Showing posts with label Yated. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Yated. Show all posts

Friday, May 06, 2011

The Irony... (UPDATED)

You've got to love it when a weekly newspaper such as the Israeli Yated puts the following letter in their paper.

All of the weeklies and freebies, including Mishpachah, distort and blur the holy Torah world view we received from our rabbonim and one should not, choliloh, bring newspapers of this sort into the home or promote them in any way.

And granting any hechsher to such newspapers is clearly out of the question.

This applies even more to radio of any kind and all Internet sites, all of which are provocative and destroy the soul, and are the root of impurities and harm.

Signing at the end of Nisan 5771.

Nissim Karelitz

Perhaps my reading skills are lacking, but do you see any exemption for the Yated (which, I believe is a weekly publication)?

On a side note, it looks like Mishpacha is "officially" out.  

UPDATED (5/6 3PM EDT):  Well, now, that's embarrassing.  S. informs me that the Yated is a daily and not a weekly and hence not included in the above referenced statement.  There goes the point of the post.  My apologies to the Yated for the error.

The Wolf

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Just Say No

An interesting letter appears in this week's Yated. A writer from Lakewood writes to complain how every time a cousin or someone else makes a simcha in Brooklyn, that the Lakewood residents are expected to travel the two to three hours (and incur the costs) that it takes to get to Brooklyn.

Dear Editor,

Since when did Lakewood become one of the five boroughs of New York City?

“Huh?” you want to ask me. “Who said it is?

Well, I’ll tell you who said it is. It seems, based on current custom, that for every event - wedding, bar mitzvah, bris, sheva brachos, etc. - held in Brooklyn or anywhere else in New York for that matter, those who live in Lakewood - young couples and older families as well - are expected to commute. I find that ridiculous.

Who decided that people should be traveling for at least 2-1/2 hours to attend every simcha of every cousin?

Besides for the shlep, how about the impossibility of getting a babysitter? Does anyone know how hard it is to find a babysitter?

And of course, the babysitter will take good money for her services, which she deserves.
Add the cost of gas and tolls, and basically, you have young couples, who live on shoestring budgets in the fi rst place, shlepping to New York at a cost of at least $65-70, to say mazel tov to their disinterested uncle and aunt at their cousin’s wedding, and barely get to eat a cold piece of halfbaked chicken if they even make it for the main course.

I am sorry, but this is not normal.

I know a yungerman who he has limited income. He is smart and careful about how he spends his money, and he and his wife get by okay, boruch Hashem. Recently, however, he told me that he had to travel in to New York for three simchos of cousins, at a cost - all in one month - of a total of over $300, which he cannot afford. (He learns in a paying night kollel and had to give up the money he receives as well.) And for what?

“At one simcha,” he told me, “the baal simcha (his relative) barely gave me the time of day as I wished him mazel tov. I imagine he realized who I am, but I wondered why I even came. But the reason why I traveled,” he said, “was because if we wouldn’t come, my parents, and especially grandparents, would be upset.

It has to stop. Couples who have young children, or even older children, cannot be expected to travel in to New York - or anywhere else that requires multiple hours of driving - for every simcha. It is not fair to the young couples, and it can potentially affect their wellbeing and their shalom bayis, not to mention their finances.

I would add that, similarly, those living in Brooklyn or anywhere else should likewise not be expected to travel for over an hour to Lakewood or any other place for a simcha of a non-immediate relative.

It is time we bring back sanity into our lives and put a stop to the unreasonable expectations and demands that we have allowed to become part of our culture.

Sincerely,

Y. Gordon

Here's my response:

Dear Y,

Thank you for your letter. I can certainly understand why you would be upset. Traveling a long distance to go to a simcha can be an arduous and sometimes expensive proposition. And, in this day and age when everyone's watching the purse strings, I definitely understand why you would be upset at having to shell out major money for what might turn out to be a mediocre night at best.

But there was one thing about your letter that left me a bit confused. Is there a police force in Lakewood that forces you go to affairs in Brooklyn and other far away places? I don't mean to be facetious, but I'm wondering why you simply cannot just say no.

I know that I love to go to family affairs. I go just about every opportunity that I can. But I also know that there are times that I simply cannot go. Sometimes it interferes with my work or school schedules. Other times it is just costs too much (financially) to go. And sometimes, it's just not practical -- maybe it's a work night and I know that I'm not going to be up to four hours of round-trip travel time. When this happens, I send the ba'alei simcha my heartiest mazal tov and tell them that while I would love to attend, I have to give my deepest regrets that I simply cannot make it.

Believe it or not, people can and will understand if you cannot make it to a particular simcha for one of the above reasons. People understand that sometimes costs cannot be borne (whether they be financial or logistical costs). And, truth to tell, if the ba'alei simcha are stubborn enough not to understand, then perhaps it's their attitude that needs to be adjusted. If they are selfish enough to "guilt-trip" you into spending money, time or effort that you cannot afford, then perhaps you might want to reconsider how much you want to associate with them. Personally, I would prefer to spend my time with people who are more empathic to my needs and abilities, rather than be so self-centered to demand that everyone attend to them whether they have the means to do so or not.

You write that the yungerman in your town goes to please his parents and grandparents. I can certainly understand that. But even parents and grandparents can be made to understand the fact that you simply don't have the funds or the ability to travel to every family simcha. They may not be happy about the situation, but they can understand.

There is one additional point I would like to address in your letter. You write about going to a wedding "to say mazel tov to their disinterested uncle and aunt at their cousin’s wedding, and barely get to eat a cold piece of halfbaked chicken if they even make it for the main course."

Personally, when I go to a simcha, I don't care if I get a half-baked piece of chicken or not. When I attend a family member's or friend's simcha, my main goal in going is to be m'sameach (make happy) the participants. (I also have a secondary goal, as an amateur shutterbug, of taking as many family pictures as possible -- but that's just my personal mishugass.) I also understand that at a large affair with many people, the ba'al simcha may not have more than a few seconds to give me a quick "Mazal Tov, I'm so glad you could come." In short, I've learned that the wedding or bar mitzvah or whatever is not about me -- it's about the ba'alei simcha. Would it be nice if they could spend a whole ten minutes with me? Sure -- but when there are over fifty guests, it just becomes impractical, if not impossible.

In short, I don't go to a simcha with the idea of "what am I going to get out of the simcha?" My goal is "how can I contribute to the simcha?" If I get nothing out of it (or even just a half-baked piece of chicken and only two seconds with the ba'alei simcha) so be it.

The Wolf

Thursday, September 11, 2008

I Guess Most Yeshivos In Brooklyn Are Like Amalek...

In this week's Yated, Rabbi Pinchos Lipschutz, has an article (posted on YeshivaWorldNews) dealing with media bias and Agriprocessors. However, tucked away in the article, he takes a potshot at Yeshiva University. In his article, Rabbi Lipschutz writes:

Amaleik appears in so many different guises. When a Jewish university maintains on its payroll a person who openly lives an immoral lifestyle and the institution’s president tells the New York Post that he is “proud of my university and all my faculty,” is that not an expression of “asher karchah”? Such a person is conferring legitimacy on behavior the Torah considers abhorrent.

What he is referring to is the case of Jay Ladin, a professor of modernist American poetry who left YU two years ago on a leave of absence and who recently returned as Joy Ladin, having undergone hormone treatments (although she has not yet had sexual reassignment surgery).

I don't want to get into whether she was right or wrong. You're free to your own opinion on the matter. Rabbi Moshe Tendler has come out against her, while others have supported her. What I want to get to is Rabbi Lipschutz's gratuitious pot-shot at Yeshiva University.

He maintains that Yeshiva University is comperable (in at least some ways) to Amalek because they maintain this person on their staff. His argument is that by doing so, they are conferring legitimacy on behavior the Torah considers abhorrent.

However, in his little pot-shot, Rabbi Lipschutz has cast most of the yeshivos in Brooklyn as Amalek as well.

I went to a very right-wing yeshiva for high school. I don't think that there is anyone on earth who would mistake it for being "modern" in any possible sense of the word. And yet, when I was in high school, I had teachers (for secular studies) who were not frum. I also had teachers who were Christians. I'm sure that if you asked the principal (a frum Jew), he would have told you that he was proud of his teaching staff as well. And yet, according to Rabbi Lipschutz, my high school conferred legitimacy on a Jewish non-frum lifestyle, or worse, an idolatrous lifestyle! My high school is like Amalek! Not only that, a great many yeshivos in Brooklyn (and certainly in other communities as well) use teachers from the public school system who may not be frum or even Jewish to teach secular studies. I guess all these yeshivos are also like Amalek!

So, thanks Rabbi Lipschutz. I always knew that my high school didn't fit me. Now I know why! They were like Amalek.

The Wolf

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Letter to the Editor: Lakewood Salaries and Employment Economics

I know that when I fall into a bit of a blogging funk, I can always count on the Yated to print something interesting. This week is no different.

Here's a letter to the editor titled "What A Joke." Any spelling errors or typos are my own.

Dear Editor,

I must say that the salaries that women receive in the city where I live - Lakewood, New Jersey - are pitiful. It is a disgrace that they get little more than $10 an hour. I am not sure what the situation is like in other places such as Brooklyn, Monsey and the Five Towns, but in this city, where so many upstanding people are struggling financially, it is simply disgraceful that our wives can't find jobs that pay decently.

Some people now highly regret that their wives, when they were single, didn't get some sort of degree to enable them to get jobs that pay decently. I don't want to get into a whole discussion about whether a girl should or shouldn't get a degree, because that really isn't the point here. The point is that, in a city where the concept of "hashkafaToraso umnaso" can be applied to so many people, the fact that wives can't earn a half-decent salary to keep their families afloat is a serious problem that has not been discussed sufficiently. In most cases, even where the husband is the primary breadwinner, the family needs the mother to earn a decent salary to help cover ever-growing expenses.

In Lakewood, apparently, $10 an hour is supposed to cut it.

$10 an hour is what you give the guy off the street who you hire to clean your backyard.

$10 an hour is what you give Maria, your cleaning lady, for scrubbing your floors.

Because of the large number of young (and not-so-young) married wives who need jobs, storeowners and business owners can - and do - dictate how much they will pay their employees. And let me tell you, they are taking full advantage of the situtation. I know of two companies that are seriously contemplating moving to Lakewood for one reason only - cheap labor.

Not Mexican cheap labor.

The cheap labor of our neshei chayil, who can be hired for "bubkis."

It's a shandeh.

Eli Parkowitz

Here's my response:

Dear Mr. Parkowitz,

I can certainly understand the frustration that you and other people in the Lakewood community are going through in your efforts to raise your families. Gas prices have shot through the roof, food prices are up, and it seems that even the basic necessities are now more expensive than they've ever been. While this is certainly true in most places, it must be impacting the Lakewood communtiy all the more, considering how many of the residents are involved in full-time Torah study. I wish you and all the Lakewood families much hatzlacha in being able to support your families.

Now then, however, I do feel that there are several things that need to be pointed out about your letter. You don't state in your letter what type of work the wives in Lakewood are looking for, but my guess is that it is largely unskilled labor. The wages for unskilled workers will, of course, usually be lower than that of skilled workers. I highly doubt the doctors, medical technicians and computer programmers in Lakewood are earning only $10 an hour.

You have to understand that companies do not exist in a vacuum. Companies that employ workers usually have to compete with other companies who provide similar or identical products or services. In order for a company to exist, it must remain competative with others in their field. If I produce widgets at $10 each and my competitor comes along and is able to produce them at $8 each, I will have to do one of two things -- a. find a way to produce my widgets at a similar cost or b. go out of the widget business.

As such, if the women in Lakewood earn $10 an hour, it is because that is what the market will bear. Employers have to find people that will do the job properly at the lowest cost. If I need a secretary (a common example of an unskilled laborer) I will find one that can do the job at the lowest cost. If your wife doesn't want to work for $10 an hour, but I know that there are ten other candidates who will, then there is no reason for me to hire your wife.

In short, if I'm paying $10 an hour for a secretary, it is because of the following two reasons:

1. There are enough candidates who are capable of and willing to do the job properly for $10 an hour.

2. If I only offered $9 an hour, the candidate pool would shrink to the point where it would be too difficult to find someone who can or will do the job properly.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'd love to hire your wife at $20 an hour and help support your Torah lifestyle. But (and forgive me for saying so) the marketplace doesn't care about your Torah lifestyle. My competitors (many of whom are not Jewish) don't care about your Torah lifestyle either. They're not going to raise thier prices to match mine because I have the extra cost of hiring a Lakewood wife. Since they're not going to raise their prices, I can't afford to pay extra to hire your wife. To do so would make my company uncompetative.

Now then, is there any solution? Of course there is. While we all recognize that our parnassah comes from HaKadosh Baruch Hu, we also all recognize the fact that we have to put in the proper hishtadlus. And that doesn't just mean showing up in the morning, doing the job and going home in the evening. It goes far beyond that.

You write in your letter that you don't want to get into a whole hashkafa debate about whether or not a girl should get a degree. But, in reality, this isn't about degrees... it's about job skills. If your wife (or anyone else, for that matter) has a valuable skill that they can bring to the marketplace, then they can command a higher salaray. The general rule is that the rarer the skill (and the more in demand that it is), then the higher the salary the person can command. In many cases this means a college degree, but it does not necessarily have to be so. Allow me to give you an example:

When I started out in the workforce, I was earning only $10 an hour. I was young and newly-married. While I had some skill at using computers, it wasn't anything terribly specialized. I knew how to use WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3 (am I dating myself?) and some other basic computer programs. In short, while I had some marginal computer skills that placed me higher than a "shlub off the street," I was still certainly in the category of unskilled labor. As such, I earned a meager salary for a few years.

It was only later on that I began to realize that if I wanted to earn a higher salary, I would have to make myself more desirable to employers. So, I went out and learned some computer skills that are more uncommon. I went to an adult education center and, for the next year, took eight courses in computers covering programming and databases. As a result, because I invested in my human capital, my value in the market place went up and I was able to command a much higher salary.

Human capital is basically what you have if you were dropped off on a street corner with nothing more than the clothes on your back. Just to give you an example (albeit an extreme one), consider what would happen if two people were put in that situation. Let's suppose that Bill Gates and I were both stripped of all our possessions. He loses his billions, his mansion, his Microsoft stock -- everything. Me -- well, I lose my house, whatever savings I have in the bank, my 401(k), etc. We're both dropped off on a street corner with nothing more than the clothing we're wearing. Which one of us will be better able to provide for our families? The answer is Bill Gates, because he has more human capital than I do. He has skills and contacts that I don't have. He has years of experience in running a multi-billion dollar corporation. I don't. The combination of skills, contacts, experience that he has is worth far, far more on the labor market than mine. As a result, he will (in all likelihood) find a job faster than I and earn a higher salary than I.

The best way to improve your earnings for the long term is to invest in your own human capital. Tell your wife to go out and learn a skill that will make her more valuable to employers in the Lakewood area. That's the *best* way to ensure that she will be able to command a higher salary. Is it a quick fix? No, of course not. It takes time and money. It took me over $5,000 and a year to take the computer courses I mentioned above. It was very difficult -- my family had to make significant sacrifices for me to be able to scrape together the money for those courses. However, with the higher salary I was able to command when I finished, I earned the money back within a year. I'm now further investing in my human capital in two ways: a. I'm always looking to improve my skills at a database administrator/programmer and b. I'm going back to school for an advanced degree. You can rarely go wrong by investing in your human capital.

If you want your wife to earn more than "bubkis" then she has to be able to bring valuable skills to her employers. However, if she is indistinguishable (in a professional sense) from thousands of other women in Lakewood, then no employer can pay her more. She has to work on setting herself apart from the crowd. There's a reason that Maria only earns $10 an hour -- because anyone can learn very quickly how to scrub floors. Likewise, almost anyone can learn very easily how to answer phones. It's only when the skills become rarer and more valuable that the salaries start to rise.

Wishing you much hatzlacha,

The Wolf

Friday, May 02, 2008

Living In One's Means: A Letter From the Yated

I don't usually barge into Sephardi Lady's territory, but this letter (titled "Strapped For Cash") in the Yated caught my attention.

(Note: Any spelling errors/typos are mine)

Dear Editor,

Is anyone out there surviving financially? I, for one, am not. Pesach itself set me back so seriously. In addition to the cost of making Yom Tov with the sky-high prices of Pesach food - and food in general, there were Afikoman presents to buy and Chol Hamoed trips to go on. This all made my already dire financial situation that much more disastrous.

Take eight kids to an amusement part on Chol Hamoed and you'll walk out having spent close to $200. For what? And if, chas veshalom we don't take our kids on a Chol Hamoed trip every single day, somehow we are lacking as parents. That's the feeling we get. So the day after the amusement park, we went to the Liberty Science Center. That, too, cost a veritable fortune. On the third day of Chol Hamoed, I said that instead of going on a trip, we would go buy Afikoman presents. Frankly, the Chol Hamoed trip would probably have been a bargain compared to the prices we paid at the toy store. On Erev Shabbos, the last day of Chol Hamoed, we took the kids bowling. Who would imagine that you would have to pay well over $100 for a family to play two games of knocking down some bowling pins?

It is unbelievable what is going on out there. The gas prices are absurd. The cost of food is absolutely ridiculous. The only thing in the grocery store that is reasonably priced is the Yated, but, last I checked, this newspaper is not edible.

Is there any end in sight to this recessions that we are in?

Feeling Hopeless

Here's my response:

Dear Feeling Hopeless,

Thank you for your letter. It is certainly true that there are many people struggling to make ends meet during these difficult financial times. Food prices have risen dramatically over the last year and people with large families and limited incomes are indeed feeling the pinch.

However, it seems to me that the people in your household are lacking two basic ideas:

1. There is a difference between items that are necessities (food) and things that are luxuries (Afikoman presents and Chol HaMoed trips).
2. There are plenty of things to do around around NYC that don't cost a "veritable fortune."

You start out your letter by stating that you were in dire financial straits even before Pesach. I'm certain that shopping for a family of ten (eight kids plus, presumably, two adults), Pesach is great strain on the budget. Of course, I don't know what you purchased, but I'm sure that you did your best to contain costs and yet, still came away with a huge food bill. I only have three kids, and yet Pesach food put a nice hole in our checking account -- I'm sure that with twice the number of people, you were hit at least twice as hard.

However, while no one can fault you for complaining about the spiraling costs of food, I think you can be taken to task on your failure to understand that Afikoman presents and Chol Hamoed trips are not necessities. As kids, many of us managed to get through childhood without going on trips everyday. There were years that, as a kid, my sister and I didn't have Afikoman presents simply because our mother didn't have the money. And yet, somehow, we managed to survive and grow into mature, productive adults. Trust me on this... your children will not be scarred for life if they don't go on a trip or don't get Afikoman presents.

In fact, I was discussing your letter with Eeees last night, and she brought something to my attention. Last year Pesach time was kind of tough for us financially. Baruch HaShem, we weren't in danger of going hungry, but we didn't have a lot of leftover cash either. As a result, the kids didn't get Afikoman presents. We did, however, take them on a day trip. One of my kids this year brought up to Eeees that they didn't get Afikoman presents last year. Wilma Fred turned to him her and said "but they took us on a trip. Shouldn't that count?" In other words, (at least some of) my kids have learned to appreciate what they have, rather than bemoaning the fact that they don't have everything.

However, all is not lost. Since you mentioned the Liberty Science Center, I am going to guess that you're in the New York area. In New York City, there are plenty of things to do that cost little or no money. Here are some suggestions for next Chol Hamoed.

1. Go to the Brooklyn Botanical Gardens on Tuesday. It's free. The other days aren't too expensive either.

2. Go to the Prosepct Park or Queens Zoos. Adult rates are $6, kids 3-12 are $2. Assuming that of your eight kids two are older than 12 and one is under 3, the total cost (excluding transportation) is $34. Not bad for a family of ten.

3. Go to the Bronx Zoo on Wednesday. Wednesday is pay-what-you-wish day. Go, give $50, and enjoy the day with the animals.

4. Gather up a family or two, pack picnic lunches, Frisbees, balls and gloves and go have a picnic lunch/outing in Central Park or Prospect Park. There is plenty of room for the kids to run around all day. Subway costs for 10 people round trip: $40 -- assuming that all kids pay full fare.

5. Go to the American Museum of Natural History. While the suggested donation is $15 per adult and $8.50 per kid (for a total of $98), this is, again, a *suggested* donation.

6. Take the kids to FAO Schwartz. Just don't buy anything!

7. Walk across the Brooklyn Bridge and spend the day in Battery Park.

8. Ride the Staten Island Ferry and see the new aquarium at the Staten Island end. You'll also get to see the Statue of Liberty close up. Best of all, it's free.

9. Visit the Sony Wonder Technology Lab. It's free!

10. Visit grandparents. They're likely to pay the kids!

There you go... ten suggestions -- and I'm sure that there are plenty of other low/no cost things to do around the city that I've missed. The point is that you don't have to spend a fortune on trips for Chol Hamoed. If you like, go on one "expensive" trips and make the rest cheaper trips.

Listen, I understand that we all want to seem like "good parents" who will splurge for our children whenever possible. But sometimes, it's just not possible. If going on trips is going to completely blow your budget so that you won't be able to pay the real bills, then you have to be strong and just tell your kids no. You have to realize exactly what is a necessity and what is a luxury, and understand that Afikoman presents and expensive trips fall into the latter category and not the former.

Here's a bit of unsolicited parenting advice: Not taking your kids on a trip every day of Chol Hamoed will not make you seem "lacking as parents." On the contrary, by making an unpopular decision (and explaining *why* you're making it), you will be doing your children a far greater service - teaching them that one has to be responsible, set priorities where they belong (i.e. necessities first and then luxuries) and live within their means. Teaching them that lesson will remain with them and serve them well throughout life, long after the memories of the "missed trip" are faded and gone. Instilling this lesson in them will show that you are indeed not lacking as a parent, but a parent who teaches his/her children the lessons that they need to live.

The Wolf

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Wow! Now There's A Rebbi Who Needs To Retire!

As many of you know, I am often critical of the Yated and some of the articles/letters that are found in it. However, there is one part of the Yated that I am actually starting to enjoy reading -- The Chinuch Roundtable. Each week, The Chinuch Roundtable features a question from a parent or teacher about chinuch and the proper approach, followed by responses from about six to ten professional mechanchim. While I have to admit up front that (aside from my experience as a parent) I have no background in chinuch, I usually find myself in agreement with the roundtable participants.

This week's letter (I'm sorry, I don't have it with me, so I can't quote it verbatim) is from a parent of a child (the letter doesn't specify the age) who sometimes causes trouble in class. The rebbi decided to punish the child (I think we can generally agree that a disruptive child does need to be disciplined) by having him write lines -- 1500 times! When the child failed to turn in the assignment, he upped the ante -- he told the child that he had to write "I will be more responsible" 5000 times!! Five. Thousand. Times.

To their credit, each and every participant in the round table criticized the practice of having children write lines as a form of discipline -- even if it it's only fifty lines, let alone the absurd number of lines that the rebbi gave the student.

That being said, I'm really surprised that there are teachers who are so out of touch that they think that any child (even a teenager) can really complete such a task. One participant of the roundtable actually remarked that the task was not a punishment, but a sentence. I can't even begin to fathom the enormity of the task that this rebbi laid before the child. 5000 times! Aside from it being a waste of two hundred pieces of paper, it also does nothing to improve the child's attitude or disposition. All an assignment like this can do is breed anger and resentment for the rebbi, the school, and possibly yiddishkeit in general.

We all know that there are good teachers out there and bad teachers -- my kids have had their share of both -- but they've never had anyone who proposed such a mindless, pointless, demeaning task as punishment. I think that this is clearly a rebbi who needs to leave chinuch and go on to something else. He clearly has no idea on how to relate to children.

Do any of you have any stories about bad punishments that you or your kids received? Or how about creative punishments that were especially good and helped you to change your ways?

The Wolf

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Purim announcement in the Yated.

From a two-page public service ad in this week's Yated (paid for by the Agudath Israel of America)

1. The mitzva of "Chayav Adam l'v'sumet b'Purya..." is only with wine as it is stated in Chayei Adam (155:30) and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (142:6). Free use of whiskey and other alcoholic beverages is entirely inappropriate and contrary to da'as Chachomim.

2. Ba'alei Batim should not serve any alcoholic beverages, including wine, to groups of bochurim visiting their homes.

3. Those who drive under the influence of alcohol not only endanger themselves but all their passengers and other members of the public. Drivers must therefore not consume any alcoholic beverages, including wine, and must take extra care to drive safely, observing all applicable laws and safety procedures.

4. Nobody should enter a car if there is reason to believe that the driver is under the influence of alcohol, and all reasonable steps should be taken to prevent such an individual from driving.

Signed by 47 rabbanim.

Yasher Kochachem! Good job! Let's hope this decree is obeyed stringently.

The Wolf

Paying Salaries Based on Need

An interesting letter in this week's Yated:

Dear Editor,

I would like to raise an issue that has been bothering me for a few years.

I am a one-man-band in a large Jewish community. Having a wife and children, this is a good way to support myself by doing something that I enjoy. When I was a bochur, I began accepting jobs. Sometimes, when I would quote a price, it was not uncommon to hear comments that my price is too high, since I am only a bochur.

Let me explain the expenses of a one-man-band.

First of all, a good keyboard used by the wedding pros (which is not uncommon to be used by a bochur) costs a few thousand dollars. Secondly, a decent sound system, which includes speakers, a mixer and cables, runs in the thousands. This is in addition to the thousands of hours devoted to programming and practicing.

The next time you hire a one-man band, even if he's "just a bochur," realize that he still has many expenses.

Signed,

Y.P.

Now, I don't know if this is a uniquely Jewish problem, but this is not the first time I've heard a similar story in the frum world -- where employers pay more to people with expenses (read: married) and less to employees without those expenses (read: single).

To me, this sounds very unprofessional and patently unfair. A person's salary (or fee) should be based on the value of the service provided. It should not be based on extraneous factors such as whether or not the person is married. In New York State, in regular employment situations, this is almost certainly illegal (I don't know how/if it applies to single-time engagements like a musician at an affair) and immoral. Should a musician with eight children demand for more money than one with two because he has more mouths to feed? The answer, clearly, is no -- because the six extra children do not add to the value of the service being provided. The musician's music isn't any better because of the six extra children. Likewise, a bochur's music isn't any worse because he is not married*.

Sadly, this is not the first time I've heard of such situations in the frum world. Like I said, I don't know if this is a "frum" problem or if it exists in other ethnic communities. But it should stop.

Do any of you have any similar experiences?

The Wolf

* Yes, it's possible that he was being asked to accept less because of his inexperience (which is acceptable), not his youth - but from the tone of Y.P.'s letter, that doesn't sound like the case.

Friday, February 01, 2008

Get A Life, Part II

As I said yesterday, this week's Yated has a wealth of blog material in the "Readers Write" section. Yesterday's letter was about science. Today's letter was going to be about parenting, but it seems that Sephardi Lady has beaten me to the punch on that. So, I'll go on to the next one. I've transcribed it below. Any typos are my own.

The Yated editors titled it "False Titles." I would have gone with "Get A Life."

Dear Editor,

I recently noticed a certain advertisement for a yeshiva dinner in your newspaper. Among the honorees are two couples being honored as "Parents of the Year." There are pictures of both husbands, but not their wives. Incredibly, under the pictures of the husbands is the title "Mr. and Mrs...." When did a man become both husband and wife?

Seriously, I understand your policy not to display pictures of women and I commend you for it. Nevertheless, if you are not prepared to show a picture of the wife as well, it would be better not to show a picture at all. Above all, it is sheker to give a title "Mr. and Mrs..." underneath a picture of only the husband. No chumrah should ever override an issur from the Torah, in this case midevar sheker tirchok.

To be frank, I don't hold of the chumra of not posting photos of women. But then again, it's not my paper, so my opinion doesn't really matter. However, I don't think anyone is being deceived by the Yated posting a picture of a man and labeling it as "Mr. and Mrs..." What next, call it sheker if someone uses an idiom because some idiot might understand it literally? Oh wait, we already covered that...

The Wolf

Thursday, January 31, 2008

Science, from a Yated Reader

Oh, man, there are some weeks that the Yated is a gold mine of blog material. This week is one of them. I could probably spend the whole week blogging on this issue, but I’ll restrict myself (for now) to one letter to the editor. Here is a letter, titled “Science” (with the quotes) from yesterday’s edition. All typos are mine (with the exception of the misspelling of the word “pursue” at the end).

A. Stone was dead-on in his observation regarding the arrogance of weather reporters. This arrogance is not limited to weathermen, but extends to all scientists in all fields of science. This is a profession where most scientific data is disproved within a decade of their release, yet, in each generation, these people somehow delude themselves to believe that they are different, that their ideas stand at the pinnacle of science.

This cycle has been going on for thousands of years, yet none of these scientists have ever learned their lesson. They are constantly correcting their own mistakes. To realize this, all you have to do is open up any science publication and you will notice the phrase “Now we know….” Written over and over, year after year! If you look closely at science, most successful scientific discoveries are trial and error discoveries, or “recipe” discoveries. We took patient A who had disease B and gave him medicine C and he recovered; therefore substance C treats malady B. This prompted Paul Valery, a noted French essayist, to write that “science means simply the aggregate of all the recipes that are always successful. The rest is literature.”

When scientific theories are not based on trial-and-error techniques, they are almost always wrong. For example, if a scientist would have been asked exactly how medicine C would affect the patient, he would invariably be eventually proven wrong. Here are some of the predictions of this kind to look back on:

“There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be attainable.” (Albert Einstein, 1932)

“A rocket will never be able to leave the Earth’s atmosphere.” (The New York Times, 1936)

“Scientists predict cure for allergies is near.” (Chicago Tribune, August 15, 1982)

“Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau.” (Yale University, 1929)

Sometimes, science goes a step farther and makes sweeping predictions about the future. These are the funniest to look back on. Of course, the scientists quickly forget these predictions, or give us an arrogant analysis. “Well, then we believed A and B, but now we know…”

Who remembers the prediction of the coming ice age in the ‘70s, which made the front cover of several national publications? Who remembers global famine, resource depletion, or overpopulation? And, of course, we have the following masterpieces from the great New York Times:

“Earthquakes may engulf all of Europe.” (April 8, 1906)

“Rats [!] may destroy the human race; man must drive out or be driven out.” (July 7, 1908)

“British experts say deaf age is coming; New Yorkers may be first to lose their hearing.” (July 26, 1928)

“Man’s war on disease sweeps on to victory; few [battles] remain to be won.” (June 15, 1927)

So, as we persue (sic) all the dire scientific data of our impending global barbeque, pardon me as I guffaw loudly.

Professor J. Sherman
Psychopharmaceutical Development Specialist,
GlaxoSmithKline Inc.

I found the letter mildly amusing until I saw the signature at the end. That was when I burst into laughter. If this fellow is a “Psychopharmaceutical Development Specialist” at GlaxoSmithKline, you may want to reconsider some using of their products. In any event, I’m fairly certain that “Professor” is an academic title, not a personal one (such as “doctor.”). GSK doesn’t hire people to be professors, only colleges do.

In any event, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at this letter. It sounds like a poorly written kiruv primer. The Professor makes the assumption that if a scientist says something, then that’s the opinion of “science” (by which I suppose he means the scientific community) and when it’s disproved, then that proves that all of science must be wrong. He puts up the straw man of science claiming to be all-knowing and infallible when it never makes such a claim – indeed, one of the principles of the scientific method is that any scientific hypothesis *must* be falsifiable.

He goes on to state that when science doesn’t rely on trial-and-error, it almost always is “proven wrong.” In reality, however, all scientific inquiry (by definition) is done through trial and error and/or observation. If not, then it is not scientific.

In addition, the Professor seems to be making the same mistake that Rav Uren Reich made a few years back when he disparaged science. At the height of the controversy surrounding Rabbi Slifkin, Rav Reich said:

These same scientists who tell you with such clarity what happened sixty-five million years ago – ask them what the weather will be like in New York in two weeks’ time! “Possibly, probably, it could be, maybe” – ain itam hadavar, they don’t know.

In short, he says that because they can’t predict the future, then anything they say must be suspect. It’s kind of like a person saying that the computer I’m using to type this post on can’t possibly exist because Bill Gates said that no one would ever need more than 640K of RAM. Since Bill Gates was wrong, certainly nothing the computer engineers tell us can be believed.

Interestingly, even some of the quotes that Professor Sherman uses are suspect. Take the quote about earthquakes engulfing Europe. If you go to the actual New York Times article, you’ll find that his quote is only half the title. Here’s the complete title:

Earthquake May Ingulf (sic) all Europe, Says German Scientist; Berlin Professor Finds in French Mine Disaster a Symptom of the Approaching Cataclysm --- American Geologists Not Quite So Alarmist in Their Views.

So, it was the opinion of one scientist, not the opinion of “science.” Furthermore, if you actually read the first two paragraphs of the article, you’ll find that the scientist who made the prediction was an astronomer, not a geologist. So, what you have is a scientist that is making a prediction outside of his field; and his opinion is disputed by other scientists who *are* experts in the field.
In addition, you have to keep in mind that the New York Times of 1906 was not the New York Times of a century later. Journalistic standards of 1906 were much lower than they are today. Just because the New York Times chose to print something hardly makes it the scientific equivalent of Torah MiSinai.

Another of his quotes is the 1936 quote from the Times that rockets will never leave the Earth’s atmosphere. This quote is referenced often on the web, yet, when I searched the Times archive from 1900 to 1949, I could not find the quote that he attributes to the Times. My guess is that it’s an urban legend (or else it’s a misstatement of the famous editorial against Goddard in 1920 – but that wasn’t written by a scientist, it was written by an editorial writer).

What is highly comical, I suppose, about this letter is that is written by someone who purports to be scientist, and yet claims that “all scientists in all fields of science” are arrogant. And what's utterly sad about it is that there are thousands of people who are going to read his letter and, because they don't know any better, will say to themselves, "yep, science is just a load of horse-hockey." And yet, these same people will go on with their lives, living into their seventies and eighties (and possibly beyond) on average, they probably won't die of scarlet fever, whooping cough, malaria or smallpox, they will be able to store food for longer than a day in their refrigerators, get where they are going in planes, trains and automobiles, be able to communicate with each other via telephone and the Internet, and, in general, benefit from the many good things that God has provided for us through science and the scientific method.

The Wolf

Thursday, January 04, 2007

A Note On The Clothing Store Activists in B'nei Brak

(Wow! Two posts in one day!)

I was reading an article in this week's Yated about the activists who have started insisting that stores in B'nei Brak must sell only clothing that appeals to certain standards or not be placed on a "white list" of stores where chareidim there may not shop.

The activists (known as the Vaadas Hapikuach Lechanuyos) brought a list of stores who have complied to Rav Aharon Leib Shteinman. According to the article (bolding mine):

HaRav Aharon Leib Shteinman read through the list with obvious satisfaction and wondered aloud how there could be chareidi store owners who have not yet joined the program. HaRav Wosner said he was pleased be'ezras Hashem there are now clothing stores where Jewish women can shop without concern, and expressed confidence additional store owners would join the program. HaRav Nissim Karelitz, who has guided the organization since its founding, encouraged the delegates and suggested a course for further activity.

I find it interesting that the path of action to take was to pressure the stores, rather than to pressure the individual buyers. If one were to successfully pressure the individual buyers, then the buyers would not buy the items and the stores would not sell them. The most obvious example would be a store that sells ham (among other items) in an exclusively Jewish neighborhood. Since no one is going to buy the ham, eventually the store owner would see the futility of carrying it and stop doing so.

It would seem to me that the need to pressure the stores stems from a failure of the activists to pressure the people individually. Since they can't (or won't) tell their women not to buy certain articles of clothing (or the women won't listen to such instructions), they feel that they must remove the opportunity to buy them.

Of course, however, that, too, is a failing proposition. While it may make it more difficult for women to shop for clothing that they want, it certainly won't prevent them from doing so entirely. One can always drive or hop on a bus and go to the next town to find clothing, purchase it through mail-order or the internet, or some other way.

In short, if you want any sort of ban to succeed, you have to first win over the will of the people. If you can convince the people that the ban is necessary, then you won't have to resort to pressuring shopkeepers - economics will take care of the problem for you. If you can't convince the people of the necessity for the ban, then, in today's global market, pressuring the shopkeepers will harm no one but the shopkeepers.

The Wolf

Tuesday, December 26, 2006

Is Supporting the Yated A Mitzvah?

As Rabbi Student pointed out, the European Yated (which includes the online version) is no longer publishing on a weekly basis. It seems fairly obvious from the notice currently on the website (see below) that the problem is financial.

Apparently, according to the folks at the Yated, supporting the Yated is a mitzvah, and one can use Ma'aser money to support them. As it says on their website (bolding mine):

Notice to Our Readers

Boruch Hashem we have managed to make arrangements with all the relevant parties and to receive permission from the relevant authorities to continue. Financing is on a "can afford" basis. We have arrangements in place for the news for a few weeks and we seek donors for other sections. Although it is not tzedokoh in the strict sense, for those who undertook ma'aser kesofim to include general mitzvah expenses, according to the rabbonim they may donate from their ma'aser kesofim.

I'd like to know who the rabbonim are who said that supporting a newspaper can be done with Ma'aser money. I'd also like to know on what grounds supporting the Yated is a mitzvah, especially when there are other right-wing Chareidi publications available.

So, what's the story? Am I being too cynical and there are real grounds to allow Ma'aser money to be used in supporting the Yated? Or is this just a way to get people to part with their Ma'aser money to support a private business venture?

The Wolf

UPDATE: Upon doing a search, I see that Dag posted about this first. My apologies, Dag.