled to be marrying off their eldest (we are both the oldest). As for how we were to live for the first year, until graduation, both sets of parents agreed to give us the amount that they would be paying for the dorm and meal plan (money that would be paid anyway had we not gotten married, as they were paying for college). This money basically covered rent and food (which, again, is exactly what it would have covered had it been going to school instead of to us). We signed up for health insurance through the college, and the rest of the money for whatever other expenses, came from us taking part-time jobs. This is how we lived that first year, and it was hard, but since we wanted to get married at that time, that was what we had to do. And we understood that this arrangement meant that we had to live in an uncomfortably small apartment, buy cheaper food (we ate mostly milchigs, produce, and chicken that year, and we were just fine), and overall hold off on things that fell into the "wants" column in our budget (wonderful parents that we have sat down and taught us how to make a budget). I went on to graduate school while spouse went on to work full-time for a year before applying to business school. I worked part-time, and the money we made allowed our parents to scale back their help (although they still generously helped us), and we made do, even thoguh at this point, we had already had our first child (which, incidentally, was already able to "fit" into our budget, as my mother gave us the stroller, high chair, and crib that had only just been retired from use by my then-4-year-old brother). I finished grad school, got a full-time job, and spouse worked through business school. We had invested the money we had recieved in wedding gifts (which was not an insignificant amount) and b"h we are solid financially. We have never gone over budget, and we have just bought our fist house, we no longer receive financial help from our parents (only moral support!) and our family is growing ka"h. We are teaching our kids the values and practices that our parents have taught us.
So please do not blame early marriage- the blame lies with parents who do not prepare their children, and children who are immature and getting married because of expectations rather than readiness. There is no need to demand that people marry older, or work for years, or finish grad school- the real demand should be that a society that expects early marriage and young families should prepare their children for such.
We are b"h very happily and lovingly married, our children are happy and healthy, and Hashem has blessed us with a solid parnassah, despite these tough times. We would do it again 1000 times. -- Someone who married young
Thank you to yet another eloquent guest poster!
I am a reader, but non-commenter on your blog. I read many of the 75 comments that the most recent post generated, and one thing I noticed was that everyone seemed to be attacking the concept of marrying young. As someone who married at 20 (spouse was also 20), I think your readers should hear the other side of the story.
We married the summer between junior and senior years of college, and we had been going to school full time up until that point, never having really worked at anything other than summer jobs. We lay in the fuzzy gray area known as right-wing Modern Orthodox and left-wing Yeshivish, so this was perfectly normal and acceptable in our circles. When we got engaged, we sat down with both sets of parents to discuss money. It was agreed that we were to have a modest wedding, with silk flowers, a small band (and not one of the more sought-after ones), a family friend for photography, and very simple food. I could detail the rest, but you get the idea- no extra expenditures there, no debt, paid for by both sets of parents who were thrilled to be marrying off their eldest (we are both the oldest). As for how we were to live for the first year, until graduation, both sets of parents agreed to give us the amount that they would be paying for the dorm and meal plan (money that would be paid anyway had we not gotten married, as they were paying for college). This money basically covered rent and food (which, again, is exactly what it would have covered had it been going to school instead of to us). We signed up for health insurance through the college, and the rest of the money for whatever other expenses, came from us taking part-time jobs. This is how we lived that first year, and it was hard, but since we wanted to get married at that time, that was what we had to do. And we understood that this arrangement meant that we had to live in an uncomfortably small apartment, buy cheaper food (we ate mostly milchigs, produce, and chicken that year, and we were just fine), and overall hold off on things that fell into the "wants" column in our budget (wonderful parents that we have sat down and taught us how to make a budget). I went on to graduate school while spouse went on to work full-time for a year before applying to business school. I worked part-time, and the money we made allowed our parents to scale back their help (although they still generously helped us), and we made do, even thoguh at this point, we had already had our first child (which, incidentally, was already able to "fit" into our budget, as my mother gave us the stroller, high chair, and crib that had only just been retired from use by my then-4-year-old brother). I finished grad school, got a full-time job, and spouse worked through business school. We had invested the money we had recieved in wedding gifts (which was not an insignificant amount) and b"h we are solid financially. We have never gone over budget, and we have just bought our fist house, we no longer receive financial help from our parents (only moral support!) and our family is growing ka"h. We are teaching our kids the values and practices that our parents have taught us.
So please do not blame early marriage- the blame lies with parents who do not prepare their children, and children who are immature and getting married because of expectations rather than readiness. There is no need to demand that people marry older, or work for years, or finish grad school- the real demand should be that a society that expects early marriage and young families should prepare their children for such.
We are b"h very happily and lovingly married, our children are happy and healthy, and Hashem has blessed us with a solid parnassah, despite these tough times. We would do it again 1000 times. -- Someone who married young
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Another Reason to Pay for a Wedding in Cash
So long as we are discussing funding wedding with debt in Israel (and I do realize that Israel runs under a different set of economic rules, which I cynically could add puts Chassidish collectors at the doorsteps of every American Orthodox community, a miracle that the weight of the system hasn't caused financial collapse yet), I might as well add that going into debt to make a wedding is also considered "normal" right here in our own American backyard.
I have a handful of friends in the mortgage and real estate industry who tell me that nearly every (Orthodox) family borrows money, usually through their own home equity, to "make" a wedding. The presumption here is America is also that weddings are debt financed, not paid for in cash.
After all, as one agent told me: "Weddings cost a lot of money. How can a family afford to pay for a wedding in cash?" The debate on how to fund a wedding underscores an important difference in the approach to money. Those who function in their own cash economy with few exceptions (a home mortgage, initial funding for an income producing activity), don't tell themselves how much a wedding should cost to make the decision of how much to borrow. Rather they ask themselves what amount of cash reserves are prudent to spend and then base their wedding budget around that amount of cash.
Recently I ran into an acquaintance who divorced after a short marriage. When she had married, her mother, a friend of mine, had borrowed a significant sum of money to pay for the affair. I can't imagine the feeling of continuing to pay, month after month, year after year, for a wedding for which the marriage no longer exists. What a sad, sad situation. Best pay cash and just be done with it. . . . . .even if the marriage lasts forever.
So long as we are discussing funding wedding with debt in Israel (and I do realize that Israel runs under a different set of economic rules, which I cynically could add puts Chassidish collectors at the doorsteps of every American Orthodox community, a miracle that the weight of the system hasn't caused financial collapse yet), I might as well add that going into debt to make a wedding is also considered "normal" right here in our own American backyard.
I have a handful of friends in the mortgage and real estate industry who tell me that nearly every (Orthodox) family borrows money, usually through their own home equity, to "make" a wedding. The presumption here is America is also that weddings are debt financed, not paid for in cash.
After all, as one agent told me: "Weddings cost a lot of money. How can a family afford to pay for a wedding in cash?" The debate on how to fund a wedding underscores an important difference in the approach to money. Those who function in their own cash economy with few exceptions (a home mortgage, initial funding for an income producing activity), don't tell themselves how much a wedding should cost to make the decision of how much to borrow. Rather they ask themselves what amount of cash reserves are prudent to spend and then base their wedding budget around that amount of cash.
Recently I ran into an acquaintance who divorced after a short marriage. When she had married, her mother, a friend of mine, had borrowed a significant sum of money to pay for the affair. I can't imagine the feeling of continuing to pay, month after month, year after year, for a wedding for which the marriage no longer exists. What a sad, sad situation. Best pay cash and just be done with it. . . . . .even if the marriage lasts forever.
A Plan that Starts With Debt Isn't Much of a Plan
Hat Tip: Ateres
A reader kindly pointed me to this story on VIN regarding new wedding takanot in Belzer kehillot and Israeli Litvish Kehillot. YWN recently reported a similar story regarding the Belz community.
The Belz wedding plan has three parts:
1. A Gemach the will send $25,000 to each mechutan with a "easy payback" plan.
2. List of costs that that will be reduced, applicable to all.
3. Joint purchasing power to reduce wedding and appliance costs.
My reader was impressed, but I personally don't see a plan that involves the couple's respective families indebting themselves to a tune of $50,000 as much of a plan at all even if this "plan" is an improvement.
And I don't care that the $25,000 loan is interest-free. There is nothing "easy" about paying back a $25,000 loan, especially if you are the parent of a super-sized family and plan to be marrying off one child after the next child. The average Chareidi family in Israel is 8 children I believe. How many families can realistically pay back $25,000 or $200,000?
I HATE debt. If I were to write a takana regarding weddings it would read as follows:
Hat Tip: Ateres
A reader kindly pointed me to this story on VIN regarding new wedding takanot in Belzer kehillot and Israeli Litvish Kehillot. YWN recently reported a similar story regarding the Belz community.
The Belz wedding plan has three parts:
1. A Gemach the will send $25,000 to each mechutan with a "easy payback" plan.
2. List of costs that that will be reduced, applicable to all.
3. Joint purchasing power to reduce wedding and appliance costs.
My reader was impressed, but I personally don't see a plan that involves the couple's respective families indebting themselves to a tune of $50,000 as much of a plan at all even if this "plan" is an improvement.
And I don't care that the $25,000 loan is interest-free. There is nothing "easy" about paying back a $25,000 loan, especially if you are the parent of a super-sized family and plan to be marrying off one child after the next child. The average Chareidi family in Israel is 8 children I believe. How many families can realistically pay back $25,000 or $200,000?
I HATE debt. If I were to write a takana regarding weddings it would read as follows:
- Do not spend a penny more on wedding expenses than you have in currently available in cash.
- Let modesty rule the day regardless of how much available cash you have.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Add Your Signature
A reader kindly informed me of an internet petition that just went up. I don't know how much good internet petitions will do, but I encourage my readers to add their own digital John Hancock to the letter. So far there are 78 signatures. How many will be up by Friday? Please feel free to pass this link along through community listserves, Facebook, or any other method.
The petition letter follows below:
To: The Jewish Community
We, the undersigned parents, want to provide our children with a quality Jewish education. We send our children to and support our local Jewish Day School. But the rising cost of Day School tuition is creating a real financial strain on many families and is making a Day School education unaffordable. Yet, Day School has proven to be the most effective means of ensuring continuity in the American Jewish community. Although the affordability issue has been simmering below the surface for quite some time, the current financial crisis brings it to the forefront. Previous efforts to address this issue have fallen short and have not provided a viable long-term solution. Too many parents are sacrificing too much, indebting themselves for dozens of years to pay for Day School tuition. It’s not fair to ask grandparents, many of whom already paid for their children’s Day School education, to now pay for their grandchildren too. And, it’s not prudent or reliable to constantly seek the generosity of a few benefactors. We implore the administrators, educators, Rabbis, lay leaders, parents, Federation and all those who have an interest in providing our children with a Jewish education to create a new and sustainable system. Harness this challenging time to focus communal efforts. Be creative. Simple cost-cutting, one-time grants and other band-aids are not permanent solutions. Challenge the status quo, question basic assumptions, consider radical ideas, and hold nothing sacred until we, as a Jewish community, find a new and sustainable model. We want to provide our children with an affordable, sustainable, and excellent Jewish education. Please help us make that happen.
Sincerely,
The Undersigned
A reader kindly informed me of an internet petition that just went up. I don't know how much good internet petitions will do, but I encourage my readers to add their own digital John Hancock to the letter. So far there are 78 signatures. How many will be up by Friday? Please feel free to pass this link along through community listserves, Facebook, or any other method.
The petition letter follows below:
To: The Jewish Community
We, the undersigned parents, want to provide our children with a quality Jewish education. We send our children to and support our local Jewish Day School. But the rising cost of Day School tuition is creating a real financial strain on many families and is making a Day School education unaffordable. Yet, Day School has proven to be the most effective means of ensuring continuity in the American Jewish community. Although the affordability issue has been simmering below the surface for quite some time, the current financial crisis brings it to the forefront. Previous efforts to address this issue have fallen short and have not provided a viable long-term solution. Too many parents are sacrificing too much, indebting themselves for dozens of years to pay for Day School tuition. It’s not fair to ask grandparents, many of whom already paid for their children’s Day School education, to now pay for their grandchildren too. And, it’s not prudent or reliable to constantly seek the generosity of a few benefactors. We implore the administrators, educators, Rabbis, lay leaders, parents, Federation and all those who have an interest in providing our children with a Jewish education to create a new and sustainable system. Harness this challenging time to focus communal efforts. Be creative. Simple cost-cutting, one-time grants and other band-aids are not permanent solutions. Challenge the status quo, question basic assumptions, consider radical ideas, and hold nothing sacred until we, as a Jewish community, find a new and sustainable model. We want to provide our children with an affordable, sustainable, and excellent Jewish education. Please help us make that happen.
Sincerely,
The Undersigned
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Reigning in the Budget or Playing with the Numbers?
New Jersey's Kushner School
Hat Tip: JS
I like to gather bits and pieces of day school news that is out there for reference. I also read whatever available information out there regarding day schools with calculator in hand. JS pointed me to an article in the NJ Jewish News regarding budget slashing at the Kushner School (of Kosher Palette Cookbook fame). I have been informed by readers that Kushner is unique in that it is a very upscale school and is quite modern on the spectrum of Orthodoxy.
Kushner is looking at what the article labels as pro-active solutions. I would not call the plan to aggressively fund raise as particularly pro-active or different. I've already labelled increased fundraising as "same old, same old" because I don't know an organization that hasn't been engaging in fundraising for the past 25 years as this tuition problem has been brewing. Perhaps aggressive refers to some fundraising method we have yet to see.
Here is where the article gets interesting to me. The school has committed to cutting already massive tuitions ranging from over in the lower grades to $11,000 to $20,000 by high school by $200 per student. The school has 700 students which would result in a total of $140,000 in savings if you assume that every parent will pay $200 less. Let's make that assumption.
So what is the cut that has been announced: a $450,000 subsidized lunch program. I'm not sure if the program costs $450,000 over whatever it brings in, or if lunch is provided. I doubt there are many Kushner students receiving government lunch, especially given that "only" 1/3 of the 700 students are on any type of scholarship.
If you take the tuition cut and add back the cost of parents providing lunch, you have to wonder if there is a *real* tuition cut or a *stealth* tuition increase that will later show up in household expenses undetected. Interesting.
In addition, the school is considering selling the athletic fields. This too is intriguing. Something important to remember when selling off property (and many organizations do so in a crunch, homeowner associations is a good example), is that the cash infusion is a one time infusion, rather than a repeat event. While utility and maintenance costs will like fall, if those costs are not significant enough to stabilize expenses in the long term, it is only a matter of time before the same questions are faced again.
I can certainly see an argument to cut extracurriculars and facility costs and look towards a more bare bones program. Of course, many tuition paying parents may be far from happy which can hurt the income side of the budget. As a parent myself, I can't say that I'd be too thrilled with the proposal. It will cost at least $200 a year to send lunch for growing teenagers. And if the ball fields get sold and sports programs/PE presumably get cut, families seeking involvement with sports will likely have to pay out of pocket to replace these programs.
I don't know about you, but I've been pricing out some sports classes for my own kids and extracurriculars are just plain expensive!
Read the article. Leave your comments. Tell me if you think that there is a real tuition decrease proposed or a silent increase disguised as a decrease. I imagine that many of us will see similar notes coming home from our own children's schools in the future.
New Jersey's Kushner School
Hat Tip: JS
I like to gather bits and pieces of day school news that is out there for reference. I also read whatever available information out there regarding day schools with calculator in hand. JS pointed me to an article in the NJ Jewish News regarding budget slashing at the Kushner School (of Kosher Palette Cookbook fame). I have been informed by readers that Kushner is unique in that it is a very upscale school and is quite modern on the spectrum of Orthodoxy.
Kushner is looking at what the article labels as pro-active solutions. I would not call the plan to aggressively fund raise as particularly pro-active or different. I've already labelled increased fundraising as "same old, same old" because I don't know an organization that hasn't been engaging in fundraising for the past 25 years as this tuition problem has been brewing. Perhaps aggressive refers to some fundraising method we have yet to see.
Here is where the article gets interesting to me. The school has committed to cutting already massive tuitions ranging from over in the lower grades to $11,000 to $20,000 by high school by $200 per student. The school has 700 students which would result in a total of $140,000 in savings if you assume that every parent will pay $200 less. Let's make that assumption.
So what is the cut that has been announced: a $450,000 subsidized lunch program. I'm not sure if the program costs $450,000 over whatever it brings in, or if lunch is provided. I doubt there are many Kushner students receiving government lunch, especially given that "only" 1/3 of the 700 students are on any type of scholarship.
If you take the tuition cut and add back the cost of parents providing lunch, you have to wonder if there is a *real* tuition cut or a *stealth* tuition increase that will later show up in household expenses undetected. Interesting.
In addition, the school is considering selling the athletic fields. This too is intriguing. Something important to remember when selling off property (and many organizations do so in a crunch, homeowner associations is a good example), is that the cash infusion is a one time infusion, rather than a repeat event. While utility and maintenance costs will like fall, if those costs are not significant enough to stabilize expenses in the long term, it is only a matter of time before the same questions are faced again.
I can certainly see an argument to cut extracurriculars and facility costs and look towards a more bare bones program. Of course, many tuition paying parents may be far from happy which can hurt the income side of the budget. As a parent myself, I can't say that I'd be too thrilled with the proposal. It will cost at least $200 a year to send lunch for growing teenagers. And if the ball fields get sold and sports programs/PE presumably get cut, families seeking involvement with sports will likely have to pay out of pocket to replace these programs.
I don't know about you, but I've been pricing out some sports classes for my own kids and extracurriculars are just plain expensive!
Read the article. Leave your comments. Tell me if you think that there is a real tuition decrease proposed or a silent increase disguised as a decrease. I imagine that many of us will see similar notes coming home from our own children's schools in the future.
Monday, April 20, 2009
New To You Shopping
I wish I discovered "New to You" shopping, otherwise known as USED or THRIFT shopping years ago. The truth is, I briefly discovered the concept in college, but the habit didn't stick. The main drag near my University had a very trendy clothing shop that sold lightly used and new clothing and accessories. Although I've always seemed to have a knack for getting a nice deep discount on clothing, this was my first taste of getting a deep discount with little effort. Since the store was near other places I had to go, I would stop in once a week for 5-10 minutes and take a quick look. My best find was a skirt I'd seen at Macy's that I really desired. But I don't spend $70 for a skirt period. I managed to get the skirt, possibly worn once for $7. Too bad I can't fit in it anymore.
Between college and the recent, I bought some used furniture, none of which followed me on my next move. I bought a small table and chair set from an girl in a neighboring apartment and picked up a $10 couch from another neighbor. But, once again, buying used did not stick.
I rediscovered "New To You" shopping after my firstborn (mostly used books), but the habit didn't stick until last summer when I was all of a sudden faced with a huge shopping list of things:
At the recommendation of a friend who is always very "put together," I finally decided to give "New to You" Shopping a real chance, learned a bit about the ends and outs, and the habit is here to stay. That summer, I landed uniform shirts and pants for a couple dollars a piece, barely worn Shabbat shirts for a dollar a piece, summer clothing for a dollar or less a piece, summer clothing all for between 50 cents and a $1.50 an outfit, perhaps never even worn swim shorts for a $1.50 each, a quality ladies' swim suit that would have retailed for over $75, barely worn, for less than $5, a number of wonderful toys and games for pennies on the dollar, and a Kettler Tricycle for less than $10 (bought on the wrong day. . but I wasn't going to pass it up--see below about days to shop). I also managed to fill in the missing pieces to complete hand-me-down outfits, picked up wonderful play and Shabbat jumpers for $1 to $3, picked up some crafting books for around a dollar a piece (Camp Mommy is coming up and I need serious help in the crafting department), and picked up some exercise clothing for me. All of this with VERY LITTLE EFFORT and for VERY LITTLE MONEY.
And while I have seen a large drop in an already low consumer budget, I have noticed that the quality of clothing has increased. A great inverse relationship!
Here is what I have learned about "New to You Shopping:"
Types of New to You Shopping. There are two basic types of shops: Thrift stores and Consignment Stores. Thrift stores take donations of household items and sell inventory to support a charity. Thrift stores may be located in shopping strips or in an annex of a charity. Consignment stores take inventory on a loan from consignors (people like me and you), sell the inventory, and provide the consignor with a cut from each sale.
For those looking for books and media, library inventory sales are one of the best ways to build a home library for the kids. Ebay and Craigslist are great places to look for something specific. Many have great luck with Craigslist for furniture. I tend to find shopping more to my liking than dealing with people on Craigslist. I don't care for the back and forth on email where the result can be that you are 5th in line for something. Shopping is first come, first serve and a short drive away.
Find Stores that You Like. Trying out "new to you" shopping is frustrating until you find places that you actually like. I found that once I found places that I actually could enjoy going to, that shopping and finding what I was looking for at the right price, was no more hit and miss than going to a department store at season end. Finding the enjoyment factor is why something so logical can take a long time to stick. I have one consignment store that I really like and about 4 thrift stores that I also like, 2 large and 2 small. I like consignment stores that have a central area set up for kids where they can play with select toys while you shop. I like thrift stores with a varied inventory and a decent presentation.
Which Type of Shopping and For What? Consignment shopping is pricier than thrift shopping. However, if you are looking for something specific, it is probably the more efficient route. For example, if you are looking for a fancier outfit for a family affair that is next week, you probably want to hit the consignment store. Consignment store owners tend to only take inventory for one season at a time, much like a department store, and place specialty products in visible areas. Consignment stores are also great if you are looking for barely used or nearly new shoes. Shoes in consignment stores are generally clean and in better condition than thrift stores. Consignment stores are also great for higher end baby equipment and extracurricular equipment (such as outgrown tap shoes or soccer cleats).
Thrift store shopping is generally hit or miss, as is regular shopping, but if you shop without impending deadlines, chances are you will find things you like. I tend to shop ahead for clothing anyways and prefer my kids shop from available inventory in house, rather than trying to find things with pressure hanging over our heads. One time I was in one of the thrift stores I like when a man walked in with numerous large bags. My luck! I found out that one of the local consignment stores (not my regular one, but another fine store) takes the inventory that their consignors don't want back to this particular thrift shop. I had some great finds that day.
What you need to know. Just because the item is in a consignment or thrift shop doesn't mean that it is a good deal. Even when doing "new to you" shopping, I generally look for a discount. Consignment stores generally mark their inventory with different colored tags, indicating when the inventory was acquired. The oldest inventory is normally put on a 50% off sale the last month before it is retired. If my kids are helping me shop (rather than playing in the kids' area), I ask them to only show me inventory with that one color tag. Keeps them focused on what I'm willing to consider. I also like taking my kids with me so that they don't think "new to you" shopping is gross. Best they get used to the idea.
Thrift stores often have one or two days during the week where they offer a specified discount, perhaps 25 or 50% off. Some thrift stores use a inventory method similar to a consignment store. I mentioned a wonderful Kettler tricycle I picked up for $9.99. If I had found it one day later, I would have paid $7.50. But I don't cry over spilled milk. One rule of this type of shopping is that you must be decisive. The chances of being able to go back and find this same tricycle later is almost none. Now that I have learned that some days are better to shop on than others, I only shop on specific days. (The consignment store had this same tricycle on sale for over $30).
Pitfalls. Things to watch out for are buying things for the sake of a good deal and buying too much. I try to keep a list of types of things I am looking for, be it a game or clothing, and always ask myself if this is something worth storing. Remember that you have to store and care for everything you buy.
If you are buying toys, you need to make sure that they are safe. I've seen great vintage toys that have I played with in my day, that are now deemed a chocking hazard, out of shelves. Great for the collector. Not great for kids that like to put stuff in their mouth. I'd be wary of toys that may have been recalled.
However, a note about toys. I think a lot of what is on the market for kids today is pure junk! This subject is probably deserving of a post of its own. I like my kids to play with versatile toys that lead toward imaginative building and that don't end up in a discarded pile a week after they comes home because they simply aren't that interesting. I also dislike most toys with batteries, although there are some exceptions. I love puzzles and board games. I love finding new pieces to a add to our train set. I love wooden blocks and tinker toys. I love legos. When it comes to building toys, often the refrain in our home is "the more the merrier." While you should be careful when it comes to "new to you shopping," I cannot say enough positive about some of the great toys that you will likely find in certain thrift and consignment stores.
I wish I discovered "New to You" shopping, otherwise known as USED or THRIFT shopping years ago. The truth is, I briefly discovered the concept in college, but the habit didn't stick. The main drag near my University had a very trendy clothing shop that sold lightly used and new clothing and accessories. Although I've always seemed to have a knack for getting a nice deep discount on clothing, this was my first taste of getting a deep discount with little effort. Since the store was near other places I had to go, I would stop in once a week for 5-10 minutes and take a quick look. My best find was a skirt I'd seen at Macy's that I really desired. But I don't spend $70 for a skirt period. I managed to get the skirt, possibly worn once for $7. Too bad I can't fit in it anymore.
Between college and the recent, I bought some used furniture, none of which followed me on my next move. I bought a small table and chair set from an girl in a neighboring apartment and picked up a $10 couch from another neighbor. But, once again, buying used did not stick.
I rediscovered "New To You" shopping after my firstborn (mostly used books), but the habit didn't stick until last summer when I was all of a sudden faced with a huge shopping list of things:
- uniform shirts and uniform pants
- pants, pants, and more pants (kids really do grow overnight!)
- a new Shabbat outfit for above child
- a sudden need for larger summer clothing (sometimes more than one child grows overnight)
- a sudden need for larger swim shorts after the sales ended (this really was not a good sight!!!)
- a swim suit for me, after an opportunity came up for me to swim daily
- a growing interest in construction toys
- a quality tricycle for the the youngest who showed unexpected readiness to tag along with the "big kids" (other tricycle turned out to be a piece of junk)
At the recommendation of a friend who is always very "put together," I finally decided to give "New to You" Shopping a real chance, learned a bit about the ends and outs, and the habit is here to stay. That summer, I landed uniform shirts and pants for a couple dollars a piece, barely worn Shabbat shirts for a dollar a piece, summer clothing for a dollar or less a piece, summer clothing all for between 50 cents and a $1.50 an outfit, perhaps never even worn swim shorts for a $1.50 each, a quality ladies' swim suit that would have retailed for over $75, barely worn, for less than $5, a number of wonderful toys and games for pennies on the dollar, and a Kettler Tricycle for less than $10 (bought on the wrong day. . but I wasn't going to pass it up--see below about days to shop). I also managed to fill in the missing pieces to complete hand-me-down outfits, picked up wonderful play and Shabbat jumpers for $1 to $3, picked up some crafting books for around a dollar a piece (Camp Mommy is coming up and I need serious help in the crafting department), and picked up some exercise clothing for me. All of this with VERY LITTLE EFFORT and for VERY LITTLE MONEY.
And while I have seen a large drop in an already low consumer budget, I have noticed that the quality of clothing has increased. A great inverse relationship!
Here is what I have learned about "New to You Shopping:"
Types of New to You Shopping. There are two basic types of shops: Thrift stores and Consignment Stores. Thrift stores take donations of household items and sell inventory to support a charity. Thrift stores may be located in shopping strips or in an annex of a charity. Consignment stores take inventory on a loan from consignors (people like me and you), sell the inventory, and provide the consignor with a cut from each sale.
For those looking for books and media, library inventory sales are one of the best ways to build a home library for the kids. Ebay and Craigslist are great places to look for something specific. Many have great luck with Craigslist for furniture. I tend to find shopping more to my liking than dealing with people on Craigslist. I don't care for the back and forth on email where the result can be that you are 5th in line for something. Shopping is first come, first serve and a short drive away.
Find Stores that You Like. Trying out "new to you" shopping is frustrating until you find places that you actually like. I found that once I found places that I actually could enjoy going to, that shopping and finding what I was looking for at the right price, was no more hit and miss than going to a department store at season end. Finding the enjoyment factor is why something so logical can take a long time to stick. I have one consignment store that I really like and about 4 thrift stores that I also like, 2 large and 2 small. I like consignment stores that have a central area set up for kids where they can play with select toys while you shop. I like thrift stores with a varied inventory and a decent presentation.
Which Type of Shopping and For What? Consignment shopping is pricier than thrift shopping. However, if you are looking for something specific, it is probably the more efficient route. For example, if you are looking for a fancier outfit for a family affair that is next week, you probably want to hit the consignment store. Consignment store owners tend to only take inventory for one season at a time, much like a department store, and place specialty products in visible areas. Consignment stores are also great if you are looking for barely used or nearly new shoes. Shoes in consignment stores are generally clean and in better condition than thrift stores. Consignment stores are also great for higher end baby equipment and extracurricular equipment (such as outgrown tap shoes or soccer cleats).
Thrift store shopping is generally hit or miss, as is regular shopping, but if you shop without impending deadlines, chances are you will find things you like. I tend to shop ahead for clothing anyways and prefer my kids shop from available inventory in house, rather than trying to find things with pressure hanging over our heads. One time I was in one of the thrift stores I like when a man walked in with numerous large bags. My luck! I found out that one of the local consignment stores (not my regular one, but another fine store) takes the inventory that their consignors don't want back to this particular thrift shop. I had some great finds that day.
What you need to know. Just because the item is in a consignment or thrift shop doesn't mean that it is a good deal. Even when doing "new to you" shopping, I generally look for a discount. Consignment stores generally mark their inventory with different colored tags, indicating when the inventory was acquired. The oldest inventory is normally put on a 50% off sale the last month before it is retired. If my kids are helping me shop (rather than playing in the kids' area), I ask them to only show me inventory with that one color tag. Keeps them focused on what I'm willing to consider. I also like taking my kids with me so that they don't think "new to you" shopping is gross. Best they get used to the idea.
Thrift stores often have one or two days during the week where they offer a specified discount, perhaps 25 or 50% off. Some thrift stores use a inventory method similar to a consignment store. I mentioned a wonderful Kettler tricycle I picked up for $9.99. If I had found it one day later, I would have paid $7.50. But I don't cry over spilled milk. One rule of this type of shopping is that you must be decisive. The chances of being able to go back and find this same tricycle later is almost none. Now that I have learned that some days are better to shop on than others, I only shop on specific days. (The consignment store had this same tricycle on sale for over $30).
Pitfalls. Things to watch out for are buying things for the sake of a good deal and buying too much. I try to keep a list of types of things I am looking for, be it a game or clothing, and always ask myself if this is something worth storing. Remember that you have to store and care for everything you buy.
If you are buying toys, you need to make sure that they are safe. I've seen great vintage toys that have I played with in my day, that are now deemed a chocking hazard, out of shelves. Great for the collector. Not great for kids that like to put stuff in their mouth. I'd be wary of toys that may have been recalled.
However, a note about toys. I think a lot of what is on the market for kids today is pure junk! This subject is probably deserving of a post of its own. I like my kids to play with versatile toys that lead toward imaginative building and that don't end up in a discarded pile a week after they comes home because they simply aren't that interesting. I also dislike most toys with batteries, although there are some exceptions. I love puzzles and board games. I love finding new pieces to a add to our train set. I love wooden blocks and tinker toys. I love legos. When it comes to building toys, often the refrain in our home is "the more the merrier." While you should be careful when it comes to "new to you shopping," I cannot say enough positive about some of the great toys that you will likely find in certain thrift and consignment stores.
Friday, April 17, 2009
The Baltimore Initiative
Time to get back to my bread and butter blogging. I hope all my readers had a great yom tov and that no one has entered the realm of slavery/subjection a la Avadim hayeinu L'Mastercard B'America.
Hat Tip: Numerous readers from Baltimore and beyond. Thank you loyal readers. I will allow you to self-identify at your own discretion.
Numerous readers from Baltimore and beyond have kindly emailed me regarding the Baltimore Communal Initiative. In late March, the Rabbinical Council of Baltimore sponsored a community wide event: “Responding to the Economic Crisis: An Evening of Tefillah, Chizuk, and Practical Initiatives.” The event featured various speakers in which an initiative known as "The Pledge" was presented along with other information about job programs (JobLink), Baltimore tzedakah organizations, the roll out of the Baltimore's own Mesila (an Israeli organization that provides financial counseling, awareness, and education, which is now expanding to chutz l'aretz), Day School education in Baltimore, etc.
The main point of the night was that the majority of tzedakah funds must stay within the community. "The Pledge" is a public listing of all community members who have committed to keeping 51% of their tzedakah funds local (Note: Rav Schachter mentioned 75% of tzedakah dollars should remain local in his shiur). Of the amount that must be given locally, 26% is to be designated in care of local day schools/yeshivot. All media files from the event are available online, see the Pledge and FAQs regarding The Pledge. (Another Note: I believe Rav Schachter mentioned that previous commitments to tzedakah need not be honored when your own community is in a emergency situation. Unfortunately, I cannot find my notation regarding this point).
I believe that the Baltimore Rabbonim are hoping that a public commitment will both help potential donors be able to turn away institutions from outside of the community with greater ease, as well as create a positive peer pressure to keep giving local. Apparently there is a sense of urgency regarding funding, especially for schools, as is the case throughout the nation. E.g., Rabbi Frand in his talk relates that there is a principal in another community sitting on $180,000 of currently worthless checks.
I'd like to hear from more attendees regarding their views regarding both the substance and presentation of the event. One reader wrote to me that while there was nothing earth shattering in either the video or the speech, that the basics (keeping money in the community and networking within the community to help those seeking work) were fine.
However, my reader felt the comments regarding tuition and personal finance missed the boat:
Time to get back to my bread and butter blogging. I hope all my readers had a great yom tov and that no one has entered the realm of slavery/subjection a la Avadim hayeinu L'Mastercard B'America.
Hat Tip: Numerous readers from Baltimore and beyond. Thank you loyal readers. I will allow you to self-identify at your own discretion.
Numerous readers from Baltimore and beyond have kindly emailed me regarding the Baltimore Communal Initiative. In late March, the Rabbinical Council of Baltimore sponsored a community wide event: “Responding to the Economic Crisis: An Evening of Tefillah, Chizuk, and Practical Initiatives.” The event featured various speakers in which an initiative known as "The Pledge" was presented along with other information about job programs (JobLink), Baltimore tzedakah organizations, the roll out of the Baltimore's own Mesila (an Israeli organization that provides financial counseling, awareness, and education, which is now expanding to chutz l'aretz), Day School education in Baltimore, etc.
The main point of the night was that the majority of tzedakah funds must stay within the community. "The Pledge" is a public listing of all community members who have committed to keeping 51% of their tzedakah funds local (Note: Rav Schachter mentioned 75% of tzedakah dollars should remain local in his shiur). Of the amount that must be given locally, 26% is to be designated in care of local day schools/yeshivot. All media files from the event are available online, see the Pledge and FAQs regarding The Pledge. (Another Note: I believe Rav Schachter mentioned that previous commitments to tzedakah need not be honored when your own community is in a emergency situation. Unfortunately, I cannot find my notation regarding this point).
I believe that the Baltimore Rabbonim are hoping that a public commitment will both help potential donors be able to turn away institutions from outside of the community with greater ease, as well as create a positive peer pressure to keep giving local. Apparently there is a sense of urgency regarding funding, especially for schools, as is the case throughout the nation. E.g., Rabbi Frand in his talk relates that there is a principal in another community sitting on $180,000 of currently worthless checks.
I'd like to hear from more attendees regarding their views regarding both the substance and presentation of the event. One reader wrote to me that while there was nothing earth shattering in either the video or the speech, that the basics (keeping money in the community and networking within the community to help those seeking work) were fine.
However, my reader felt the comments regarding tuition and personal finance missed the boat:
- The reader pointed out that a comment on the video telling telling parents to teach their kids to be careful with money, so they will understand the value of $1, $10, $100, and eventually $10,000. My reader writes notes that "its not the little things, but the big things." The reader refers to the ingrained lifestyle choices that are considered normal writing: . . . . but will you get rid of that maid? Will you buy a smaller house? Buy a used car? Stop going to summer camp, pre-Pesach camp, between summer camp and school camp, etc?" The reader noted that no specifics regarding personal finance were addressed beyond being careful. The reader's comment really resonates with me, as I have a bit of (professional) experience in the realm of personal finance. Issues of "lifestyle" simply can't be glossed over. I know very few people who say, "I'm broke because I have made poor choices." But I know a lot of people who are broke and believe they are quite careful, even frugal. Might sound harsh, and I apologize if I am in a bad mood after a recent conversation with a client regarding cash issues, but that is my own observation. Take it or leave it.
- My reader noted that on the school front, it is what I am about to start calling "same old, same old." The schools are are basically just looking for more ways to find money---more donations, government funds. They aren't yet ready to deal with issues of sustainability and (like above) tangible "lifestyle" changes of their own. If you listen to the Aisfa video available at the website (school section starts at just past 20 minutes) you will likely note, as the reader did, that no changes are being proposed. The basic gist is a need for more funding.
I'm encouraged by the increased attention on tuition, although it would have been nice if there was more foresight, rather than trying to tackle the issues when the schools are at the "financial breaking point." Personally, I don't like to tackle an issue when there is an emergency on hand. Like my reader who kindly sent comments, I don't believe the full pictures regarding the tuition and other economics crisis vis a vis the Orthodox community is more fully understood yet by leadership. (Obviously I'm not quite convinced that the funds are sitting in wait).
Hat Tip: A Mother In Israel
One person does seem to pinpoint one or two crucial issues (highlighted) of this financial crisis, and that is the executive editor of the Baltimore Jewish Times, Phil Jacobs. In response to the community gathering he writes the following:
I don't have much to say about Mr. Jacob's own suggestions. Many of the suggestions have been made before (but are a long way from implementation), and in the case of a "tax" of meshulachim, Baltimore already has a program for taxing meshulachim. Some of the suggestions really push towards some sort of half day public, half day Talmud Torah option, which isn't going to get too far at this juncture. I think volunteer labor is key to lessening costs in the schools, and forgoing a pricey year in Israel may just be commonsense for those lacking the resources, but the "YeshivaCorps" suggestion doesn't hold much appeal for me personally. Perhaps others feel differently. I think the delay of entrance into the workforce (amongst Orthodox young men in particular) is one of the root causes of our current doomed economic model. I see no reason to delay my own children's entrance into the workforce while painting Yeshiva walls, answering phones, or coaching a sports team alongside some sort of ad hoc learning program.So here we are. It’s 2009 and we’re still working a model of education and fund-raising that connects back 25 years ago, at least. We remember the days when schools would “pay off” loans by borrowing from other sources. Jewish Community Services executive director Barbara Gradet told the BALTIMORE JEWISH TIMES that her agency is handling some 1,000 unemployed Jews. Ahavas Yisroel is going to disperse a record-setting $370,000 in financial aid just for Passover alone. CHAI is preparing itself for a workshop on avoiding foreclosure. The Orthodox community is mobilizing itself to train its constituents in job-hunting skills and family financial management. [A lot of suggestions interspersed with "Again, we don’t have money. There is no money." Which is followed by a reminder]:
The punch line –– there is no money.
There is no money coming.
I will wrap this up now before this post becomes even more lengthy. Welcome to what will probably be an extended stretch of bread and butter Orthonomic blogging. I've got materials coming out my ears with thanks to my fantastic readers.
Shabbat Shalom!
Sunday, April 05, 2009
I Wish I Was a Member. . . . .
So I could retract my membership
I wish I was a member of the Agudah so I could retract my membership with fanfare. Rabbi Shafran is the voice of Orthodoxy, even if it isn't exactly the branch we subscribe to. His articles are published far and wide. And this article should clearly have never made it onto his computer, much less off the computer and into the press (see here and here). They are published in many non-Orthodox publications. As Rabbi Yair Hoffman writes, "I strongly believe that each of Rabbi Shafran’s points are completely antithetical to the true Torah perspective and that the consequences of printing such an article can have far-reaching and harmful ramifications."
In one article he managed to:
I won't sit around waiting for a retraction from Rabbi Shafran. Pesach awaits and the retraction will likely never come. I'd write the Agudah, but the article somehow made it out the door of the Agudah. I'm not sure it is worth spilling ink.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Another shopper noticed my children snacking on the apples we were buying for Pesach. I had the grocery store weigh two other apples in their place, but who G-d only knows if we made restitution.
So I could retract my membership
I wish I was a member of the Agudah so I could retract my membership with fanfare. Rabbi Shafran is the voice of Orthodoxy, even if it isn't exactly the branch we subscribe to. His articles are published far and wide. And this article should clearly have never made it onto his computer, much less off the computer and into the press (see here and here). They are published in many non-Orthodox publications. As Rabbi Yair Hoffman writes, "I strongly believe that each of Rabbi Shafran’s points are completely antithetical to the true Torah perspective and that the consequences of printing such an article can have far-reaching and harmful ramifications."
In one article he managed to:
- Praise Madoff, the man who destroyed dignity, destroyed lives, destroyed fortunes, destroyed foundations, destroyed endowments, and who has, perhaps, permanently altered the landscape giving. (And, yes, scale does matter. Don't pretend we are all thieves anyway and that there is no difference between those who systematically defraud over and over and over and over again, and those whose children have eaten an apple or two in the grocery store before the infraction was noticed*. There is a difference).
- Denigrate Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger, a man who heroically saved 155 passengers, for absolutely NO good reason.
- Denigrate the Torah publicly.
I won't sit around waiting for a retraction from Rabbi Shafran. Pesach awaits and the retraction will likely never come. I'd write the Agudah, but the article somehow made it out the door of the Agudah. I'm not sure it is worth spilling ink.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Another shopper noticed my children snacking on the apples we were buying for Pesach. I had the grocery store weigh two other apples in their place, but who G-d only knows if we made restitution.
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Are Raffles a Good Idea in this Environment
Like many of you, I am involved in at least on community institution and I think all of us involved understand one simple thing: the money is just simply not flowing in and the word insolvency is on tip of the tongue. Another thing we know is that if someone gives you a donation, they probably aren't going to give you a second donation, so there is little room for failure.
Ariella's son just came home from school with a note that in order to meet payroll, the school must engage in fundraising and that at this time each boy is expected to sell $100 tickets for a $100,000 raffle.
A little simple math is helpful in evaluating such a fundraiser. To cover the costs of such a raffle (and there are so many of them out there) the students/parents/fundraisers must sell 1000 tickets just to break even. In actuality they must sell more because there are also promised incentives for those that sell. I don't know what the likelihood of selling more than 1000 tickets is, but I believe the likelihood is rather low. Perhaps the likelihood of a loss is higher. If I was on a board where such a fundraiser was suggested, I would be at the forefront fighting the idea. Fundraisers are not my game, but I think a large expected prize combined with a very high ticket price is an equation for a potential loss.
Personally I have a distaste for gambling fundraisers and a distaste for children being asked to go door-to-door. Ariella had a more modest proposal that the boys used the time off of school before Pesach to work, helping harried parents with random chores, errands, and babysitting. As I try to get all the things I need to get done before Pesach, I can say this: I would NOT, under any circumstances, entertain buying a $100 raffle ticket (when I get calls to buy such tickets from boys or girls fundraising for their school, I always tell them I will give a small donation to the school and note their name in a note, but I don't want to feed into the pricey fundraising frenzy), but I would entertain paying a bochur to help out with some household projects that need taken care of so long as they show up with their painting clothing on.
Like many of you, I am involved in at least on community institution and I think all of us involved understand one simple thing: the money is just simply not flowing in and the word insolvency is on tip of the tongue. Another thing we know is that if someone gives you a donation, they probably aren't going to give you a second donation, so there is little room for failure.
Ariella's son just came home from school with a note that in order to meet payroll, the school must engage in fundraising and that at this time each boy is expected to sell $100 tickets for a $100,000 raffle.
A little simple math is helpful in evaluating such a fundraiser. To cover the costs of such a raffle (and there are so many of them out there) the students/parents/fundraisers must sell 1000 tickets just to break even. In actuality they must sell more because there are also promised incentives for those that sell. I don't know what the likelihood of selling more than 1000 tickets is, but I believe the likelihood is rather low. Perhaps the likelihood of a loss is higher. If I was on a board where such a fundraiser was suggested, I would be at the forefront fighting the idea. Fundraisers are not my game, but I think a large expected prize combined with a very high ticket price is an equation for a potential loss.
Personally I have a distaste for gambling fundraisers and a distaste for children being asked to go door-to-door. Ariella had a more modest proposal that the boys used the time off of school before Pesach to work, helping harried parents with random chores, errands, and babysitting. As I try to get all the things I need to get done before Pesach, I can say this: I would NOT, under any circumstances, entertain buying a $100 raffle ticket (when I get calls to buy such tickets from boys or girls fundraising for their school, I always tell them I will give a small donation to the school and note their name in a note, but I don't want to feed into the pricey fundraising frenzy), but I would entertain paying a bochur to help out with some household projects that need taken care of so long as they show up with their painting clothing on.
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
Obscene!
For only $30 dollars a month you can help feed a child in a far away 3rd world country. Anyone want to guess what a well known tzedakah is asking to feed a family for Pesach alone? Take $30 and start multiplying. . . . . . . . . .
Obscene is the word my husband blurted out after I showed him an advertisement that was running in a publication for a well known tzedakah for aniyei Eretz Yisrael. This advertisement detailed the costs needed to be covered for aniyei Eretz Yisrael as follows:
Seder night for a smaller family = $214
Seder night for a larger family = $404
Entire Yom Tov for a smaller family (including clothing) = $1449
Entire Yom Tov for a larger family (including clothing) = $3088
My husband and I were simply astounded by these (high) figures and how an organization could ask for far more for one night or one week than the donor you are trying to attract is planning to spend, possibly for 6 months on their own needs? (The advertisement ran in a community that is not known for high incomes).
I only hope that the numbers are inflated. Personally I see no good purpose in inflating numbers. Inflating numbers doesn't underscore need, it makes the donor question the need, especially when your middle income donor in America, who is likely cutting back to make their own ends meet, isn't planning on spending so much for their own needs.
The notation "including clothing" was made in the form of an edit (light blue), in handwriting with a ^, instead typewriting. This too is disturbing. I have been reading numerous reports that the food situation in Eretz Yisrael is desperate. And when the situation regarding food is desperate, it seems to me that the concentration should simply be on feeding people. Yet that does not appear to be the case. In this report, a major philanthropist, is told by well known Rabbonim about the terrible and rampant poverty (bochurim in yeshiva are being fed only bread and water for breakfast and supper and those who have families with food-which from other articles seems to be few- are being asked to go home for Shabbat). One would think that given the situation regarding food, a major donor would be asked to either donate food and/or start some sort of program that could help the situation in the long term via job training and placement. But instead the recommended initiative was to donate suits to bochurim, of which 10,000 were donated.
While I do believe that we need to concentrate on our needs at home (a point emphasized by both Rabbi Schachter and the Rabbonim in Baltimore at another event I have yet to report on--thanks readers for all the info you have sent me!), the poverty in Eretz Yisarel is of great concern to me because the way it is being dealt (and I have another post about wedding takanot in the Belz and Yeshiva communities in Eretz Yisrael) underscores some very troubling issues vis a vis priorities in spending.
Signing off for now. (Hope this post wasn't too harsh).
For only $30 dollars a month you can help feed a child in a far away 3rd world country. Anyone want to guess what a well known tzedakah is asking to feed a family for Pesach alone? Take $30 and start multiplying. . . . . . . . . .
Obscene is the word my husband blurted out after I showed him an advertisement that was running in a publication for a well known tzedakah for aniyei Eretz Yisrael. This advertisement detailed the costs needed to be covered for aniyei Eretz Yisrael as follows:
Seder night for a smaller family = $214
Seder night for a larger family = $404
Entire Yom Tov for a smaller family (including clothing) = $1449
Entire Yom Tov for a larger family (including clothing) = $3088
My husband and I were simply astounded by these (high) figures and how an organization could ask for far more for one night or one week than the donor you are trying to attract is planning to spend, possibly for 6 months on their own needs? (The advertisement ran in a community that is not known for high incomes).
I only hope that the numbers are inflated. Personally I see no good purpose in inflating numbers. Inflating numbers doesn't underscore need, it makes the donor question the need, especially when your middle income donor in America, who is likely cutting back to make their own ends meet, isn't planning on spending so much for their own needs.
The notation "including clothing" was made in the form of an edit (light blue), in handwriting with a ^, instead typewriting. This too is disturbing. I have been reading numerous reports that the food situation in Eretz Yisrael is desperate. And when the situation regarding food is desperate, it seems to me that the concentration should simply be on feeding people. Yet that does not appear to be the case. In this report, a major philanthropist, is told by well known Rabbonim about the terrible and rampant poverty (bochurim in yeshiva are being fed only bread and water for breakfast and supper and those who have families with food-which from other articles seems to be few- are being asked to go home for Shabbat). One would think that given the situation regarding food, a major donor would be asked to either donate food and/or start some sort of program that could help the situation in the long term via job training and placement. But instead the recommended initiative was to donate suits to bochurim, of which 10,000 were donated.
While I do believe that we need to concentrate on our needs at home (a point emphasized by both Rabbi Schachter and the Rabbonim in Baltimore at another event I have yet to report on--thanks readers for all the info you have sent me!), the poverty in Eretz Yisarel is of great concern to me because the way it is being dealt (and I have another post about wedding takanot in the Belz and Yeshiva communities in Eretz Yisrael) underscores some very troubling issues vis a vis priorities in spending.
Signing off for now. (Hope this post wasn't too harsh).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)