tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2096776708897685863.post5837847969502422806..comments2024-02-23T04:39:49.329-05:00Comments on Conversations in Klal: The Lifeboat ConundrumProfKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17954446826821665314noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2096776708897685863.post-23166025583179835212008-02-28T16:10:00.000-05:002008-02-28T16:10:00.000-05:00I agree with anonymous that politics is a huge par...I agree with anonymous that politics is a huge part of how we decide on what gets the funding and what doesn't. But it sure would be nice if when we came down to voting there was a choice that said "none of the above."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2096776708897685863.post-5515745758281885632008-02-28T06:15:00.000-05:002008-02-28T06:15:00.000-05:00This is a very easy question to answer, and it is ...This is a very easy question to answer, and it is the same answer as any question of limited public resources (money) and unlimited public needs.<BR/><BR/>Politics. Politics, both "small" and "large" is what decides where the limited resources are used, and where they aren't used.<BR/><BR/>Sometimes it works out the way you and I think it should, and sometimes it doesn't, but in the end it roughly works out the way the overall community thinks (i.e. "votes", "supports", etc). And that is rarely the optimal solution.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2096776708897685863.post-80332385570504037612008-02-27T12:40:00.000-05:002008-02-27T12:40:00.000-05:00One could write a thesis trying to answer this que...One could write a thesis trying to answer this question. A few ideas:<BR/><BR/>1. Save big buildings that are multi-functional first.<BR/>2. Save only tzedakah organizations that function at the highest level (helping people get on their own two feet). <BR/>3. Change entire structures by eliminating duplication.<BR/>4. Only save organizations that are willing to think outside the box. <BR/>5. If an organization isn't open to advice, isn't transparent, etc. . . no need to save it. Sunk costs.<BR/><BR/>Mike S is correct, we need to create the most functional organizational structures possible.Orthonomicshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07892074485262548496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2096776708897685863.post-52502213762347367692008-02-26T14:53:00.000-05:002008-02-26T14:53:00.000-05:00If I remember the exercise correctly one of the pi...If I remember the exercise correctly one of the pieces of information for each person on the ship was what their main accomplishment was or what they were best known for doing. One was a cancer specialist who had discovered a new cure. One was a woman who who watched out for the elderly people in her neighborhood. Would be really interesting to see what some of our institutions would put down for themselves. Singlehandedly drove a store owner to remove pictures from his store window? Responsible for confusing more jews about what a halacha is then any other group? Protected more perverts then any other group? Endless possibilities here.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2096776708897685863.post-24128296577131425272008-02-26T13:22:00.000-05:002008-02-26T13:22:00.000-05:00The answer to who would get into the lifeboat is p...The answer to who would get into the lifeboat is probably no one. They would all be so busy pointing fingers at each other and bogged down in deciding what the rules should be in making a decision and whose kavod gets them the first seat in the lifeboat that the ship would sink. And as they were in the water drowning you would still hear them yelling it's all the other ones fault.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2096776708897685863.post-21884709092536890222008-02-26T12:04:00.000-05:002008-02-26T12:04:00.000-05:00Mike,Presumably, hopefully, in deciding on which i...Mike,<BR/>Presumably, hopefully, in deciding on which institutions would remain there would be a restructuring of those remaining institutions such that the financial "sinking" would not arise again in the future. I would imagine that one criterion for getting into the "lifeboat" would be how flexible/amenable/capable is the institution in accepting inevitable changes to its structure.<BR/><BR/>I'll grant your premise that we have to "structure institutions to meet communal needs within the communal budget." But we are not talking about a utopian ideal, a new world constructed from a blank slate. We have to face the reality of what we have now and ask which of these institutions could be adapted to a better way of doing things. The concept of "survival of the fittest" has also had as a basic premise adaptation to new circumstances.ProfKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17954446826821665314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2096776708897685863.post-23267710671616249092008-02-26T10:49:00.000-05:002008-02-26T10:49:00.000-05:00One problem with looking at the situation that way...One problem with looking at the situation that way, is it focuses on choosing among existing institutions, rather than how to structure institutions to meet communal needs within the communal budget. A proper solution to a problem needs a proper view of the problem.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2096776708897685863.post-58369012590262994402008-02-26T10:38:00.000-05:002008-02-26T10:38:00.000-05:00Why do I get the feeling that "women and children ...Why do I get the feeling that "women and children first" won't be the order of the day?Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08512231582715592098noreply@blogger.com