Shana Tova and Mechila

I just want to wish my readers a wonderful year of health, beracha, and parnasah. I wish the same to all of the important institutions that we rely on to provide a rich communal life and take care of the less fortunate. I really try hard to make sure that this blog focuses on ideas, rather than people or institutions. Ultimately, I hope this blog contributes to greater financial health within the kehilla and not ch"v hurt feelings. But if anything I have written has been hurtful, please do grant mechila. And an easy fast for all.

Surviving a Layoff:
The beauty of a reasonable mortgage

Hat Tip: Rosie

This is a story about a family that is trying to make it through a layoff with severance, unemployment, and a bit extra while still making their house payments and without dipping into their savings. The article gives a number of tips that the frugal are quite familiar with, e.g. finding free entertainment and using the library. There is nothing particularly revolutionary, although I like the advice that luxuries are what you make of them.

What the article doesn't point out is the factors that are most important in keeping this family afloat during a (hopefully) temporary setback, and that is their previous spending and budgeting habits. They don't have to maintain loan payments on student loans, car loans, credit cards, and a house. The mortgage is their only debt and they have some savings. And their mortgage is manageable on a lesser, single income.

Here are things I think should be avoided like the plague:
*Buying a home for which the monthly mortgage payment is dependent on two incomes (or rent money or help from parents). I'm not opposed to earning more income, I'm opposed to tying up more than one regular income in order to make a mortgage payment. Life happens. Be prepared.
*Mortgage insurance. I know I'm out of step, but I do believe in coming in with that traditional down payment. Mortgage insurance can be a tremendous expense and if you have to refinance yourself out of it, you can be stuck in quite a rut in a falling market.
*ARMS, LEGS, BODY PARTS: I was surprised to find out that there are people still taking out ARMS (adjustable rate mortgages), especially right now when, with good credit, you can get a loan 30-year fixed rate loan at an unbelievable 5% or below. Anyone who has been a homeowner for a while now will tell you that you don't take an ARM when you can lock in a low rate for the long term. Those who are new to home ownership might be surprised to find out that at one time 8% was considered good. My parents talk about when a mortgage could run in teens.
*Refinancing over and over again: Refinancing can be a wonderful thing. In fact, we refinanced recently. But refinancing costs (a nice chunk of change I might add) and interest rate is only one determining factor in the calculation of whether or not refinancing is worth it. A friend of mine in the business tells me that there are those who return for a refinance like clockwork every 3-5 years. When you are using refinancing as a way of increasing cash flow, you can be almost certain that refinancing is one expensive proposition.
*Always hold a mortgage (i.e. continue to refinance) because you will save on taxes. You only save on taxes to the extend your itemized deductions exceed your standard deduction. Paying more interest so Uncle Sam can have a lesser piece is just silly. As one of my accounting profs used to say, the idea isn't to lower taxes, it is to increase profitability [and lowering taxes may or may not be a component of such].

And here is some BAD financial advice you might be given that you is worth rejecting:
*"Don't worry too much about buying a home that seems to be too expensive for your budget. Your income will grow and it will get easier." And if your income doesn't grow? But even if the 7 bad years never arrived and we lived perpetually in the land of the 7 fat cows, tuition will easily eat those income increases! So you still need to be able to afford the home.
*"Your home is your biggest asset." It is also your biggest liability!
*"Buy now. You can always refinance." On top of the fact that interest rates are are about as low as they can get, refinancing has become a lot more difficult.

Things I like: Fixed term loans (30 year fixed is still my favorite although we always throw extra at it), 20% down payments, and a reasonable size monthly mortgage payment. Yeah, I know. I'm no fun. But this is how you can survive a setback in tact.

Cell Phones In The Classroom (Revisited)

Once again I return to a topic from the past after tesyaa made mention of a teacher's cell phone ringing in her child's class (thankfully, the teacher didn't pick it up and begin to chat which, sadly, is not unheard of). She has given up and isn't going to make a fuss as prior experiences have left her with the impression it isn't worth the effort.

I quickly recalled a previous post of mine about a teacher who downloads different ringtones to entertain her class when her cell phone goes off (!). I don't have any investment in either tesyaa's school or the school mentioned in my previous post. But I do believe that our children deserve a classroom that is free from such artificial distractions. There are enough distractions as it is. Adding cell phones to that list just need not be.

I know we have to pick our battles carefully. I'm not in anyone's shoes, but I think that this is a battle I'd probably choose, especially because another friend of mine who taught in a girls high school was telling me about her struggles with students texting in class. I'm still unconvinced that a high schooler needs a cell phone anyways (cell phones providers still do sell cell phones that can call only a handful of numbers, do they not?). If they are necessary, there should be very little tolerance for them in the classroom both on the end of teachers and students.

Parents: What is the cell phone policy for teachers in your school? What about students? More importantly, is this policy enforced? And, lastly, would you be calling the office about this issue, or would you leave it alone?

Also, Shana Tovah if I don't have a chance to wish before Yom Tov.

Mussar from MTV?

I never ever would have imagined I'd be referencing inspiration gained from MTV in an Orthonomics post. But here I am days before Rosh Hashana and this is what I'm posting. I heard about this story on talk radio this morning as I set out on my morning errands and thought I have to check it out for myself.

At the Video Music Awards, the host, Kayne West, grabs the microphone from a young country star, Taylor Swift, who at a very young age surprised everyone by winning best female video over a group of big names. She looks shocked when she receives the award, and as she begins to give her speech, West rudely interrupts her thank you speech to announce his own view that Beyonce's video is the best of all time and really steals her special and unexpected moment away. The entire thing was rather shocking. And Beyonce looks flabbergasted, although she keeps a smile on I can see her cringe beneath it all. I can only imagine the entire episode was both downright humiliating for both Taylor and Beyonce.

Later on, Beyonce is called to receive her award for best video of the year and in a show of complete class and dignity, she calls up Taylor Swift to take the spotlight.

I only hope that if I ever am privy to a modern day Kamtza-Bar Kamtza moment of public humiliation that I would have the character to try and right that wrong.

So I don't (possibly) further offend the sensibilities of any readers, I won't link to any videos, but they are all over the net and I will say that seeing Beyonce give the mic over to Taylor is a moving and a worthwhile watch.

Kiplinger's Personal Finance on Vendor Tax Shenanigans

I caught this small Q&A from Kiplinger's which addressed a recent question discussed on this blog regarding vendors who advertise their intent to defraud. I think it is worth reprinting.

Q: Recently, I asked my new dentist the cost of a procedure. I was quoted a certain price, and then I was offered a 7 percent discount for paying cash, to which I agreed. When the work was done, I paid in cash and waited for my receipt. The secretary responded, "You don't get a receipt--that's how the dentist can give you a discount." She as much said that he was planning not to report this as income. Am I at risk for participating in his tax evasion? What should I have done?

A: Many vendors offer cash discounts of a few percent for legitimate reasons,such as saving the fee that credit card companies charge them or not having to bill you and wait a few weeks for your check. But this is different -- a probable intent to defraud the government of taxes. You're not at legal risk, because the responsibility to report income honestly is entirely the dentists's. You should have insisted upon a receipt, and if you were still refused, you could have threatened to report the dentist to his professional licensing board. In any event, consider finding a new dentist.

It is likely that the person answering the question does not need to use up their FSA. If so, the person would have paid by check and got her receipt to submit for pre-tax savings, which likely in the neighborhood of 20% on up.

I concur with the advice to get a new dentist. . . . .

Props to this Mother

More GOOD FINANCIAL advice from a Yated letter writer. She has put "don't count your eggs before they hatch" into practice by making her children wait for their gift before allowing them to spend it. Hopefully all will keep this lesson in mind and not fall into common practices such as spending more money than you have on a wedding and counting on the (cash) gifts to make up the different or signing contracts to pay tuition when in all reality that money will likely never materialize.

Shabbat Shalom! I'm hoping that the upcoming new year is going to bring a financial turnaround for the Jewish community as we start making old-fashioned finance fashionable again.

WE DON’T SPEND WHAT WE DON’T HAVE

Dear Editor,
I couldn’t agree more with Rabbi Avrohom Birnbaum’s thoughts in his article about “The Frum ‘Cash-for-Clunkers’ Mentality.” The mentality of spending before actually having the means to do so has most certainly seeped in and affected many in the frum community. One possible cure for this “Obama mentality” is to teach our children when they are young not to spend money they don’t have.

Case in point: My children receive ice cream money from a great-uncle every summer. The uncle told them on the phone that he would be sending them some money for ice cream. On a hot day, my children wanted me to lay out the money so they could purchase the ice cream immediately, counting on the funds coming in the mail. There was my chance to impart Rabbi Birnbaum’s important lesson: We don’t spend money that we don’t have! The children had to wait, and when the money arrived, they were happily permitted to buy ice cream. Hopefully, the lesson will be remembered long after the ice cream.

Thank you, Rabbi Birnbaum.
Name Withheld
Los Angeles, CA

Props to this School Board

This is quite the story. In a rather bold the Board of Directors of the Zvi Dov Roth Academy of Yeshiva Rambam in Flatbush decided to rent out the 1st floor of their building to the new Hebrew Language Charter School of Brooklyn. Why? No surprise, the school is in desperate financial straights and they need funds. In my book, "new money" (as opposed to grabbing a larger share of communal money through, often pricey, and time consuming fundraising) is a great way to go.

The school's move leaves the current tenant, Congregation Machzikei Torah, without a home. The vacate deadline has come and gone and should they still be there after the yomim tovim, the school plans to take the Rabbi and Congregation to court. The Rabbi is outraged saying "For over 60 years people have been putting together their pennies and dollars in order to have a place for children to study and learn Torah . But now Rambam is renting [its building] to this new charter school, which by law is not permitted to teach anything of faith. They took out the mezuzahs; they're going to have to take out my sifrei Torah." He also threatens to call the police if the school forces them out, but there is likely little legal ground to stand on. I think the best move would be to go quietly.

The Board President, who donates a huge $300,000 annually, replies, "If I have to choose to pull out a shul or [be forced] to let 110 children go to public school [as a result of Rambam folding], I will choose to pull out the shul."

I think it is no small miracle that the Hebrew Language Charter School ended up in this building after their previously planned location fell through. Not only with the children attending the Charter School be in the heart of a Jewish neighborhood, a Jewish school with have a real revenue stream to help support their costs. This seems like a win-win for all but the Rabbi and his congregation.

I have to hand it to this Board. Anyone who has ever engaged in communal work realizes that change is really difficult and painful because your hands and feet are tied by certain powers that be, by donors, by long standing contracts, and by whatever project is "untouchable." It sure isn't easy asking a shul to vacate, but when the president says it is the choice between educating these students and closing the school, I believe him. I'm just surprised that the powers that be looked the other way and/or approved renting out to a charter school.

Now let's hope that the Congregation decides to leave quietly.

Also, see comments on this story at YWN. Commentors mostly take the opposing view.

A Danger to Society

I ran into the following quote this afternoon, and a few hours later I ran into an interview on VIN between Rabbi Yair Hoffman and the organizer or the Mea Shearim protests/riots which brought the brilliant quote to life.

"A human being who has not been taught to think clearly is a a danger in a free society." *
-------------------------------------------------------------
*Ben Stein's High School Diary as quoted by Thomas Sowell.

Infrastructure is Simply too Large

A reader just went me a link to a Jewish Star Article regarding Hatzala of Rockaways-Nassau and is wondering why in the world they are building. The article reports that there is a quarter of a million dollar budget shortfall, the bank account is frequently in overdraft, they admit bills get paid in "dribs and drabs" and the proposed solution is none other than to fundraise(!). There is a series of parlor meetings planned naturally. The situation doesn't look optimistic with only 20% of the database having written any check in the past year.

Somehow budget shortfalls and projected budget shortfalls never seem to get in the way of building a building or taking on other large expenses. In my last post I laid out some rules of the road for board members who aren't functioning on "bitachon" alone including the rule "Cash is king and revenue is key." Unfortunately, for years the only rule of the road seems to have been "built it and they shall come."

Now we are suffering from this "build it" mentality because the infrastructure of the Orthodox community is simply too large and the foundation can't support it (period). My own community involvement seems to center around trying to fight the prevailing mentality of "build it and they will come" and "we can't afford not to." My response to "we can't afford not to" has consistently been, "nor can we afford to."

I haven't made many friends asking questions such as, "what happens if they don't come?" "Who are all of these people waiting in the wings?" "Has anyone worked up a realistic budget of the cost of the new *larger* facility and what type of increase in membership/fees can we expect?" "If we can't meet our operating costs right now, how do we expect to cover larger expenses in the future." Of course that last question just sends you back to square one. . . . . remember, they will come. I once asked someone what happens what happens when the money simply runs out and the response was, someone will step up as the community simply won't allow the institution to collapse. Well, I guess it is nice to have that sort of bitachon. But from my own perspective there is a balance sheet full of revenues and pledges that are unlikely to materialize.

The Hatzolah branch lists some very, very good reasons to build, but the bottom line doesn't support appear to support the feasibility. "In addition to the overall drop in contributions, the deficit is also attributable to the recent purchase by Hatzalah of a site in Woodmere where a new ambulance garage and training center is planned. $200,000 was raised for the purchase; another $400,000 was taken from the operating budget and only some was replaced." So let me break this down, the operating budget has a cash flow problem, but an expansion was taken on despite this and a new property was purchased. There is no guarantee that the zoning will be met, but if so, a fundraising campaign will ensue so that Hatzolah can build. And the new targets for fundraising: young people. The director states, "“If neither the community at large, nor an individual [steps up] to the plate then we will not be able to build this building.” Of course, if the fundraising falls through, the organization will still own the land and will have to maintain it unless there is a buyer waiting in the wings.

Let's make something very clear about fundraising: we are all trying to grab from the same pot. And that pot of money isn't growing! With larger families, bigger and bigger tuitions, greater debt loads from mortgages to student loans for credit card debts, lack of savings, late entrance into the workforce, and a recessions, there isn't much to grab at.

Perhaps hatzolah will be successful on collecting some of the money in the pot for themselves and their problem will be alleviated for the time being. But, another organization will soon need their own "financial rescue." I've reached the conclusion that our own infrastructure is simply too big, from the physical structures to the number of people dependent on it for their own income. But we have no diocese to order a restructuring, which is desperately needed. So, I guess we will keep grabbing from the same pot.

Let's Take Some Important Notes:
How NOT to run a Business or 501(c)3

Hat Tip: Thinking. Thank you!

The principal of Bais Yaakov of Boro Park allowed himself to be interviewed regarding the potential closure of this very large school. I do believe the school is slated to open, but there is little doubt that whatever emergency funds were collected will only provide a temporary bandaid. I don't think the interview was a good move from a PR standpoint, and I imagine that many of the board members who are in charge of fundraising are tearing their hair out.

I am posting the link because I think there is a lot to take away from the interview. Those of us who serve on shul boards, school boards, mikvah boards, and any other high cost operation's board should read carefully, take note, and be ready to explain to their fellow board members why business as usually simply does NOT make sense. And, of course, when you actually do go to vote, you need to be willing to oppose the majority even if it means that bad looks come your way and you gain a reputation as a naysayer, pessimist, and/or bad guy.

Here are the key lessons. The italicized print in orange are quotes from the article.

1. An organization's job is not to employ people, but to ensure that the organization is a "going concern" so it can continue to serve the needs of the kehillah down the line. "But until this year - even though enrollment went down by some 400 students - we did not reduce any classes, as we thought that smaller classes could mean more individual attention for the children."

2. You can't take care of the needs of the kehillah or the needs of an individuals until you have ensured that your needs are taken care of. "Any menahel who had difficulty with a child would say, 'Please go to Bais Yaakov of Boro Park. Rabbi [E] will find a program for you where you can excel.' This all contributed to the financial crisis we now are in."

3. Staffing costs are the MOST important costs to control. Over staffing spells death to a budget. "Total staff in Bais Yaakov is slightly over 400 [for 2100 students]. The majority are teachers, but you also have professionals, social workers, para-professionals, librarians, and assistant teachers." Note that the staff to student ratio at BYOBP is 1:5.25. This is extremely low. Even when there were 2500 students the ratio was low at 1:6.25. Granted, much of the staff is likely part time, and there is no central administration so the school maintains its own janitorial staff and business office, but I can't get over the low, low ratio, nor can I relate to that ratio given that I never attended a class with less than 20 students growing up.

4. Cash is king and revenue is key. Don't build on promises, nor is it wise to take on additional staff without revenue to cover such staff because letting go of staff is simply a nightmare. "Also, we built a new building, for which we got a lot of pledges from people, but we didn’t get the expected donations from them ." And "We put up a state-of-the-art building in one year, but were then saddled with huge debts."

5. Plan as if the seven bad years are coming (because they always do come). "For the first time we are making some cuts. Some of the programs we have been giving, we can’t give anymore. We’ll have to do some cutting on the computer program. The resource room will be primarily cut out, except for those students subsidized by the government. We are starting to consolidate some classes. Until now we have tried to have smaller classes, trying to provide more individualized attention. We’re going to have to change that, until we get out of this crisis. "

Till The Money Runs Out Do We Part

Hat Tip: Divrei Chaim

Rav Aviner, once again, brings some sanity into the world of Orthonomics(TM) as he explains to a son-in-law that his in-laws money is a generous gift, not an obligation and that he needs to straighten out his view of marriage because he is obviously missed the boat in this important area. (Also see Let Them Eat Cake, Rav Aviner re: collecting for a wedding for more (not so )commonsense advice).

Q: Parents supported their daughter and son-in-law for many years while the son-in-law learned in Kollel, but now they have decided to stop. The son-in-law will not allow the daughter to talk to her parents unless they give them all of the money they promised. What should the parents do?

A: This is certainly a desecration of Hashem's Name. First of all, parents have no obligation to give money to their children. The basic obligation is only to support child until they are six years old. According to a decree of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel after the establishment of the State, one must support children until the age of fifteen years old. After that, they can go out to work. Parents obviously help their children even after that, but it is a kindness and not an obligation. For this, the children should have gratitude and thank them each day. I do not understand what happened in this case. One must first be a human being. Ethics precede Torah. Before learning Torah, you have to be a good person. Perhaps the parents should speak with the Rabbi of our "scholar" and he will explain to him the proper way to act.

This is certainly an extreme case, but I hope I can lend some insights as to "what happened." And, I'm quite sure the Rav knows what happened too! While marriage should be a vehicle to create a bayit ne'eman b'yisrael, it can also be a good "business move."

In Hollywood, dating and/or marriage often appears to be a PR move. It keeps you in the headlines and being in the headlines is exactly where you want to be. We have all heard of women that marry to gain access to a family fortune. And we have all heard of men that are all too happy to dump their trophy wife like yesterday's garbage when she no longer fulfills her purpose.

While it is not commonplace, there are men who gain the motivation to date and marry in order to continue learning. As such, the #1 factor they are seeking is "support." Thankfully, feelings of obligation and love normally take over somewhere between dating and marriage and they roll with the punches.

I have little doubt that this husband continues to view his marriage as a means to an end and with a supersized sense of entitlement and ego to boot, he no longer sees his wife as useful and now is stepping in to blackmail his the out-laws (pun intended). The dehumanization of his wife is apparent now, but the marriage relationship was dehumanized long before the money tree stopped producing. Of course, there are many people from all walks of life that think marriage should be for their pleasure and convience. But when that attitude finds its way within our own walls, it seems shocking.

I am a firm believer that a good shidduch should have some practicality to it. So you won't catch me saying that finances are not important to a marriage, because having the means to raise a family really helps. But when money becomes central to the brokering of shidduchim, it isn't surprising to see questions having to do with the fallout.

Excellent Article: The Frum "Cash for Clunkers" Mentality

Great article! Wish I wrote it. :) And from the Yated no less. I will file this under GOOD Financial Advice.


The Frum “Cash for Clunkers’ Mentality
by Avrohom Birnbaum

I have an admission to make. It’s going to be difficult to get it out of my mouth, or out of my keyboard and on to the screen, but I am going to gather the strength, steel myself, overcome the difficulty and make the admission. Okay, here goes: I drive a 1998 Ford Windstar! There. I did it! I got it out. It’s now public knowledge. I feel better already.

Yes, I am one of those guys who usually drives around town in what is classified as a bonafide old clunker!It even fits the criteria of “clunker” as set forth by our beloved commander-in-chief, President Barack Obama. Why, then, am I so hesitant about publicizing my admission? Is it because my car is missing most of its hubcaps? Is it perhaps because it has several unsightly dents and even has paint peeling in a couple of spots?

Maybe it’s because I am one of the only people driving that model car without Pennsylvania license plates and am a legal upstanding citizen of this great republic. Either way, over the past few weeks, a number of goodhearted souls have told me that they feel happy for me that I will now be able to trade in my clunker and receive some $4,500 from Mr. Obama towards a spanking brand new car. After all, my 1998 Windstar fits all of the government mandated criteria - it is a gas guzzling old car that I have owned for approximately 9 years, thus making me a textbook case of one who is eligible for the program. “Wouldn’t it be nice to trade in the old bus for a new Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, or perhaps even a Honda Odyssey?” a good friend proposed. The philosophical, one-word answer that I gave him was, “No.” I may get a $4,500 discount on the new car, but after all is said and done, the new car, with taxes, will cost me more than $20,000. That’s a lot of money that I am not willing to pay, or better said, put on credit, when I have multiple tuitions to pay and myriad other expenses that are part and parcel of sustaining a family. My trusty old clunker will just have to do for as long as the One Above grants it life. And, when its day comes, I suspect that it will be exchanged for another clunker that will once again fit Obama’s criteria.

My friend countered with what seemed to be an irrefutable argument. “You can buy the new car and then sell it after two years. You will get back virtually the entire balance of your loan and you will have had the use of a beautiful, brand new car for two years, for nothing. Zippo! Zilcho! Free!”

The refutation of his logic targets the crux of what is so troubling about the Cash for Clunkers program, and the many similar justifications that so many people make for buying things that are really out of their range. Firstly, after two years of enjoying the car, it is very unlikely that one will sell it. If one does sell it, one will be hard-pressed to step back into an old clunker after experiencing the taam of driving a brand new, mechanic-free, headache-free car. Taking advantage of the program will effectively place one in a status bracket and accustom him to a comfort level that he cannot afford.

That is the truly troublesome issue with the Cash for Clunkers program. It encourages the population to spend beyond their means and go into unsustainable credit debt. Was that not one of catalysts for the economic crisis in the first place?Indeed, one need not avail himself of the Cash for Clunkers program to see how - way before Obama cooked up the program - this mentality had already seeped into many areas of our own lives.

Recently, I was conversing with a frum electrician employed by many in the frum communities in both New Jersey and New York. He told me that in the 13 years since he began working, he has discerned a fundamental metamorphosis. “The standard of home in which I worked 13 years ago, which was limited to only the considerably wealthy, is today the home of the simple, poor or lower middle class income family.”

I asked him, “How could it be? How could a person with minimal income buy the kind of house that only the wealthy possessed a decade or a decade and a half ago?”

He replied, “Most of them have elaborate cheshbonos that ‘made it impossible for them not to buy the home’! It sort of goes like this,” he explained. “They get their hands on or borrow a certain sum that serves as a down payment. Then they design the house to have a rental; the industrious ones even find a design that allows for two rentals. Then they plan on living in the basement for at least five years while renting out the upstairs. If they do all of that, their monthly portion of the bill is just several hundred dollars more than they would be paying if they had to rent. Therefore, it would be a crime not to buy and own your own large home, no?!”

This is the classic example of how the Cash for Clunkers syndrome infiltrated our thinking long before the president proposed it. Everyone is a brilliant oiber chochom, concocting elaborate schemes to justify the excess. If everything works according to the scheme, one would be a fool not to buy the large house. Never mind the fact that so many of these people are young couples, barely after marriage, who are undertaking massive mortgages and massive debt that could destroy them if all the cheshbonos don’t work out as planned. Let’s say the rental market falls drastically. Let’s say the property taxes skyrocket. There are so many scenarios that can doom a person if he does not have a realistic cushion. Even if he is not doomed and somehow comes up with the payments, he will be in a constant state of angst about how he will come up with the astronomic monthly sum to cover the payment and thus forfeit some of his most precious assets: menuchas hanefesh, time for learning, shalom bayis, time with the children, and the list goes on... All because he thought he was smarter than everyone and the “opportunity” was too good not to take advantage of.

Perhaps we, as a community, should stop to ask ourselves whether we have been guilty of the same fundamental mistake and premise that is wrong with the Obama Cash for Clunkers program. Are we being oiber chachomim when it comes to our lifestyles? Are many of us behaving like “Obama on steroids”? Not only with the houses that we must have, and the cars that we must buy…or lease, but also with the clothes we buy, the recreation we “require,” and the general lifestyles that we live? Sometimes, driving the 1998 Windstar can ultimately afford one a greater comfort level than the brand new car. Sometimes, living for the first decade of marriage in a rented apartment or a small starter house while not giving a couple room to spread out surely affords them the room to breathe. Are the new car and the new house really worth it? What is the price - both spiritual and material - that they are truly costing? Perhaps it is time to analyze these questions in a moment of brutal, unadulterated emes. Think about it.

Hey You!

I was across from two dating age girls who were conversing about all of the various rules their dating friends must abide by. I wasn't really paying attention because I'm aware of the growing list of rules. But then one rule caught my ear. Apparently the girl is not supposed to address the boy she is on a date with by his first name. So what is she supposed to address him as? Reb Yid? Mister? Hey You? Perhaps one can address their date by a number and dehumanize the process completely?

Wouldn't it be nice to put a little fun back into dating? I'm not sure these girls have even been out on a date by the way they were conversing, and they already seemed burdened by the whole process. What a shame.

Public Service Annoucement: Affordable Los Angeles Yeshiva Alternative

A friend forwarded this to me, after it was forwarded to her. I'm posting this both for my Los Angeles readers (I do have some Los Angeles readers I hope) and for the rest of my readers who are searching for alternatives. This one seems very intruiging.


There is a fantastic new Yeshiva high school program – Yeshivas Ohev Shalom – that is opening up for this fall (starting Sept. 8). It is being run by my brother Rabbi Chaim Tropper (former menahel and rebbe at Yeshivas Ner Aryeh in the Valley), and Rabbi Rachmiel Steinberg who taught at Yavneh for many years and who is well known throughout LA as a rebbe and a top secular teacher (currently a candidate to receive his doctorate in education).

The Yeshiva will have a fully structured limudei kodesh morning program, starting with Shacharis at 8 AM. The afternoon secular program is going to be done as a "supervised home schooling program". Students will all be registered through a local charter school and will be taking an individually designed secular program custom made for each student. Rabbi Steinberg and other accredited teachers will be supervising the secular program, and will be available for one-on-one help for any student that needs it.

The goal of the Yeshiva is to make a real Yeshiva education affordable for every family. Full tuition this year is only $5,000> (75% lower than other L.A. high schools), and scholarships are available. This is a perfect solution for home schooling families looking for a limudei kodesh program for their boys. For families that want to continue secular studies at home, they can attend the limudei kodesh in the morning and then go home for secular studies. It is also a wonderful option for the many families that have been considering the possibility of home schooling but were not practically able to do it since both parents work.

The Yeshiva already has 11 boys registered and will be opening with boys in every grade, 9-12. It is centrally located at Congregation Ohev Shalom, 525 S. Fairfax. Free carpool from the Valley is also available.

Please spread the word. More info is available at our website Yeshivas Ohev Shaloms. Rabbi Chaim Tropper can be reached directly at (818) 461-4312 and is happy to meet with any interested families.

A poster with more info as well as the calendar for the 2009-2010 school year will be posted shortly.

Mendel Tropper

What a Spoiled Brat!!

Hat Tip: Jeremy

I thought I'd seen it all vis a vis entitlement, but THIS tops it all. I'm glad I'm not a social worker with a column in the Five Towns Jewish Times because it would be near impossible for me to maintain any civility towards a wife whose maturation process apparently ended around the terrible twos.

This wife of 10 years and 4 children is beyond petty and vindictive. She doesn't want to go to her in-laws for Shabbat or yom tov because they don't give, give, give to her, her, her. She writes, "I don’t think they deserve to enjoy our company. They haven’t earned it." She is mad as could be because her mother-in-law spends money on nice things for herself instead of skimping and giving that money to her and the grandchildren. This is contrary to her own parents habits. While they are not well-off and always look for a bargain, when it comes to their own children and grandchildren "only the best will do." The wife complains that her husband "doesn’t really see what’s wrong with this situation."

She complains that they can't make it without help because her 5 Towns home, purchased 2 years ago at the height of the market, taxes, and tuitions are out of control. And she wants what "everyone" else has: someone else to pick up the tab.

If she wrote me I would have told her that I think it is a miracle that her husband hasn't divorced her!

The columnist writes:

In many circles today, the focus for many young adults is strictly on getting married, and they let the parents figure out who will take care of what bills. I think that we need to step back and ask ourselves whether this is fair to the parents. Some of them have struggled all their lives to manage their affairs, only to finally arrive at a stage of life where their children are grown and moving out of the house. Is it so terrible if they begin to finally stop working so hard and begin to think about themselves for a change?

Are these parents not entitled to take care of themselves and enjoy a little? Is it selfish for such a mother to finally splurge on herself in a way that was previously not possible? Or should this mother continue to deny herself for the sake of her grown and married children and grandchildren? I’m sure there are differing opinions in answer to these questions.

Differing opinions? Perhaps amongst adolescents, 2-year olds, and grandparents who have issues with their grown children being adults and like to experience feeling of martyrdom.

And quite frankly, I think it is irresponsible for parents to exhaust their own resources propping up a generation that not only can't support itself, but refuses to do so. Kol hakavod to this "stingy" mother-in-law who is treating herself, rather that throwing her money down a black hole.

The columnist also writes: "However, if a young couple is fortunate enough to have one or two sets of in-laws who are capable and willing to help out, they are indeed very blessed."

Personally, I beg to differ. While I don't oppose parents assisting adult children (see Better and Worse Ways to Help Adult Children), I don't see any "blessing" this daughter and wife has received from her parents. While they have made sure that she has "only the best," her husband gets to put up with the temper tantrums, pettiness, and selfishness.

I will say this. . . . . . . after we are done raising children and getting them on their own two feet so they can do the same for their own children, I plan to spend some on us and I won't feel a bit guilty!

Yet Another Use for Limited Tzedakah Funds

Link to story on VIN.
What will "they" think of next? Poverty continues to worsen, schools both in Israel and America are collapsing. But, someone is always thinking of a new way to (drum roll please) SPEND MONEY.

A seminary in Israel plans to give students who agree not to wear makeup at their own wedding 1000 NIS (approx $265) in the form of a scholarship. The article is poorly written, so it is hard to tell if the girls sign up when engaged or when in school. If the latter, the opportunity to take money and not follow through is ripe.

Apparently the seminary isn't too pleased that after all of the education, the "girls" aren't making the choices that the school would like: (quote) "before their wedding the girls are exempted from the school's strict rules, leading many brides to put on heavy makeup."

The school can't judge the response yet because not enough "girls" have married yet. Thankfully, I don't see many girls, even from the most stringent homes, signing on the dotted line.

Also, when does the prohibition of adding to the Torah get violated? Clearly the minhag has always been for Jewish women to adorn themselves on their wedding day.

Lots more to say, so you say it!