An article in our newspaper last week made the point that utilities in the NYC area have gone up 18% in the last six months. Yes, you read that right--18%. It matters not a whit how careful we have been with gas, electric and water usage--we're paying more, a lot more. Nor are utilities the only thing that have gone sky high in this past year.
At the end of August last year I paid $28.00 for a case of printer paper. The cost this year is $40. A single pack of paper last year was on sale for $2.60. This year the sale price was $4.29. My grading book for school cost me $2.00 last year; this year it costs $3.75. I run through dozens of pens during the school year so I buy them in the multi-packs. Last year the pens I prefer ran $9.99 per dozen. This year the cost is $14 for a pack of eight.
We all know about the raised costs of food and household supplies. Even with being a careful shopper and with using coupons the budget has gone up to accommodate our must have items.
And now the Jewish holidays are coming up, and with them comes shopping for items that are necessary for this time of year. Want to bet that fish prices go up? Honey is already more expensive this year than last. Flour and sugar are more expensive. Seats in shul have gone up, I guess to reflect the higher costs of utilities the shul is also paying. I can't wait to see what a lulav and esrog costs this year. Ladies who may have gone bare legged over the summer are coming back to pantyhose/stocking season, and they raised the price of the brand I use by $1.25 a pair.
I am no longer paying yeshiva tuition or college tuitions and my kids work and pay their own expenses, so I have a lot more wriggle room in my budget, but even I am having to rethink some spending patterns. Yes, yeshiva tuition still remains the number one item of concern for parents with young children, but it is no longer the only item of concern. The added costs in all other areas of a family budget are making a deep dent in available funds. So what are we going to do? Obviously, there is going to be some cutting down and some cutting back. But it's not enough, because it doesn't address the reason so many of our staples have gone up in price.
It's more than time that the US put into place a far more sensible energy policy then the one we have. It's more than time to rein in the ultra profits in the oil industry. Why does produce cost more now? Because it costs more to transport it around the country. The energy needed to process and manufacture products costs way more, and the price is passed on to us. Scratch any price raise and you will find raised energy costs in there somewhere. It's time to say that energy costs are not separate from the costs of everything else. And it's more than time that we stop complaining to each other and send our elected officials lots and lots of complaints. I am not belittling the abortion issue, but it's time to move it off the table as a major issue in our upcoming elections and let the candidates know that energy costs are making the price of living in the US too high. Will it help? Well, it can't hurt, and there sure is no better idea being fielded. At least it's a place to start.
Me? I just fired off a whole bunch of emails to the elected officials from my area, city, state and federal representatives. At least I can say I did something more than just look at my bills and cry about them.
32 comments:
Last year the cost of getting something delivered to my house from Sears was $35. This week it was $65. The distance from the store to my house is 1.3 miles. Okay, so gas went up but are they really trying to get me to believe that their trucks get one mile to ten gallons? When they told me the delivery price went up I told the sales person to cancel the order. Since it was kind of a pricey item she went and got the manager. I told the manager that I wasn't going to pay the raise in delivery. After a few minutes of talk she dropped the delivery charge back to the old $35 price. It pays to complain and not just accept that the added charges have to be there.
About our elected officials, sure I'd send them mail, but are you sure they can read? Given some of their actions I'm not convinced that they can.
so why does tuition go up so quickly again?
Lion of Zion I cut my tuition bill by almost eleven thousand this year. We're not sending our three year old to nursery. I work part time and I got together with three other mothers who also work part time. We brought back the old idea of a play group and we watch each others kids. Almost two weeks since we started and it's working out great. We split the cost of any supplies we all might need. We bought all kinds of educational material for the computer and for reading and playing with. We also have one period of time for a few hours on one day that we couldn't cover. We hired a college student in elementary ed to come in for those few hours. She gets twenty dollars an hour but that is split among the four of us at five dollars an hour for each of us. So my cost is fifteen dollars a week for this student who watches, teaches and plays with the kids. If this continues to work well we are already talking about not sending the boys to kindergarden either.
RENA:
just to clarify, my question was a rhetorical one. the last post asked why tuition has risen so quickly and this post is about the rise in energy prices. people fail to take these things into account when noting the high tuition.
as far as your arrangement. it's great that you and your friends have a flexible schedule that allows you do this and that you are willing to think outside of the box (by contemporary standards) in this manner.
Any sensible energy policy is going to have to not only look at our present sources of energy but also look towards developing new sources. You talked about reining in the fuel companies here but failed to mention developing a different policy towards the suppliers in the Middle East and South America. Foreign policy and fuel policy are closely related here. We are all going to be hurting because of higher prices for everything we use until and unless we get some elected officials in Congress who will stop doing business as usual.
Rena - it's great what you did, but I know families who chose to send their children to pre school anyway, despite costs, otherwise getting them into the first grade would be impossible.
Rena-Congradulations. I will be posting up your comment as part of a future post. I love out of the box thinking. Plus, it gives other the permission to think out of the box, which is permission that is desperately needed.
Sending letters is great, but I'm surprised that you're not encouraging people to think outside of the box and revisit their "must haves" in addition to writing their congress-critters. We need to attack this problem from every possible angle.
If my preferred brand of pen cost $14/box, I'd start wondering just how much I really prefer that brand (and maybe give a cheaper one a try). Maybe I'd look into using less printer paper (or reprinting on the unused side if that's an option). Maybe I'd start writing directions down on the back of an envelope instead of printing out that Google Map. Maybe I'd look into buying overstock and seconds quality pantyhose-- or switching to thick stockings that can be mended if they catch/snag on something and develop a hole.
Yes, staples have gone up-- but there's a lot of room to trim back in most American budgets. I don't *want* to wear thick sweaters as opposed to using less heat this winter, but that's a want, not a need (unless you're already risking frozen pipes). There are lots of books out there to help people think out of the box like "The Complete Tightwad Gazette." "Living Well on Practically Nothing" (or reading about the freegan movement) are other options that are too extreme for most people, but really made me rethink what was a need vs. a want.
Ahuva,
I did mention that some cutting back and cutting down would need to be done, but there is a limit to how much and when you can do that. Wants and needs are idiosyncratic and can depend on a person's individual circumstances. Unlike many people, our thermostat set back is for 60 degrees nighttime in the winter and only 64 degrees during the day--not going below that. We already wear sweaters in the house--I'm not looking to have to wear a parka instead. Our airconditioning is set at 75-77 in the summer--not going higher then that. I didn't say I bought the pens at the $14 price--still trying to find them cheaper, but I do hours of marking and I need a pen that won't cause cramping, that is comfortable to hold, that has a fine point--I have a small handwriting, and one where the ink supply and the nib last for the same amount of time. Cheap pens have the nib go bad well before all the ink is used up--no bargain there.
I teach, supervise, tutor and do freelance writing and editing--printer paper is a business requirement and I use what I need to use. I'm already buying discounted hose, and the price went up. And no, I'm not buying thick stockings to mend--I'm a professional on public view and walking around in patched socks is hardly a professional look. My favorite 99 cent store now has a sign on the door that due to rising prices some items are no longer 99 cents but are more.
Sure, there are areas where I could tighten up spending, and where I have already done so. And others have areas where they could cut down. But for many people they have already cut out everything possible to cut and still are having trouble making it. Relief is going to have to come from the outside to help these people.
Rena--good for you and keep it up! I had the same type of arrangement when my little ones were preschool age. Because our work schedules did not mesh as well as yours seem to do we hired our assistants for more hours, but with 5-6 in the group our costs for the entire school year were only about $1500 to 2000 per family, including supplies, snack and lunch. One member of our group paid that amount for just one month before she joined us when she needed child care.
mlevin--all of our kids are in the full grades now and no one in the group had any trouble getting their kid into yeshiva. A couple of the principals weren't sure if our kids would be up to the rest of the class so they gave the kids tests to see how they would do. Our boys all went into the "A" class and the girls in our group were so far ahead that a couple were jumped a class.
Few people have cut back as much as they possibly can. I have my AC set to 77 in the summer and set the heat to 60-65 in the winter. I don't want to cut back more, but I *could* if I had to. People lived without air conditioning and effective heating systems at all for a very long time.
I am also a professional on public view-- and most mends don't show if you wear longer skirts. Eventually, stockings develop tears that can't be mended neatly and become new cleaning rags or are made into "sponges" for use on the dishes.
Yes, there are people who really can't make it no matter how much they try (thanks mostly to tuition), but how many have really cut out *everything* possible and how many of them don't realize that they could, say, make their own cleaning supplies, use alternatives to disposable sanitary products, etc. And how many people simply choose not to cut out things that are really extras (like meat during the week or drinks other than tap water)?
One of the things that I came to realize by reading those crazy "live on nothing" books was that I am making choices. Most of the things I purchase are wants, not needs. I don't need meat; I want it. I don't need air conditioning; I want it.
I started feeling a lot better about my finances once I started realizing how many things I was giving myself because I *wanted* them, not because I couldn't live without them.
It would be wonderful if the US could fix their energy policy, but I'm not holding my breath. :)
Ahuva,
As I said in a previous comment, wants and needs are idiosyncratic. Other than a requirement for shelter, clothing and food, how we define what our needs are for these things depends on a whole slew of individual requirements. Those books written about living a pared down life style don't take this into consideration. Your needs and your wants are not necessarily going to be my wants and needs or someone else's either.
I'm allergic to mold and mildew as carried in humid air--air conditioning is not optional for me. My friend is asthmatic--a whole house filtration system is not optional for her. A niece is highly iron deficient, and red meat is not optional for her.
Not going to get into a whole classroom lecture on the logical fallacy involved, but saying that because we did not have something in the past means we do not have to have it now, that it is a want instead of a need, is not logically supported. Using your reckoning, we did not have antibiotics in the past so they are only wants today. We did not have refrigerators in the past, so they are only wants today. We did not have anesthetics to be used during surgical procedures, so they are only wants today. Following your logic, home washers and dryers are indulgences that we can do without; let's go back to washboards in a stream. That our ancestors did not have home heating systems and air conditioning does not mean that these "newer" inventions have not become necessities in today's time.
I'm happy that what you have chosen to do is making you happy, but because it does so for you doesn't mean that it would necessarily work in the same way for others.
And Gentlemen, you can close your eyes now. Re the homemade, non-disposable sanitary items, the only way to clean such items is going to require loads of heavy duty detergent, bleach, hot water and lots of washer and dryer use. And this is a savings how? Frankly, I think the Kimberley Clark company should be awarded a medal for freeing women from possible septic contamination and from a chore that is truly a thankless one. I can't think of one woman I know who would not categorize these items as needs instead of wants.
Certainly an interesting comment thread going on here. We regularly had playgroups when my kids were small. I'm glad they are making a comeback now.
About the wants and needs, I'd say I agree with the Prof that a lot of them have to do with an individual and how they see it. I'd also agree that just because something wasn't around in the olden days doesn't make it a luxury now. Maybe we could still call cellphones a want, but not the idea that we need to have a phone of some type. That is a necessity. Heating? a necessity. Air conditioning? Maybe not in cold summer climates but in hot summer climates then yes. Reusing old darned stockings to wash my dishes with? No way, cuz I know where those stockings have been. As to the sanitary products, I just asked my aunt who is visiting with us, who grew up in Europe without the disposables, and she was horrified that anybody could be recommending "going backwards" this way.
Anon, there was a study done once where a guy tested kitchen sponges for germs (in families that ate meat) and compared it to tests he had done on toilet bowls. You probably don't want to know which one had fewer average germs. Unless that sponge is thrown out at the end of each day, the average person might be better off with a freshly laundered cloth... But that's ranging off topic.
Actually, I think it depends more on how you define "need." We are blessed with the richest poor people in the world. ProfK is absolutely right that one needs to make allowances for medical conditions (such as asthma and iron deficiency). I am also *not* saying that a "want" is something that we should do without; a "want" is not something that's bad or should be discarded. A refrigerator IS a want, as is a washer and dryer. There are millions of people who live without one. That doesn't mean that I want to live without one, and I don't. It simply means that life will not end if I don't have one. The same goes for antibiotics and medicines. I would never choose to live without them, but people who can't afford them frequently do.
As for items that require detergent, bleach, and hot water-- don't you wash your sheets with these things? Did you toss your sheets in the garbage every time your child had an "accident" or discard undergarments that pick up a stain? Throwing a few extra underthings in with a wash you're already doing doesn't really add to the cost.
I'm not trying to tell you or anyone else what choices they should make, only that we do have choices. I always found it more pleasant to look at all the "wants" that I've factored into my budget, rather than viewing a budget as something that's been stripped down to as close to the bone as I can stand.
Maybe "which means more to me-- using the heating system or paying school tuition" isn't a decision we want to make, but it is a decision we are making when we set that thermostat. We are saying that we value being comfortable more. Maybe that's the right decision, but it is still *a* decision. We are not living on the streets and eating out of dumpsters; G-d has blessed us with choices.
Easy ways to sanitize your sponges--throwing them out not necessary. If you have a dishwasher, put them on the top rack when you run a load--no more germs. Wring out your sponge but leave it wet. Put it in the microwave oven for 30-60 seconds--zapped bacteria. Soak sponges every night in a water and bleach solution in a small container just to cover--sanitized.
Ahuva, you are saying that we have been blessed with choices, which is true, but that doesn't mean that all of our choices are wants. Some of them are needs. The people you mention who don't have refrigerators or who cannot afford medicine don't have a choice. But they aren't missing something they want. They are missing something they need. People in poverty aren't missing luxuries, they are missing essentials. People in underdeveloped countries are living but don't have access to the necessities like innoculations for their kids, medicine, food, safe storage for that food etc. They die of diseases that people who have all the necessities don't die from any longer. They don't live as long altogether. How high or low you set your thermostat is a question of choice, of want, but having that thermostat and that heating system here in the US is a question of need. Once you have a necessity the degree to which you have it or use it might be your choice, but first you have to have it.
Re the sanitary issue, I suspect that ProfK is right that most women would say no way to the washables.
I've got to chime in here. It is great to promote frugality. I've dedicated a good part of my blog to it. But, we have to remember that most of us in the frum community have put a tremendous amount into education and careers.
When tuition starts to take so much out of people that they can't enjoy a bit of heat and some air conditioning, don't be surprised when our kids decide why bother pursuing all this education and working long hours if I can't even enjoy a bit of luxury.
I'm all for frugality and practice what I preach, but I'm not about to make my own sanitary products so I can squeeze out an extra $10 to pay a tuition bill that is already overinflated.
PROFK:
"It's more than time to rein in the ultra profits in the oil industry."
why?
"I can't wait to see what a lulav and esrog costs this year."
here i agree with you. anyone who pays more than $40 for ארבע מינים is throwing $ out the window.
MLEVIN:
"otherwise getting them into the first grade would be impossible."
this is certainly a consideration with certain schools
i just want to add to (repeat?) what SEPHARDI LADY wrote. many parents work extremely hard to bring home good salaries. it is very difficult (psychologically) to then live a working-class lifestyle when you are making enough $ for what would normally permit an upper-middle class lifestyle.
this doesn't justify being being financially irresponsible, but it is the way people think. (i know this disparity between income and lifestyle is unsettling to me.)
Lion,
Why rein in the ultra profits on oil? I'm certainly not against a business making a profit. But the US has a long history of stepping in and "regulating" if not taking over altogether certain industries that manufacture certain necessary products during "crisis" times. During WWII any number of items were in short supply here because they were being diverted to war use or were considered non-essential for consumer use because they used supplies that were needed in other types of manufacturing for the war.
Now we have a different situation but equally as pressing. One item--oil--has become key in the manufacture and disbursement of virtually every other item used in the country. Until we have other sources, oil has become a necessity here. The oil industry has taken full advantage of this and has raised its prices well beyond just making a profit or even making an excellent profit--they are indulging in blatant and overthetop price gouging to line their own pockets goldenly.
Our government--federal, state and city-- has done something all right--they have raised and raised the taxes on a gallon of gas, for instance. But that is not raising the taxes on the oil industry--that is taxing us directly. So we pay twice and more--we pay for our own gas and for that used by manufacturers and processors.
I don't think you can argue that we are in a recession right now, named or not. Prices on consumer goods are rising to such a degree that "normal" people are being priced out of things like milk, eggs, bread etc. To solve this problem you are going to have to go to the source--the oil industries--and halt their gouging.
Prof, I know that on a basic level only the government is going to be able to solve our energy dependence problems but I'm leery of letting them do so because they were the ones who caused the problem to begin with by being so short sighted. One can only hope.
To solve this problem you are going to have to go to the source--the oil industries--and halt their gouging.
I am very surprised that an educated and highly intelligent person such as you has been taken in by such hype!
The "oil industries", at least the ones we even have a chance at controlling, are earning margins that are very much in-line with historical margins. The core of the issue of higher energy prices are due to the fact that large parts of the world are rapidly industrializing and increasing the demand for energy. At the same time, many energy companies are at or near to capacity. That drives prices up. Add to all that the fact that much of the fossil fuels the western world needs is located outside of the western world, and you have even more upward pressure on prices.
Even if it were possible, how do you suggest halting price "gouging" by OPEC, Russia, and Canada? We have no jurisdiction in those places! Should we invade them to force them to lower their oil prices?
Mark
Libby, thanks for the food for thought (and the tips on sponges).
Lion of Zion wrote:
"many parents work extremely hard to bring home good salaries. it is very difficult (psychologically) to then live a working-class lifestyle when you are making enough $ for what would normally permit an upper-middle class lifestyle."
This is of course true. Out of curiosity, why isn't anyone mentioning homeschooling? Wasn't there an article about it recently (I think in Mispocha).
Also, for the record, I don't make my own sanitary products. I bought a cloth version which is more comfortable, appeals to the environmentalist in me, and works out to cost about $2/month. They even come in silly colors and patterns designed to appeal to young girls. Everyone I know who's tried them loves them, but then I don't think anyone tries them who can't get past the "ick" factor in the first place (or got forced into them through an allergic reaction to the disposables).
Mark,
You are correct as to the cause of the problem of rising prices being on the part of those who "own" the oil and on increased world demand. However, that oil is delivered as crude here to the states and is refined here. The major oil companies here may be "in line" (and I don't know if that is so or not) with their historical margins, but those margins have traditionally been much higher than margins in other industries. And as an industry they are less regulated then other key industries. Their "perks" are higher. In an economic downturn ask yourself what other industries are showing profits that are equal to past profit margins? The stock market sure isn't showing business as usual for the companies it follows, except perhaps for the oil industry. If you can get away with it during good times then fine for them, but these are not good times. We may not be able to do much as yet about OPEC et al but if we are all having to tighten our belts that should include the oil industry as well.
I'm not saying that the US oil industry is the only root of the problem but it sure is a part of it, and it's one that we could take care of "locally" so to speak.
Ahuva,
Home schooling is certainly an option, but it is a limited option. For one thing, it requires that there be a parent at home all day, which is not the case in many families. You could also argue that if a wife is out working so that her family can pay tuition, then she can quit her job and stay home and teach her kids because she won't be paying tuition. Wives who work only to pay tuition are not the majority either. And then there are the qualifications necessary to be able to teach your kids, all on different levels, in a home setting. Yes, there are all kinds of organizations that provide help for home schooling parents, but this does not negate the fact that some parents are simply not prepared, educationally or skill-wise, to teach the range of subjects necessary for their kids to be educated. And if they can somehow make do in the very early grades their lack is magnified when a child gets into intermediate school or above.
So yes, home schooling is an option, but only for a very small percentage of those sending their kids to yeshiva. They may be able to opt out but that still leaves the vast majority without this option.
Home schooling is certainly an option, but it is a limited option. For one thing, it requires that there be a parent at home all day, which is not the case in many families.
There was an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal a few years back about telecommuting homeschooling parents. If I can find the article I will make a post because it was very interesting.
Wives who work only to pay tuition are not the majority either.
I know I am going to take some heat here, but when two salaries are being used to cover the basics it is a sign that a budget is not too healthy. Yes, that is often a reality. But it isn't a healthy reality because it leaves families vulnerable.
Also the subject of a future post of mine.
Or Sephardilady it is a sign that the salaries are not too healthy, not the budget. You do the math. Only the husband working and a salary of $40K or so (and it could be less) and some young children. A frum family with all the typical expenses but budget conscious. Just where in this one salary is there any wiggle room? Where is there room for savings and insurances and basic living expenses, never mind thinking about a bigger apartment or buying a house? Where is the cushion for emergencies? Where does schooling of any kind figure in? Can it be done? Sure, by going into debt. Wives don't work because they and their husbands are bad budgeters.
PROFK:
1) my (primitive) understanding of the oil industry and its alleged profit margin increase is similar to mark's above
2) you bring the WWII comparison, but the two situations are not analogous. there isn't a shortage of oil in the sense that that there was a shortage of materials that were rationed (or otherwise controlled) during WWII. our oil supply is not running out. gas station tanks are not emtpy. there aren't any 1970s-era long lines at the pumps. etc. there WAS a shortage (or in some cases at least a threatened shortage) of war materials (and other products) during WWII.
3) if you want to bring down the price of oil: a) reduce government expenditures so the gas taxes can be eliminated; b) let's stop being hypocritical about the environment and encourage more domestic exploration and drilling
4) "those margins have traditionally been much higher than margins in other industries"
so what?
5) "In an economic downturn ask yourself what other industries are showing profits that are equal to past profit margins?"
again, so what?
6) artificially lowering the price of oil will only further increase our dependence on it and help americans forget that in we need to develop alternative sources of energy
7) finally, i am personally very leary of the govt. managing the economy for the mere sake of price control
Rae-
Budget includes income and expenses. A second income is a great way provide a cushion, put away for retirement, get a downpayment together, or pay tuition.
But a major budgeting red flag is when a single salary can't cover the mortgage. That is a problem. It leaves no wiggle room and can easily send a family into insolvency.
3) if you want to bring down the price of oil: a) reduce government expenditures so the gas taxes can be eliminated; b) let's stop being hypocritical about the environment and encourage more domestic exploration and drilling
Gas taxes are spent almost entirely on road projects. They are the closest thing to a usage fee we have; how is it more reasonable to shift the burden to the general fund.
And sorry, option (b) (political posturing aside) won't do anything in the short term, and realistically won't do anything in the long term.
It would take around 10 years to get new drilling platforms up and operational. That is more than three times the length of an Oil futures contract, so even if it were to start now, it would have no effect for a minimum of 7 years.
But even then, we simply don't have the reserves to make it make a difference. The best case is that the United States could increase our oil supply by 1%. The problem is that that isn't enough to affect oil prices, both because of worldwide increases in consumption, and because other suppliers have a vested interest in keeping prices high. Oil is fungible, and the total worldwide supply is limited.
There is no path to energy independence in the United States that depends on oil. There is no ability for the United States government to effectively lower the price of oil over more than a short period of time. There is no way for drilling to solve our problems.
Anyone who tells you otherwise is either mistaken or lying. The math just doesn't work out.
DAVE:
"Gas taxes are spent almost entirely on road projects."
didn't know this.
"They are the closest thing to a usage fee we have; how is it more reasonable to shift the burden to the general fund."
no more unreasonable than all the other taxes we pay for services we will never use
"It would take around 10 years to get new drilling platforms up"
i understand this. i wasn't thinking of an overnight fix in this regard.
"There is no path to energy independence in the United States that depends on oil"
i agree and i didn't intend to give any impression to the contrary. i was just suggesting ways to lower energy prices (or keep them from rising that much more) until we find a long-term solution
"The best case is that the United States could increase our oil supply by 1%."
i've seen a wide array of estimates (granted in the popular press). but we'll never know without exploration.
even without reducing the price, is it possible that increased drilling could be used to strengthen the strategic reserves for a (real) crisis?
anyway, granted your criticisms of my point, i still don't think that government regulation is a solution (and this was my bigger concern)
even without reducing the price, is it possible that increased drilling could be used to strengthen the strategic reserves for a (real) crisis?
No. The Strategic Reserves are just giant that. Stored amounts of oil. The government buys it. It wouldn't change anything.
anyway, granted your criticisms of my point, i still don't think that government regulation is a solution (and this was my bigger concern)
Be careful in demonizing regulation. Deregulation of the energy markets gave us Enron and their market manipulations.
Moreover, much of the drilling is on Federal land, and land for utilities and powerlines has often been granted by Eminent Domain. Why shouldn't these be regulated?
Historically speaking, too little regulation has been as much of a problem (if not more) as too much. The key, as with most things, is finding the balance.
Frankly, I think the solution is going to require the government to produce a real nationwide powergrid, rather than the cobbled together network we have now. There are new technologies that allow clean and cheap generation of electrical power, but we need to be able to get that power to the customers, and our current grid can't do that.
Post a Comment