The Yated just published a piece called "Preserving the Kollel Revolution." I'd say that publishing the article took a bit of gumption on the part of the newspaper given that it brings up an uncomfortable subject matter. The article covers some history of kollel in America--from revolution to mass movement. The article then looks at the challenges facing kollel, namely "the convergence of massive financial obligations" (i.e. parents have a compounding issue of paying for numerous weddings in a short period of time, long term financial support of the couple, and still support the other mouths they need to feed) and the health issues that are exasperated during this period of time. In the words of the author: "This [convergence of massive financial obligations] can result in terrible stress affecting the parents’ physical and emotional well being. This period of marrying off one’s children generally coincides with the time of life when middle-age health issues set in. The addition of relentless financial burdens may cause parents to literally fall ill, or greatly aggravate pre-existing medical problems." The conclusion of the article is that the culture of consipcuous consumption must be stopped by parents and bnei Torah because it is not the Torah way and that the price of ill health is "simply too steep a price for any child to pay." This conclusion falls under the heading "not a monetary issue; a health issue."
The premises of the article is that "Kollel, as an institution, is vital for everyone - not only for
the elites, the best bochurim, but for every yeshiva student who marries. Kollel provides the basis for a Torah life and it should be encouraged and supported by every means." The solutions to "preserve" kollel was to tone down the lifestyle and fight conspicuous consumption. Two examples the author notes are: 1) the ben Torah should drive a safe car that serves to get him from point A to point B rather than a late model or leased vehicle that raises the expectations of others who pass through the yeshiva/kollel parking lot and 2) reconsider the housing provided for the young couple as fewer families are choosing a one bedroom rented apartment and opting for a house or townhouse in the hundreds of thousands.
Perhaps you need to be driving around in a car that has outlived its prime by a number of years and that announces its comings and goings while budgeting a rather generous income in order to realize just how ludicrous these suggestions sound in terms of "Preserving the Kollel Revolution." Furthermore, the author insults the intelligence of the reader when he asserts the following: "it seems that certain alien concepts have crept into this most hallowed ideal of supporting our young couples. Undoubtedly, in today’s bountiful generation, we cannot expect our youth to conduct lives of Torah mitoch hadechak as done in previous generations. In this day and age, it is unrealistic to expect young couples to abstain from eating fleishigs throughout the week and to subsist on a can of sardines or a small piece of chicken on Shabbos. Nor can we expect very large families to be crammed into one-room hovels without heat, like many who learned Torah mitoch hadechak in previous generations (even here in America)."
Unrealistic!?!?! Puhleeze as the teenagers say. This is a generation suffers from an inflated sense of entitlement and low expectations!
Friday, April 30, 2010
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Packing a Lunch: Some Product Recommendations
I'm not quite sure how the comments in the previous post went from discussing different philosophies towards finances in the frum community into a discussion about take-out vs. brown bagging lunches. But it makes for a perfect time to point out this really nifty product one of my readers pointed me to: the USB Powered Lunchbox Warmer.
For a bit less than $11, I'd rate this product a potential bargain. If I wasn't working from my home, I'd definitely purchase one. There are other brands out there and I like the idea of being able to take some leftover vegetable soup to work and not having to worry about using the work microwave and wasting disposable bags to double wrap. This type of product is right up my alley. Any reviews?
Another product I absolutely LOVE are the Ziploc plastic divided rectangle containers. I use these for school lunches replacing plastic baggies, plastic wrap, and foil. No need to worry about inventories and shopping when you have these on hand. The square part of the container is sized for a sandwich, wrap, pasta, or a salad. The two side containers are great for cut up fruit or veggies, a hard boiled egg, or a treat. I like to have 2 containers on hand for each lunch taking member of the family. These go through the dishwasher and are relatively inexpensive. Make sure to cut the Ziploc coupons and if you have the $0.55 coupon shop in a store that doubles coupons. I can probably get 2 school years of use from each container, if not more. They stack both in the pantry compactly and on top of each in the refrigerator and on the counter nicely. I've had it with other containers and plan to replace a lot of my Rubbermaid I use for leftovers with the wonderful and large plastic Ziploc rectangle containers over time. That is another fantastic product that has just the right shape.
For a bit less than $11, I'd rate this product a potential bargain. If I wasn't working from my home, I'd definitely purchase one. There are other brands out there and I like the idea of being able to take some leftover vegetable soup to work and not having to worry about using the work microwave and wasting disposable bags to double wrap. This type of product is right up my alley. Any reviews?
Another product I absolutely LOVE are the Ziploc plastic divided rectangle containers. I use these for school lunches replacing plastic baggies, plastic wrap, and foil. No need to worry about inventories and shopping when you have these on hand. The square part of the container is sized for a sandwich, wrap, pasta, or a salad. The two side containers are great for cut up fruit or veggies, a hard boiled egg, or a treat. I like to have 2 containers on hand for each lunch taking member of the family. These go through the dishwasher and are relatively inexpensive. Make sure to cut the Ziploc coupons and if you have the $0.55 coupon shop in a store that doubles coupons. I can probably get 2 school years of use from each container, if not more. They stack both in the pantry compactly and on top of each in the refrigerator and on the counter nicely. I've had it with other containers and plan to replace a lot of my Rubbermaid I use for leftovers with the wonderful and large plastic Ziploc rectangle containers over time. That is another fantastic product that has just the right shape.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Moshiach will pay the Credit Card
I feel compelled to respond to a comment I received in the last post where I once again penned some thoughts to Matzav regarding what I believe is irresponsible journalism on the part of Matzav. Once again Matzav published a letter decrying the cost of being frum. But this time the article not only featured the subject of just how terribly expensive it is to be frum, but it centered around the subject of **contemplating suicide** in response to the overwhelming costs. Now, we all know that observance comes with a price tag, but there is a way of addressing that cost and a way to not address that cost. Frankly, publishing the words suicide in response to that cost is crossing a line in my book. I believe we are all familar with the words of Rav Feinstein who admonished a generation for saying "it is hard to be a Jew." I think the constant barrage of letters/editorials about being frum = broke do the same terrible disservice. My hope is that through this medium, I am able to offer up a different message that the challenges are surmountable so long as we recognize the underlying issues, approach the challenge with some courage and sechel, and trust that Hashem will not leave us socially ostracized and our children friendless and shidduchless because we didn't conform to the standards set by "the system."
This Pesach, Matzav treated us to an editorial whinning about how expensive Pesach is (Pesach poundcake is a killer). Two Pesachs prior, the Yated treated us to a letter complaining that Pesach has left families in the red (how do you afford those afikoman gifts and chol hamoed trips?). And each Pesach since I started penning my thoughts on these issues, I (with the help of some fantastic commenters) have put forward a number of money saving tips for consideration because I believe that man cannot serve to masters: Hashem and Mastercard.
This week I received this comment which I'd like to just address head on:
I've read the comments to the "letter writer" on Matzav and the comments here and there is a world of difference in the basic outlook. The comments on Matzav are religious in outlook - tefillah, Moshiach - and also very compassionate. Many commenters say they are in exactly the same situation and they totally understand. The comments on Orthonomics are highly practical and rather disdainful of people who put frum values ahead of balancing the budget. In fact, none of you really seem to understand the religious way of thinking. I have often read on this blog criticism of lack of birth control in the religious community - why do they have so many children? When I have commented that birth control will never be accepted in the frum world, I have read comments like "why not?" The point I'm making is that people who are religiously motivated and people who are motivated by practical concerns will never be able to understand each other. Oh, the reason frum people will not accept birth control is not because of community pressure - it's because first, frum people believe it is a commandment from the Torah to have children, second, they LOVE children, and third, they are willing to live at a very minimal level to sustain a Torah life. Visit Lakewood and see how most families there live. You will see that they truly believe in a Torah life, and while these are not your interpretations of what the Torah requires, they are admirably consistent. They are not motivated solely or even primarily by community pressure. They are motivated by BELIEF.
Note the title of my post, "Moshiach will pay the creditors." Way back when I was a student trying to wrap my head around the ins and outs of going concerns and bankruptcy chapters, budgeting and leveraging, I discovered these very issues were present right in my own community. I think the first time that it hit me was when I was sitting with a lovely Rebbitzen, small business owner, and friend who had just had a wedding like I'd never seen before, which was shortly followed by a much more intimate bar mitzvah. The wedding was a first wedding for this very large family and one of the largest I've attended to date. There was not a detail missing in the festivities from a formal vort, to the jewelry, to the edible flowers on the salad. I can only make an educated guess about the cost of the wedding, but I'm nearly certain I could put a child through (public) law school or med school including a generous allowance for living costs for the cost of the wedding. Somehow as we were chatting, I found out that they had yet to pay for the wedding. This might have been the first time I realized that people really did borrow against their homes to pay for things they wanted. I would not take out a credit card for another five years, so I was still in the dark that I could actually write myself a check for cash to take the vacation I so deserved.
Once my eyes were opened they were opened wide, I learned a lot quickly. A little later I was privy to a conversation between someone else and her daughter in which some rather large credit card debts were mentioned (they were adding to them because they "needed" new dresses for all the kids for a simcha and I believe the discussion was if they had enough credit for the purchase). I had just been signed to my first real job and couldn't comprehend how anyone could *pay* for such debt, especially given the demographic and career choice, and just blurted out, "how will you pay that off?" The reply: "When Moshiach comes, he will pay [off the credit card]." It would have been funny, except there wasn't a hint of humor. She later explained something to the effect that unless a frum Jew was wealthy, they would juggle debt.
A lot of what I have learned and write about comes from published words, conversations, and observations. But, I've also had my fair share of runs-ins with people who can't pay their bills or simply stiff you. E.g., I took on some work for a family that who does all of the same things my commenter mentioned. Every conversation has has a "religious outlook." Tefillah, bitachon, emunah, mashiach; it is all in the conversation. The problem? The work is done, but you get a message not to cash the check because something else came up. And the next check bounces from here to there and back again and the "practical" person ends up on the phone with a local posek trying to figure out what courses of action would be permissible to now collect the funds.
I don't separate the practical from the religious or frum. To me they are completely intertwined, and I see this in the Torah I've learned and from the Rabbonim I've consulted on "practical" issues. The commenter writes "[I/we are] disdainful of people who put frum values ahead of balancing the budget." To me balancing the budget IS a "frum" value.
Thecannon canon of Torah is filled with instructions on how to engage in commerce and ownership. And there is a spirit there too. While borrowing is permitted, Mishlei comments on the relationship between the creditor and the debtor and tehillim makes mention of those who do not repay their debts. The sources address a mitzvah b'averiah in classic discussions on whether a person can fulfill the mitzvah of arba minim if they don't have ownership of the item. The wedding ring must be owned by the chatan to make a valid transaction. The Ben Ish Hai addresses such practical matters such as how a wife should budget and spend her husband's money in his writing for women. No less than Rav Salantar includes thrift in his middot.
Derech Eretz kadma l'Torah is a fundamental concept. I think that being able to pay your bills as agreed upon would fit right under the banner of derech eretz kadma l'Torah. Putting yourself in a position where you are engaging in a life of debt means that eventually something will give. Creditors will not be paid. Food and services that you consumed and made a beracha over will not be paid. Pledges that you made will go unfilled. Lawyers, dentists, and schools will go unpaid. Unfortunately there are businesses (grocery stores no less) with massive receivables on their books. Schools and shuls experience the same phenomena. Years ago I met a wonderful couple visiting from a certain neighborhood known for its piety. The family had a business within the community and when he found out I was an accountant, he wanted to share with me a trick he learned on how to 'clean out' as much as he could from the bank accounts of people who wrote him bad checks. Let's just say I didn't learn this trick in business school. I'm a very simple person. I still like to assume that when someone writes a check that it will cash.
Operating in a constant state of red invites ethical challenges. This is not to say that people who live with great wealth don't fall to the yetzer hara (think Enron), but supporting a lifestyle that is not commensurate with income is an invitation to the yetzer hara. I've seen it with my own two eyes.
To close I want to say one last thing: while many of my commentators feel strongly that families should not have "more children than they can afford," (there are VIN and Matzav commentators who say the same thing!), I have a liking for large families. I think that having a growing, expanding, and alive community is our lifeblood. I think it is well worth while to forgo plenty of extras to have more children. The issue that we have is defining the extras and we have made everything a requirement in the name of frumkeit so that we don't even know what "minimal" is. When camp become minimal and dental work to fix rotting teeth becomes extra, you have a problem. And that problem isn't particularly related to family size, but priorities.
This Pesach, Matzav treated us to an editorial whinning about how expensive Pesach is (Pesach poundcake is a killer). Two Pesachs prior, the Yated treated us to a letter complaining that Pesach has left families in the red (how do you afford those afikoman gifts and chol hamoed trips?). And each Pesach since I started penning my thoughts on these issues, I (with the help of some fantastic commenters) have put forward a number of money saving tips for consideration because I believe that man cannot serve to masters: Hashem and Mastercard.
This week I received this comment which I'd like to just address head on:
I've read the comments to the "letter writer" on Matzav and the comments here and there is a world of difference in the basic outlook. The comments on Matzav are religious in outlook - tefillah, Moshiach - and also very compassionate. Many commenters say they are in exactly the same situation and they totally understand. The comments on Orthonomics are highly practical and rather disdainful of people who put frum values ahead of balancing the budget. In fact, none of you really seem to understand the religious way of thinking. I have often read on this blog criticism of lack of birth control in the religious community - why do they have so many children? When I have commented that birth control will never be accepted in the frum world, I have read comments like "why not?" The point I'm making is that people who are religiously motivated and people who are motivated by practical concerns will never be able to understand each other. Oh, the reason frum people will not accept birth control is not because of community pressure - it's because first, frum people believe it is a commandment from the Torah to have children, second, they LOVE children, and third, they are willing to live at a very minimal level to sustain a Torah life. Visit Lakewood and see how most families there live. You will see that they truly believe in a Torah life, and while these are not your interpretations of what the Torah requires, they are admirably consistent. They are not motivated solely or even primarily by community pressure. They are motivated by BELIEF.
Note the title of my post, "Moshiach will pay the creditors." Way back when I was a student trying to wrap my head around the ins and outs of going concerns and bankruptcy chapters, budgeting and leveraging, I discovered these very issues were present right in my own community. I think the first time that it hit me was when I was sitting with a lovely Rebbitzen, small business owner, and friend who had just had a wedding like I'd never seen before, which was shortly followed by a much more intimate bar mitzvah. The wedding was a first wedding for this very large family and one of the largest I've attended to date. There was not a detail missing in the festivities from a formal vort, to the jewelry, to the edible flowers on the salad. I can only make an educated guess about the cost of the wedding, but I'm nearly certain I could put a child through (public) law school or med school including a generous allowance for living costs for the cost of the wedding. Somehow as we were chatting, I found out that they had yet to pay for the wedding. This might have been the first time I realized that people really did borrow against their homes to pay for things they wanted. I would not take out a credit card for another five years, so I was still in the dark that I could actually write myself a check for cash to take the vacation I so deserved.
Once my eyes were opened they were opened wide, I learned a lot quickly. A little later I was privy to a conversation between someone else and her daughter in which some rather large credit card debts were mentioned (they were adding to them because they "needed" new dresses for all the kids for a simcha and I believe the discussion was if they had enough credit for the purchase). I had just been signed to my first real job and couldn't comprehend how anyone could *pay* for such debt, especially given the demographic and career choice, and just blurted out, "how will you pay that off?" The reply: "When Moshiach comes, he will pay [off the credit card]." It would have been funny, except there wasn't a hint of humor. She later explained something to the effect that unless a frum Jew was wealthy, they would juggle debt.
A lot of what I have learned and write about comes from published words, conversations, and observations. But, I've also had my fair share of runs-ins with people who can't pay their bills or simply stiff you. E.g., I took on some work for a family that who does all of the same things my commenter mentioned. Every conversation has has a "religious outlook." Tefillah, bitachon, emunah, mashiach; it is all in the conversation. The problem? The work is done, but you get a message not to cash the check because something else came up. And the next check bounces from here to there and back again and the "practical" person ends up on the phone with a local posek trying to figure out what courses of action would be permissible to now collect the funds.
I don't separate the practical from the religious or frum. To me they are completely intertwined, and I see this in the Torah I've learned and from the Rabbonim I've consulted on "practical" issues. The commenter writes "[I/we are] disdainful of people who put frum values ahead of balancing the budget." To me balancing the budget IS a "frum" value.
The
Derech Eretz kadma l'Torah is a fundamental concept. I think that being able to pay your bills as agreed upon would fit right under the banner of derech eretz kadma l'Torah. Putting yourself in a position where you are engaging in a life of debt means that eventually something will give. Creditors will not be paid. Food and services that you consumed and made a beracha over will not be paid. Pledges that you made will go unfilled. Lawyers, dentists, and schools will go unpaid. Unfortunately there are businesses (grocery stores no less) with massive receivables on their books. Schools and shuls experience the same phenomena. Years ago I met a wonderful couple visiting from a certain neighborhood known for its piety. The family had a business within the community and when he found out I was an accountant, he wanted to share with me a trick he learned on how to 'clean out' as much as he could from the bank accounts of people who wrote him bad checks. Let's just say I didn't learn this trick in business school. I'm a very simple person. I still like to assume that when someone writes a check that it will cash.
Operating in a constant state of red invites ethical challenges. This is not to say that people who live with great wealth don't fall to the yetzer hara (think Enron), but supporting a lifestyle that is not commensurate with income is an invitation to the yetzer hara. I've seen it with my own two eyes.
To close I want to say one last thing: while many of my commentators feel strongly that families should not have "more children than they can afford," (there are VIN and Matzav commentators who say the same thing!), I have a liking for large families. I think that having a growing, expanding, and alive community is our lifeblood. I think it is well worth while to forgo plenty of extras to have more children. The issue that we have is defining the extras and we have made everything a requirement in the name of frumkeit so that we don't even know what "minimal" is. When camp become minimal and dental work to fix rotting teeth becomes extra, you have a problem. And that problem isn't particularly related to family size, but priorities.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Shalom Bayit and Finances, Tuition vs. Health
There is a new Letter to the Editor published today on Matzav supposedly written by a breadwinning father contemplating suicide due to his financial position. Oftentimes the letters posted on Matzav are straight out of the Yated, but I'm guessing this letter is not one of those. Additionally, I don't believe the letter was actually written by the person supposedly considering suicide, but I do believe that financial problems can make a person consider dreadful measures. Personally, I'm rather annoyed with Matzav for publishing a constant stream of "it's too expense to be frum" articles because I believe that this complaining, and I hear it in my own backyard too, is completely detrimental and counterproductive. What I think is highly needed is financial and frugality education, subjects I see stressed by different ministries. For my commentary on one Matzav "it's too expensive to be frum" editorial see Echad Chacham. . . . Echad Helpless Loser.
Like other complaining editorials of late, there is a lack of differentiating between needs and wants. The author mentions all of the following costs: "tuition, mortgage payments, car expenses, food bills to the sky, clothes, utilities, camp…" So long as camp or the chatunah (a subject that rears its head later in the letter for which I only have three words: Cake and Punch) appears in the same sentence as basic food and shelter, there is a lifestyle problem that needs to be addressed.
What I don't doubt about the article is that the real subject of the letter (see below), reflects the "matzav" of a good handful of husbands out there:
The letter writer believes that he has an income/lack of assistance issue. In all reality, $80,000 is a respectable income, but with a larger size family looking to maintain a healthy budget(healthy budget loosely defined as income > expenses + no consumption debt), I'm not quite sure there is more than a 4 figures available to pay tuition. So, in one sense there is an income issue, but what I believe the reader has is a shalom bayit issue. If the couple was supportive of each other, they could deal far more effectively with the financial issues.
More essential than cash flow in personal finance, is unity in approach. I believe that Chazal asserts that a couple with shalom can exist on the tip of a pin, whereas the largest home won't suffice for a couple without shalom. I think the same can be said of shoestring budgets: a family that works together on addressing their financial challenges can survive on a shoestring budget, whereas a family that does not share common vision, determination, and accomodation will struggle even on a generous income. I believe that sharing a similar approach towards finances is also what will move a couple from disatisfaction --> acceptance and addressing the issue together --> satisfaction or sameach bechelko.
One more issue I'd like to revisit is what I previously called "worshipping at the altar [of yeshiva/day school]." While I do believe yeshiva/day school should take precedence over stuff (e.g. camp experiences, European fashion, and eating out), I am concerned when supporting a frum lifestyle (and I use the term lifestyle deliberately), means neglecting health. To me that fits the definition of "worshiping at the altar."
The letter writer, whoever that is, mentioned forgoing dental care. So did a later commentor who writes:
Like other complaining editorials of late, there is a lack of differentiating between needs and wants. The author mentions all of the following costs: "tuition, mortgage payments, car expenses, food bills to the sky, clothes, utilities, camp…" So long as camp or the chatunah (a subject that rears its head later in the letter for which I only have three words: Cake and Punch) appears in the same sentence as basic food and shelter, there is a lifestyle problem that needs to be addressed.
What I don't doubt about the article is that the real subject of the letter (see below), reflects the "matzav" of a good handful of husbands out there:
But is hard to appreciate the good things in life when you are sitting and staring at a bank account that is emptying out faster than it fills up. It is hard to smile when you have to tell your 12-year-old kid that he can’t go to the dentist this month even though his tooth is hurting because you don’t have the money for it. It is hard to be happy when your wife is frustrated that you are just not making ends meet no matter how hard you are working and how hard you are trying.
The letter writer believes that he has an income/lack of assistance issue. In all reality, $80,000 is a respectable income, but with a larger size family looking to maintain a healthy budget(healthy budget loosely defined as income > expenses + no consumption debt), I'm not quite sure there is more than a 4 figures available to pay tuition. So, in one sense there is an income issue, but what I believe the reader has is a shalom bayit issue. If the couple was supportive of each other, they could deal far more effectively with the financial issues.
More essential than cash flow in personal finance, is unity in approach. I believe that Chazal asserts that a couple with shalom can exist on the tip of a pin, whereas the largest home won't suffice for a couple without shalom. I think the same can be said of shoestring budgets: a family that works together on addressing their financial challenges can survive on a shoestring budget, whereas a family that does not share common vision, determination, and accomodation will struggle even on a generous income. I believe that sharing a similar approach towards finances is also what will move a couple from disatisfaction --> acceptance and addressing the issue together --> satisfaction or sameach bechelko.
One more issue I'd like to revisit is what I previously called "worshipping at the altar [of yeshiva/day school]." While I do believe yeshiva/day school should take precedence over stuff (e.g. camp experiences, European fashion, and eating out), I am concerned when supporting a frum lifestyle (and I use the term lifestyle deliberately), means neglecting health. To me that fits the definition of "worshiping at the altar."
The letter writer, whoever that is, mentioned forgoing dental care. So did a later commentor who writes:
All I know is that if the "letter writer" is contemplating suicide and this other commentator's children have rotted and diseased teeth, leaving the yeshiva system for public school doesn't sound like the horrific alternative other commentors are making it out to be!
Giving up the dentist was the hardest of all for us, we also earn income higher than this poster, but when we had no income, the school tuition committee thought we were hiding something and refused us. That was 15 years ago and we still don’t have necessary dental care—the adults in our family have allowed our teeth to rot and become diseased, and have suffered bouts of excruciating pain without seeing a dentist because we couldn’t afford it. The children who needed braces did not get them, nor did they get normal dental care. Along the way we mentioned this to a Rav whose response was What about all the Rabbi’s teaching in Yeshiva who can’t get dental care? So we just keep quiet and suffer. But at least now we pay full tuition.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
The Life Insurance Tuition Plan
Charles Kushner has published an Op-Ed piece title "Op-Ed: Funding Jewish education—a self-sustaining solution." He does not present this plan as a "perfect solution" but rather a conversation starter.
The plan presented has the following two tranches:
Tranche I: Upon enrollment of its first child to enter yeshiva, each family agrees to allow the school to buy a $25,000 life insurance policy on each parent. There is only ONE policy per parent at the school, regardless of how many children attend the school. The premiums are to be paid over a period of 10 years and remain in effect until the insured reaches 100 years of age. Again, the premiums are paid at no cost to the parents.
Tranche II: Ten benefactors to the school will each select an older person to honor by buying a life insurance policy in his or her name. The death benefit will be $5 million, again with premiums to be paid over a period of 10 years and guaranteed until the insured reaches 100 years of age.
I don't want to be a complete pessimist, but this looks like an endowment fund by another name. The winner, of course, being the insurance carrier(s). The commitment is huge. I am not an insurance expert, but my understanding of whole life insurance is that when a payment is missed, the entire policy is cancelled leaving only the cash value. To put out $250,000 annually to pay for an "endowment" is a large commitment. I believe that trying to fund such a plan, if successful, would uproot other fundraising, possibly causing tuition increases until the endowment is fully functioning. Personally, I believe that further tuition increases will threaten enrollments.
Personally, I believe that the problem for many families, especially younger families, is the current price of tuition, i.e. the here and NOW. The presented plan is a long term plan that doesn't address the fact that increasing numbers of families can't afford full tuition for each child, much less try to fund a massive endowment for which there will be no benefit until at least 10 years down the road. From what I understand, the 5% Estate Plan has not yet benefited the schools, and with that plan there is no massive cost. Meanwhile, tuition continue to rise every year.
I'm interested in what my readers think, both positive and negative. I'm not opposed to long term planning by any means, but the underlying assumption seems to be that the schools will just continue to hold on until a big cash infusion kicks in some 10-20 years down the road. And to put it succinctly, I just don't share the same underlying assumption.
The plan presented has the following two tranches:
Tranche I: Upon enrollment of its first child to enter yeshiva, each family agrees to allow the school to buy a $25,000 life insurance policy on each parent. There is only ONE policy per parent at the school, regardless of how many children attend the school. The premiums are to be paid over a period of 10 years and remain in effect until the insured reaches 100 years of age. Again, the premiums are paid at no cost to the parents.
Tranche II: Ten benefactors to the school will each select an older person to honor by buying a life insurance policy in his or her name. The death benefit will be $5 million, again with premiums to be paid over a period of 10 years and guaranteed until the insured reaches 100 years of age.
I don't want to be a complete pessimist, but this looks like an endowment fund by another name. The winner, of course, being the insurance carrier(s). The commitment is huge. I am not an insurance expert, but my understanding of whole life insurance is that when a payment is missed, the entire policy is cancelled leaving only the cash value. To put out $250,000 annually to pay for an "endowment" is a large commitment. I believe that trying to fund such a plan, if successful, would uproot other fundraising, possibly causing tuition increases until the endowment is fully functioning. Personally, I believe that further tuition increases will threaten enrollments.
Personally, I believe that the problem for many families, especially younger families, is the current price of tuition, i.e. the here and NOW. The presented plan is a long term plan that doesn't address the fact that increasing numbers of families can't afford full tuition for each child, much less try to fund a massive endowment for which there will be no benefit until at least 10 years down the road. From what I understand, the 5% Estate Plan has not yet benefited the schools, and with that plan there is no massive cost. Meanwhile, tuition continue to rise every year.
I'm interested in what my readers think, both positive and negative. I'm not opposed to long term planning by any means, but the underlying assumption seems to be that the schools will just continue to hold on until a big cash infusion kicks in some 10-20 years down the road. And to put it succinctly, I just don't share the same underlying assumption.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Investigate before Jumping on This Ship
YWN reported that Aguda Rabbonim convened to discuss Chinuch Atzmai which is under more financial strain due to a fine imposed by the Israeli court of 5,000NIS per day the school does not comply with the ruling of the courts. The courts became involved in the Emanuel Bais Yaakov schools after accusations of segregation between segregation of Ashkenazim and Sephardim and discrimination against the latter. The gedolim have decried the involvement of the secular court system in Chareidi education and have supported the parents in their actions, rallying behind them. For links to all related stories see YWN here.
When I was the story about the Aguda meeting to discuss the financial strain I can't say my reaction was a nice one. But, not knowing the details of the case, I didn't want to jump to any conclusions either.
My friend Mom in Israel has details of a different case in Bet Shemesh and has kindly posted a transcript of tape in which the Bais Yaakov Principal's remarks to school parents in Bet Shemesh were recorded and later played on an Israeli radio program. What a lovely gem during the Omer. I have never heard such cruelty. There is no possible way that you can build an education on such a foundation. I know no one in the Agudah, but would be more than happy to place this excerpt as translated by Mom in Israel in envelopes to anyone who was at the American Agudah meeting asking them to do some further investigation before supporting Chinuch Atzmai in the Emanuel discrimination case and asking for money from an already struggling American community. This might not be the ship they want to jump on! I certainly wouldn't want to be on that ship.
If you have the home addresses of anyone who was present in the meeting, please send me an email at Orthonomics at gmail dot com. Excerpt follows from the Bet Shemesh principal. See all the links at Mom in Israel for more info.
You, as a mother, are insisting on sending her to a place where she’s not wanted . . . No child wants to sit next to her, no one will be friends with her, no one will go to her house to play, no child will lend her a notebook, no one will approach her at recess, everyone will know that this is the girl, that because of her, we all sat at home for so long.
How can you, as a mother, send your daughter to a place where she is clearly not wanted? not only by me, not only by the teachers, and not only by the rabbi of the neighborhood—all 280 students don’t want her.”
Your daughter will be socially isolated. No girl will sit next to her. No one will invite her over. She’s going to go into a class that has 26 girls, she’ll be number 27. The other class has 32—in either case the class will have an odd number. Your daughter will sit by herself. And in two months when the teacher changes the seating arrangements, your daughter will sit by herself, again.
280 girls are sitting at home. For many of them it’s very hard, the parents are working. No one knows when this will end, I also don’t know. But all of them (kuuulam), did it happily (besimcha). Now if that girl calls on the phone to play, and the mother asks who is on the phone, will she let her daughter play with the girl, that because of her they all stayed home?
She’ll be a museum exhibit. All the girls will look to see who this girl is who caused the commotion. When every [apartment] building has 50 girls living there, what mother would send her daughter to play with a girl that has a “baayah chinuchit” (educational or discipline problem) at home?”
When I was the story about the Aguda meeting to discuss the financial strain I can't say my reaction was a nice one. But, not knowing the details of the case, I didn't want to jump to any conclusions either.
My friend Mom in Israel has details of a different case in Bet Shemesh and has kindly posted a transcript of tape in which the Bais Yaakov Principal's remarks to school parents in Bet Shemesh were recorded and later played on an Israeli radio program. What a lovely gem during the Omer. I have never heard such cruelty. There is no possible way that you can build an education on such a foundation. I know no one in the Agudah, but would be more than happy to place this excerpt as translated by Mom in Israel in envelopes to anyone who was at the American Agudah meeting asking them to do some further investigation before supporting Chinuch Atzmai in the Emanuel discrimination case and asking for money from an already struggling American community. This might not be the ship they want to jump on! I certainly wouldn't want to be on that ship.
If you have the home addresses of anyone who was present in the meeting, please send me an email at Orthonomics at gmail dot com. Excerpt follows from the Bet Shemesh principal. See all the links at Mom in Israel for more info.
You, as a mother, are insisting on sending her to a place where she’s not wanted . . . No child wants to sit next to her, no one will be friends with her, no one will go to her house to play, no child will lend her a notebook, no one will approach her at recess, everyone will know that this is the girl, that because of her, we all sat at home for so long.
How can you, as a mother, send your daughter to a place where she is clearly not wanted? not only by me, not only by the teachers, and not only by the rabbi of the neighborhood—all 280 students don’t want her.”
Your daughter will be socially isolated. No girl will sit next to her. No one will invite her over. She’s going to go into a class that has 26 girls, she’ll be number 27. The other class has 32—in either case the class will have an odd number. Your daughter will sit by herself. And in two months when the teacher changes the seating arrangements, your daughter will sit by herself, again.
280 girls are sitting at home. For many of them it’s very hard, the parents are working. No one knows when this will end, I also don’t know. But all of them (kuuulam), did it happily (besimcha). Now if that girl calls on the phone to play, and the mother asks who is on the phone, will she let her daughter play with the girl, that because of her they all stayed home?
She’ll be a museum exhibit. All the girls will look to see who this girl is who caused the commotion. When every [apartment] building has 50 girls living there, what mother would send her daughter to play with a girl that has a “baayah chinuchit” (educational or discipline problem) at home?”
Friday, April 16, 2010
Ask Orthonomics: Opting Out of Social Security
I received this question earlier, and my readers have already addressed the question for me (thanks!), but I like to make sure that important subjects have their own posts so interested parties can find them for future reference.
I'm a lurker and comment rarely, I agree with most of your opinions on finance and would love to hear your opinion about my situation. Husband and I are in kiruv, self employed with four children KA"H, our combined income amounts to 46K, we are considering opting out of social security, do you think it is worth it for us? Provided of course, that we invest the equivalent properly.
Dear Reader,
Thank you for bringing up an interesting question. Opting out of Social Security/Medicare is something I don't see younger Rabbis doing, but it isn't unheard of amongst the older Rabbinate. Perhaps the requirements have changed over time, but I'm not quite sure what religious objection we have to a public insurance system as issues regarding the financial sustainability of social security are not valid religious grounds for objections. The Form 4361 is the form needed to opt out and needs to be filed by the second year in the clergy.
The consequence of opting out of social security is that a member of the clergy can no longer receive Social Security, Medicare, or any other welfare program. I'm not quite certain if this means you would be ineligible for all the various welfare credits that already flow through the IRS Form 1040 in the form of "refundable credits" or if this is only exempts you from Food Stamps, WIC (?), Pell Grants, etc. Nonetheless for the $3519 (7.65% of salary) that you would be saving from your half of the employment taxes, you will be losing access to a great deal of programs. (Note: You mentioned being self-employed, but I'm not sure if that is in kiruv or another activity).
The Christian Church has built up numerous "financial ministries" and none seem particularly enthusiastic about members opting out, for both ethical reasons and financial reasons. The United Methodist Church strongly advises its clergy not to exercise this option. Crown Ministries advises clergy that when they opt out of social security they will need to consider income replacement in retirement, purchasing life and disability insurance, and replacing medicare coverage. The truth is that every single one of us who pays into social security needs to do all of the above, especially when you are considering a large family and (yes!) Yeshiva Tuition.
I don't believe that at this income level you will have the means to take the excess and invest all of it. And given the specific concerns in the frum community regarding paying for private schooling, I think you would be nuts to opt out of Social Security, Medicare, all welfare programs, and expect that the "powers that be" will be interested in letting you keep the change to invest in the very things you will need to invest in.
Signed,
Orthonomics
[Updated] To address a comment in the comments section:
I'm surprised no one is bringing up what, at least to me, seems like an obvious problem here: by signing Form 4361, you are certifying that you are conscientiously opposed to, or that because of your religious principles you are opposed to accepting public insurance. The question raised in this post is opting out of Social Security payments because you want to save that money and/or reinvest it yourself. By signing this form, you're basically lying. I don't know of any Jewish religious principle that opposes public insurance; in fact, I would argue quite to the contrary, but that's a different topic for a different day.
I wrote the following: "Opting out of Social Security/Medicare is something I don't see younger Rabbis doing, but it isn't unheard of amongst the older Rabbinate. Perhaps the requirements have changed over time, but I'm not quite sure what religious objection we have to a public insurance system. . . . " In other words, I'm not sure why some Rabbis in the past opted out and I don't have the historical knowledge of the system to determine if clergy could automatically pass on these withholdings without religious objection. Like I noted above, concerns over the viability of the social security system are not "valid reasons for religious objections."
And quite honestly, have am concerned by the discussion in this post as focusing solely on the money savings and pros and cons of opting out of paying this tax. Am I reading this whole thing wrong? I would expect differently from this blog so am a bit surprised.
I'm disucssing the financial issues because I believe that is what promoted the reader to think about leaving the system which is why I concentrated on the pragmatic issues. I did a little research on numerous statements from different church denominations, none of which came out and said signing would be "assur" but all of which said we strongly recommend against this and which asked the clergy member "are you really being honest with youself?" I think if the couple gets past the money issue, they can then ask themself, do I really have a religious objection. Like social security or not (I have plenty of reservations), if the family still wanted to opt out, their next stop should be a posek with a reputation of integrity. I don't know of any religious objection, but then again, I know people in the frum community who don't believe in buying life insurance or saving for retirement for "bitachon" reasons. I think they are sorely mistaken, but if people think that saving for retirement isn't "Jewish" I imagine that they could have the same objection to this safety net.
Don't worry, the blog hasn't changed. Just my approach to the issue was too heavily focused on the pragmatics.
I'm a lurker and comment rarely, I agree with most of your opinions on finance and would love to hear your opinion about my situation. Husband and I are in kiruv, self employed with four children KA"H, our combined income amounts to 46K, we are considering opting out of social security, do you think it is worth it for us? Provided of course, that we invest the equivalent properly.
Dear Reader,
Thank you for bringing up an interesting question. Opting out of Social Security/Medicare is something I don't see younger Rabbis doing, but it isn't unheard of amongst the older Rabbinate. Perhaps the requirements have changed over time, but I'm not quite sure what religious objection we have to a public insurance system as issues regarding the financial sustainability of social security are not valid religious grounds for objections. The Form 4361 is the form needed to opt out and needs to be filed by the second year in the clergy.
The consequence of opting out of social security is that a member of the clergy can no longer receive Social Security, Medicare, or any other welfare program. I'm not quite certain if this means you would be ineligible for all the various welfare credits that already flow through the IRS Form 1040 in the form of "refundable credits" or if this is only exempts you from Food Stamps, WIC (?), Pell Grants, etc. Nonetheless for the $3519 (7.65% of salary) that you would be saving from your half of the employment taxes, you will be losing access to a great deal of programs. (Note: You mentioned being self-employed, but I'm not sure if that is in kiruv or another activity).
The Christian Church has built up numerous "financial ministries" and none seem particularly enthusiastic about members opting out, for both ethical reasons and financial reasons. The United Methodist Church strongly advises its clergy not to exercise this option. Crown Ministries advises clergy that when they opt out of social security they will need to consider income replacement in retirement, purchasing life and disability insurance, and replacing medicare coverage. The truth is that every single one of us who pays into social security needs to do all of the above, especially when you are considering a large family and (yes!) Yeshiva Tuition.
I don't believe that at this income level you will have the means to take the excess and invest all of it. And given the specific concerns in the frum community regarding paying for private schooling, I think you would be nuts to opt out of Social Security, Medicare, all welfare programs, and expect that the "powers that be" will be interested in letting you keep the change to invest in the very things you will need to invest in.
Signed,
Orthonomics
[Updated] To address a comment in the comments section:
I'm surprised no one is bringing up what, at least to me, seems like an obvious problem here: by signing Form 4361, you are certifying that you are conscientiously opposed to, or that because of your religious principles you are opposed to accepting public insurance. The question raised in this post is opting out of Social Security payments because you want to save that money and/or reinvest it yourself. By signing this form, you're basically lying. I don't know of any Jewish religious principle that opposes public insurance; in fact, I would argue quite to the contrary, but that's a different topic for a different day.
I wrote the following: "Opting out of Social Security/Medicare is something I don't see younger Rabbis doing, but it isn't unheard of amongst the older Rabbinate. Perhaps the requirements have changed over time, but I'm not quite sure what religious objection we have to a public insurance system. . . . " In other words, I'm not sure why some Rabbis in the past opted out and I don't have the historical knowledge of the system to determine if clergy could automatically pass on these withholdings without religious objection. Like I noted above, concerns over the viability of the social security system are not "valid reasons for religious objections."
And quite honestly, have am concerned by the discussion in this post as focusing solely on the money savings and pros and cons of opting out of paying this tax. Am I reading this whole thing wrong? I would expect differently from this blog so am a bit surprised.
I'm disucssing the financial issues because I believe that is what promoted the reader to think about leaving the system which is why I concentrated on the pragmatic issues. I did a little research on numerous statements from different church denominations, none of which came out and said signing would be "assur" but all of which said we strongly recommend against this and which asked the clergy member "are you really being honest with youself?" I think if the couple gets past the money issue, they can then ask themself, do I really have a religious objection. Like social security or not (I have plenty of reservations), if the family still wanted to opt out, their next stop should be a posek with a reputation of integrity. I don't know of any religious objection, but then again, I know people in the frum community who don't believe in buying life insurance or saving for retirement for "bitachon" reasons. I think they are sorely mistaken, but if people think that saving for retirement isn't "Jewish" I imagine that they could have the same objection to this safety net.
Don't worry, the blog hasn't changed. Just my approach to the issue was too heavily focused on the pragmatics.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
More Economic Terrorism
I find the economic terrorism coming out of the Chareidi community to be particularly infuriating, especially in light of recent reports regarding the employment and state of poverty in this community. The Chareidi entrepreneur and business owner does not just have to deal with the usual headaches of red tape and tax. The Chareidi entrepreneur has to deal with self-appointed Vaadim that look to enforce standards of tzniut through duress. I believe this would be a bigger headache than dealing with just about any other red tape. Even if the business owner has secured permits, completed legal paper, and paid their taxes, the businessman always has to watch their back as idle and unstable men with plenty of time on their hands look to "enforce tznius standards."
Since I've started this blog, I've seen so many stories of businesses attacked by these self-appointed Vaadim. Anything relating to women seems particularly susceptible. In Israel, we've seen stories of clothing boutiques being threatened and even set on fire. A popular vocation for kollel wives in Israel is cosmetician services. But don't dare advertise your business in Modiin Ilit! The kehilla committee, has told publications that they are not to publish advertisements for eyebrow shaping, even if the ad is text only. Pharmacy and grocery stores in Israel face special challenges regarding kashrut demands and specific opening hours. Under normal circumstances the market would dictate things like opening hours or even having separate shopping hours or areas for which feminine products are to be secluded. But the Chareidi business man or the business man looking to establish a store in a Charieidi area knows that demands must be met even if the market might dictate a different policy. American pharmacy owners in areas like Boro Park or Lakewood also face similar challenges.
Even in America, a boycott was announcement when the owner of sheitel shop on the same street as Yeshiva Chaim Berlin refused the demand of some man to remove framed pictures (I guess this is better than requesting the removal of real live women walking around in the same sheitels).
So what is the newest report of economic terrorism? It regards an ice cream store (!)-- not a sheitel shop, not a women's education program, not a call center manned by Chareidi women, a cosmetician advertising eyebrow shaping services, a women looking to sell clothing, a woman looking to teach the arts to other women and girls, or a pharmacy being told to keep the pads out of public view or remove/cover a picture of a teen star (in a sheitel of her own no less).
As per this report published today, a new ice cream and candy store, Zisalek of Geulah, has found itself in the middle of a hashgacha battle and has faced protests regarding tznius, hashkafa, and ruchniyus. The store owner met with protesters and agree to institute the following to appease them:
The store owner wouldn't agree to have female employees only sell to females and male employees only sell to males. (The quick way to bankruptcy!)
Running a business and making a profit is very difficult work! Profit margins in nearly every industry are normally very slim and adding demands that increase the most costly area of business (payroll) is sure to topple a business. To place demand upon demand upon Chareidi entrepreneurs looking to support their families in dignity is nothing but Economic Terrorism. The market will decide if it is in the best interest of a store to close at 10:30pm! The market will decide if it is in the best of the store to have an employee scooping ice cream after 1pm on Erev Shabbat!
I think it is obvious that self-appointed tzniut vaadim aren't the least bit interested in the financial health of their communities. (I'd argue that being self-supporting is integral to tzniut/dignity. "Hustling" certainly lacks dignity). Leaders, both lay and Gedolim, who are interested in the financial health of the community MUST tackle this issue with courage and allow businesses to function and prosper.
Since I've started this blog, I've seen so many stories of businesses attacked by these self-appointed Vaadim. Anything relating to women seems particularly susceptible. In Israel, we've seen stories of clothing boutiques being threatened and even set on fire. A popular vocation for kollel wives in Israel is cosmetician services. But don't dare advertise your business in Modiin Ilit! The kehilla committee, has told publications that they are not to publish advertisements for eyebrow shaping, even if the ad is text only. Pharmacy and grocery stores in Israel face special challenges regarding kashrut demands and specific opening hours. Under normal circumstances the market would dictate things like opening hours or even having separate shopping hours or areas for which feminine products are to be secluded. But the Chareidi business man or the business man looking to establish a store in a Charieidi area knows that demands must be met even if the market might dictate a different policy. American pharmacy owners in areas like Boro Park or Lakewood also face similar challenges.
Even in America, a boycott was announcement when the owner of sheitel shop on the same street as Yeshiva Chaim Berlin refused the demand of some man to remove framed pictures (I guess this is better than requesting the removal of real live women walking around in the same sheitels).
So what is the newest report of economic terrorism? It regards an ice cream store (!)-- not a sheitel shop, not a women's education program, not a call center manned by Chareidi women, a cosmetician advertising eyebrow shaping services, a women looking to sell clothing, a woman looking to teach the arts to other women and girls, or a pharmacy being told to keep the pads out of public view or remove/cover a picture of a teen star (in a sheitel of her own no less).
As per this report published today, a new ice cream and candy store, Zisalek of Geulah, has found itself in the middle of a hashgacha battle and has faced protests regarding tznius, hashkafa, and ruchniyus. The store owner met with protesters and agree to institute the following to appease them:
1. The store won’t sell on Erev Shabbos after 1 p.m. ice cream that can be eaten immediately, such as ice cream cones, and will only sell at that point packaged ice cream that can be bought for families for Shabbos.
2. The store will not open on Motzoei Shabbos.
3. The store will close at 10:30 p.m. each night.
The store owner wouldn't agree to have female employees only sell to females and male employees only sell to males. (The quick way to bankruptcy!)
Running a business and making a profit is very difficult work! Profit margins in nearly every industry are normally very slim and adding demands that increase the most costly area of business (payroll) is sure to topple a business. To place demand upon demand upon Chareidi entrepreneurs looking to support their families in dignity is nothing but Economic Terrorism. The market will decide if it is in the best interest of a store to close at 10:30pm! The market will decide if it is in the best of the store to have an employee scooping ice cream after 1pm on Erev Shabbat!
I think it is obvious that self-appointed tzniut vaadim aren't the least bit interested in the financial health of their communities. (I'd argue that being self-supporting is integral to tzniut/dignity. "Hustling" certainly lacks dignity). Leaders, both lay and Gedolim, who are interested in the financial health of the community MUST tackle this issue with courage and allow businesses to function and prosper.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Office Depot Work Life Rewards Program
I already gave a review of the Staples Rewards programs which I enjoy very much. From time to time, I've shopped at Office Depot, but I've never seen a group of deals so incredible that I had to get myself there in a jiffy.
Office Depot has a rewards program called Work Life Rewards. Just like the Staples Rewards program, a percentage is awarded for different types of purchases including a 10% award on ink, toner, paper, and copy and print services.
This week there is an entire page of great items where the reward is 100% which ultimately makes me only responsible for the sales tax. I will use the rewards to buy ink. Rewards are issued at the end of the quarter in the form of a gift card. I expect to receive our gift card right in time for back to school shopping, which incidentally is a great time to stock up on small gifts for birthday party favors or small gifts. Customers can purchase 2 per day. I didn't take advantage of each offer, but I picked up a lot of great things for my home office including 2 packages of 5 bankers boxes, 2 large plastic filing boxes, 2 of those absolutely fantastic staplers (I know it is ridiculous to get all giddy about a stapler, but I'm tired of fighting mine and these work like a dream!), 2 packages of paper clips, 2 packages of Scotch Tape Refills (8 total!), 2 pallettes of bottled water (40 total), a handheld label maker, 3600 printable Avery labels, and 5 packages of colored highlighters (10 total).
I resisted the temptation to purchase any more than I plan to spend on ink come August, something I spend a good amount of money on yearly.
This is the week for a trip to the Office Depot!
Office Depot has a rewards program called Work Life Rewards. Just like the Staples Rewards program, a percentage is awarded for different types of purchases including a 10% award on ink, toner, paper, and copy and print services.
This week there is an entire page of great items where the reward is 100% which ultimately makes me only responsible for the sales tax. I will use the rewards to buy ink. Rewards are issued at the end of the quarter in the form of a gift card. I expect to receive our gift card right in time for back to school shopping, which incidentally is a great time to stock up on small gifts for birthday party favors or small gifts. Customers can purchase 2 per day. I didn't take advantage of each offer, but I picked up a lot of great things for my home office including 2 packages of 5 bankers boxes, 2 large plastic filing boxes, 2 of those absolutely fantastic staplers (I know it is ridiculous to get all giddy about a stapler, but I'm tired of fighting mine and these work like a dream!), 2 packages of paper clips, 2 packages of Scotch Tape Refills (8 total!), 2 pallettes of bottled water (40 total), a handheld label maker, 3600 printable Avery labels, and 5 packages of colored highlighters (10 total).
I resisted the temptation to purchase any more than I plan to spend on ink come August, something I spend a good amount of money on yearly.
This is the week for a trip to the Office Depot!
Required Reading: A Smorg of Economic Stats
The Jerusalem Post has a very interesting editorial titled Downhill, by the numbers. This report looks at numerous economic indicators in Israel, only one of which is particularly positive. I'm always amazed how new articles on my radar seem to continue a subject from a different post. This post provides more background on the outrageous statements made by Gafni which I posted about on Friday, In Other Words. . . It's the Man's Fault.
The article examines a number of economic indicators shared by the researcher Prof. Ben-David of the Taub Center for Social Policy Study who believes that the "findings show an unsustainable burden is being placed on the fewer and fewer Israelis who can contribute effectively. Reform is urgent, and it must begin with education."
Here are some of the economic indicators of note from the article:
*GDP: Israel had caught up with the G-7's rising rate by the 1970s, but has been slipping steadily behind over the past 30 years or so.
*Brain Drain: For every 100 British academic scholars at work in Britain, 2.1 British scholars had moved to the US. For France, the number was 2.9. For Italy, 4.2. For Canada, 12.2. And for Israel, 24.9.
*He gave me worrying figures on labor productivity – Israel had caught up with the G-7’s rising rate by the 1970s, but has been slipping steadily behind over the past 30 years or so. And then he described the related fall-off in GDP – the data that essentially governs our living standards: *Welfare: In 1979, 26 percent of Israeli families lived below the poverty line before tax and welfare adjustments. By 2008, that figure was 32.3% – a vast increase compared to the OECD countries that are his barometer, leaving Israel second only to the US in terms of the numbers reliant on the overburdened state system.
*Employment: Re able bodied men aged 35-54, non employment in the OECD averages 11.9%. Spain the worst afflicted at 14.5%. In Israel, the rate is 18.9%. In that age group, 27% of Israeli Arab males and 65.1% of haredim are unemployed.
*Growth of the Arab and Hareidi Sector: 1960, 15% of kids going into primary school came from the Arab and haredi sectors. By the 1980s, 26%. In 2000, 40%. In 2008, 48%. (The 2040 projection is 78%, but I prefer sticking to the known, not the unknown).
*Employment for those who don't complete high school: In th 29-54 age range, fewer than 10% of Arab women in that demographic have work while 70% of their counterparts with a degree have work. 90% of Arab men and non-hareidi Jewish men and women with degrees have work.
Ben-David points out that these stats are worrying in terms of sovereignty as a nation. Ben-David had a chance to meet with Porush to present his findings and address his concerns regarding education. According to Ben-David: "Porush responded that if only the haredim were exempted from IDF service, more would join the labor force – which is not born out by the data – and he disagreed on the haredi sector’s educational needs. His response was unacceptable. It won’t work."
The positive indicator is one that the religious community and the hareidi community can claim a great deal of credit for: "The average woman aged 15-49 in the OECD countries has 1.7 kids, he noted, with New Zealand topping the league at 2.2. The average Israeli woman in that age-range has three kids."
Read the entire article for Prof. Ben-David's commentary. Also, if you want, see Haaretz which also is covering some of the data.
The article examines a number of economic indicators shared by the researcher Prof. Ben-David of the Taub Center for Social Policy Study who believes that the "findings show an unsustainable burden is being placed on the fewer and fewer Israelis who can contribute effectively. Reform is urgent, and it must begin with education."
Here are some of the economic indicators of note from the article:
*GDP: Israel had caught up with the G-7's rising rate by the 1970s, but has been slipping steadily behind over the past 30 years or so.
*Brain Drain: For every 100 British academic scholars at work in Britain, 2.1 British scholars had moved to the US. For France, the number was 2.9. For Italy, 4.2. For Canada, 12.2. And for Israel, 24.9.
*He gave me worrying figures on labor productivity – Israel had caught up with the G-7’s rising rate by the 1970s, but has been slipping steadily behind over the past 30 years or so. And then he described the related fall-off in GDP – the data that essentially governs our living standards: *Welfare: In 1979, 26 percent of Israeli families lived below the poverty line before tax and welfare adjustments. By 2008, that figure was 32.3% – a vast increase compared to the OECD countries that are his barometer, leaving Israel second only to the US in terms of the numbers reliant on the overburdened state system.
*Employment: Re able bodied men aged 35-54, non employment in the OECD averages 11.9%. Spain the worst afflicted at 14.5%. In Israel, the rate is 18.9%. In that age group, 27% of Israeli Arab males and 65.1% of haredim are unemployed.
*Growth of the Arab and Hareidi Sector: 1960, 15% of kids going into primary school came from the Arab and haredi sectors. By the 1980s, 26%. In 2000, 40%. In 2008, 48%. (The 2040 projection is 78%, but I prefer sticking to the known, not the unknown).
*Employment for those who don't complete high school: In th 29-54 age range, fewer than 10% of Arab women in that demographic have work while 70% of their counterparts with a degree have work. 90% of Arab men and non-hareidi Jewish men and women with degrees have work.
Ben-David points out that these stats are worrying in terms of sovereignty as a nation. Ben-David had a chance to meet with Porush to present his findings and address his concerns regarding education. According to Ben-David: "Porush responded that if only the haredim were exempted from IDF service, more would join the labor force – which is not born out by the data – and he disagreed on the haredi sector’s educational needs. His response was unacceptable. It won’t work."
The positive indicator is one that the religious community and the hareidi community can claim a great deal of credit for: "The average woman aged 15-49 in the OECD countries has 1.7 kids, he noted, with New Zealand topping the league at 2.2. The average Israeli woman in that age-range has three kids."
Read the entire article for Prof. Ben-David's commentary. Also, if you want, see Haaretz which also is covering some of the data.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)