What Change?

I've been playing around in my mind with some topics for future postings.  Yes, I've thought of a few things I haven't really written about before that I want to research.  But here's the depressing thing--the major problems that seem to occupy our minds are still alive, well and unchanged.

School tuition?  I've heard of a few schools that raised tuition for this year but not one that lowered tuition to a workable level, or any lower level.

The School Day?  No announcements anywhere that even one school is considering altering its hours to fit in with what working parents need and want or that would be beneficial for family togetherness.

School Lunches:  Still the same dismal offerings that most schools presented last year.

Shidduchim?  Still no national organization or community group that has announced it will be approaching things differently, allowing for more "natural" socialization among singles.

Money and Budgetting:  Not a single national organization or a local one either that has come out and said that expenditures are outrunning money available and it has to stop, the first step being eliminating conspicuous consumption and spending on simchas and lifestyle events. (Yes, I know that Satmar last year announced some changes, but they apply only to those in Satmar.)

Not all the problems we all wish would disappear or at the very least be reduced in intensity, but there they are, unchanged and still among us.  And yes, still  topics of serious and sometimes heated conversation when people get together.  And yes, here I will go again this year, banging my head against the granite wall of indifference that so many of the "major" organizations and "machers" of Klal have erected to keep us exactly where they would like us, never mind the harm that causes.

Oh well, I must be that cockeyed optimist because I believe and hope that if we all keep chipping at it, that wall will come tumbling down.  Even a few visible chips and missing chunks would give us chizuk to keep on trying.  We shall see.

The Irony of It All

The Asifa that was held yesterday is really a study in irony.  It is being reported that 50,000 people attended the asifa, both in person and remotely.  Purveyors from here and from Israel were present to sell their wares--kosher phones and Internet filters.  Those who spoke made it clear that such filters and phones HAD to be used if you are using a cellphone or the Internet and that attendees and listeners had better buy them. 

So what is the irony?  Had the Internet not existed, the Asifa would not have been possible.  Short of certain parades many years ago, the Asifa is being touted as the largest gathering ever of Jews in one place in the NY area.  Did they gather together to address any of the truly pressing issues that Klal faces, issues like yeshiva tuition and the fact that Klal is beggaring itself through its insistence that young men not work but sit and learn forever instead?  Nope, they gathered because a "truly evil" force is in our midst.  They would much rather have banned Internet usage altogether--and there are many rabbonim who do just that--but they used that old axiom "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."

Ironic that those who could not attend in person could do so through their cellphones and through the Internet.  And let's not forget the money made yesterday.  Those purveyors had a captive audience, and they bought and bought and bought.  I'm not sure how much mind expanding was done yesterday, but some people's pockets were stretched wide as the money poured into them.

If the Internet did not exist, what issue of importance would have possibly brought together this many people?  The answer is no issue would have brought them together like this.  It would seem that no other issue could get so many rabbonim and their followers to come together in one place and in seeming unity, rabbonim and followers who otherwise "don't play nicely together" and would rather chew nails than have anything to do with each other.  And yes, that is ironic. 

Wants? Needs?

Given the discussion on wedding expenses and about luxuries and necessities in general, you might find of interest this article from Reason Magazine that I have on occasion assigned to the composition classes in my college. The article is entitled "Needing the Unnecessary: the democratization of luxuries."

http://reason.com/archives/2002/08/01/needing-the-unnecessary/1

Choices, Choices Everywhere....

Once, in the dark times of long ago, "choice" was a luxury, a luxury that not too many people had. Where you lived was pretty much decided for you as an accident of birth. What you ate was proscribed by where you lived; fresh vegetables and fruits were limited to spring and summer with few exceptions. Meat was eaten when you found game to kill, or when a sheep became too old to produce milk any longer. What your profession was going to be was also pretty much decided beforehand; most boys apprenticed with their fathers and entered their fathers' professions. If your father was a cow herder, you were going to be a cow herder. Or perhaps if your father in law was a vintner, you would be a vintner. And life was good, and people were mostly contented.

Fast forward to now. The problem is not that there are no choices available but that there are too many choices available. Making a decision about what to choose can be paralyzing to some people. They worry incessantly that if they choose X then they can't have Y and what if Y would have been the better choice? Or Z? There is discontent when you have this worry. There is a feeling for some that they are "settling" rather than choosing freely. They constantly flit from place to place, from item to item, always looking for that elusive one thing that will bring them complete happiness and contentment.

New York and its surrounding area is very much like the situation described above. For Jews, there are lots of schools to choose from, lots of stores to shop in, lots of shuls to choose from, lots of restaurants to choose from. Whatever you are possibly looking for as relates to Yiddishkeit, you have a huge choice to select from here. And yet, New York is not a contented place, not for its frum citizenry. No sooner does someone make a choice here then they already have growing a seed that says "look further, choose again." They look and see others making different choices and this doesn't always sit well. Either they wonder if their own choice was really the right choice and perhaps that other person made the better choice, or they feel the other person is a fool for having made the choice he/she did.

Sometimes having a choice can be a good thing; other times having too many choices can lead to discontent, to overspending, to kinah. It seems to be really true that sometimes "less is more."

Playing What If

Little Yankele's mom puts dinner down on the table and Yankele is not very happy. He pushes around the plate's contents with his fork. "I don't like this!" he cries. Yankele's mother wants him to eat so she asks him: "So, what would you like?" Yankele yells out, "hot dogs and steak and tuna fish and pancakes and chocolate chip cookies and zucchini and french fries and scrambled eggs and bagels and ice cream and an apple and spaghetti and orange juice!" Yankele's mother reasonably points out to him that he can't have all of that for one meal. But Yankele is not in the mood to be reasonable. "But that's what I want!" Yankele's mom's patience is beginning to fray and so she walks to the refrigerator and opens the door wide. She points inside. "You may have two things from in here, but only two." So Yankele walks over to the fridge and stares inside. "But mommy," he wails, " I want it all!"

Sound familiar? A scene like the one above seems to have played out in every home at least once. And every mom, at some point in her children's upbringing, has found herself explaining a true but often ignored maxim: "Alles in einim is nisht du bei keinem--no one has everything all at the same time."

So why is it that we adults keep having these "Yankele moments"?

Black Friday? I don't think so.

Black is a kind of funny word, having both negative and positive connotations. When the stock market crashed spectacularly, as it has done on more than one occasion, those days were designated "Black Monday." Black was a bad thing, an evil thing. Being in a "black" mood means your friends and family should take cover.

But there is also a positive connotation for black: when businesses are making a profit and have more income than outflow they are said to be "in the black."

Businesses across the country have dubbed today "Black Friday," and have touted it as a good thing. Well, yes, if it works to get consumers in and buying then it's good for the businesses. Just how good is it really for consumers?

I looked at the advertisements for those doorbuster specials that stores are pushing for Black Friday. I looked at both the items and the prices. Just what is all the hoopla about? If an X-Box costs $300 regular price and you can get it for "only" $265 on Black Friday, where is the bargain? You are still going to be paying $265 for a toy. And when Designer X's perfume is available at the "truly unbelievable" price of only $95 an ounce instead of $170? And when Designer Q's shoes are available at "the never before seen" price of $177 a pair instead of $340?

I like to think of today as Blackout Friday. Today I black out any knowledge that there are stores out there. Today I black out any shopping that I know I'm going to have to do for Chanukah or an upcoming wedding. Today I refuse to face the traffic nightmares at shopping malls. Today I'm not going to be pushed and prodded into making purchases of items that are still overpriced regardless of how much the stores may have reduced them. Today I'll stay warm and dry at home and celebrate some real savings--my money has remained in my pocket.

And at 4:00 am I was still warm and toasty under my covers instead of jumping out of bed to make the 4:30 am opening of the stores. I can think of only a very few things I'd like to do at 4:00 in the morning, and shopping isn't one of them.

So Black Friday will come and go, unmourned and unsung by me. I do have a suggestion, though, for those businesses who think people like me are what is hurting our economic recovery. Look at what you are selling, which are wants, not needs, for the most part. Now move those highly inflated prices way down, and not just for a sale. Offer me decent prices year round and you might get to call me a regular customer. Do it only for Black Friday and don't bother calling me at all.

For younger Readers--"The Fisherman and his Wife"

I got an email from a reader who said that the Tolstoy story I recommended was too difficult for her younger kids. Did I have anything like that story but on a younger level?

The classic Grimm's tale "The Fisherman and his Wife" is available online at
http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm019.html
or at
http://www.ongoing-tales.com/SERIALS/oldtime/FAIRYTALES/fisherman1.html

There is an animated, downloadable copy of the story available at
http://www.ipl.org.ar/youth/StoryHour/Fisherman/fishdwnld.html

The progression of wants and needs is similar in idea to that of the Tolstoy story.

As Ye Think, so Shall Ye Do

A friend on Shavuous told me of a new "game" that was going around in her school. The moderator of the game turns to the first "contestant" and says: "You are about to be given one million tax free dollars. What will you do with it?" The moderator then turns on a ticking timer set for 5 seconds and the contestant has to answer. Kind of boring actually until you hear what the results were. The "game" was played in a classroom. The first person started off the answer with "I would buy...." No one else in the room could hear all the answers being given before they were called upon. And in that entire classroom every answer began with "I would buy...."

Interesting to note that everyone was thinking of buying things. No one said "I would give..." or "I would donate...." And surely no one said "I would save it" or "I would repay loans with it."

When we have a chance to get our hands on some money, whether make believe or real, our first thoughts turn to spending it by buying something. It is the gut reaction. And it is probably responsible for so much of the impulse buying that gets done by people who "hear" a dollar jingling in their pocket.

It should be alarming to us that young people in a frum high school consider that the first thing to do with money is to spend it on buying something. It doesn't make for prudent spenders later on within marriage. And it certainly doesn't highlight any charitable impulses.

A lot of discussion here and there on this blog and on others--Orthonomics for one--has focused on the lack of financial skills our young people have. Suggestions have been made on how to teach fiscal responsibility. If this new "game" is indicative of the attitude among adolescents (and the friend indicated that the other classes that played the "game" had the same results) then what needs to be done first is to try and change the attitude. If nothing else, we need to make the answer to that question be "I'll have to think about it."

Those Darned Joneses

I'm probably going to make some readers unhappy (what else is new) but I've been giving some thought to the financial disparity in Klal and how that seems to be affecting people.

There's a simple scale you can use to measure financial prosperity. On one end of the scale you have wealthy; on the other end you have poor. There are any number of points on the scale between these two.

In the real world goods and services cost money; how much money you have should be the determinant of how much you can purchase of those goods and services. Because we have a sliding scale of prosperity, we also need to introduce the idea of choices when it comes to purchasing goods and services. The more money you have the more choices you can make. Basically, you can't walk into a supermarket with $50 and expect to walk out with goods costing $99. You're going to have to look into your shopping wagon and choose which of the items you are going to buy, just so long as you don't exceed $50. I can just see the face on a supermarket manager's face if a customer walked over to him and said: "Give me the stuff I have in my wagon that I can't pay for because all my friends buy these things and I am entitled to buy them also."

In the frum world, as well as in the secular world, people look at all the people around them and all the things they own and the services they have. They look, and then they say: "I'm a person too and if person X has item Y I am entitled to have item Y too." Wrong. You are "entitled" to want item Y; to actually get item Y you are going to have to be able to afford it. The Declaration of Independence stated that among our inalienable rights were "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." Notice that it did not say we were entitled to Happiness; it said that we are entitled to working and pursuing that happiness, whatever that should be for us. And if Happiness has a price tag attached, we have to be able to pay that price.

I don't really care if those with more money then I have own more and fancier "toys" then I do. If they have the money then let them spend it as they want to. If they want a fancier neighborhood and they can afford it, then fine. If they want designer clothing and they can afford it, then fine. If they want Viking ranges instead of GE and they can afford it, then fine. They are entitled to make their decisions just as I am entitled to make my own. But let's be careful when looking at those people.

It's not good for anyone when people play keeping up with the Joneses, play being the operative word. Either you have the money to actually "be" the Joneses or you need to retire from the competition before you get into deep financial trouble. If your happiness depends on having what the Joneses have then you had better be prepared to pursue that happiness by making the money that lets you into the game. If someone makes an elaborate chasoneh and they can afford it down to the last penny, then thank you for inviting me and isn't it nice how well the Joneses are doing that they can indulge themselves this way. But that doesn't and shouldn't obligate those who don't have the Joneses' money to make the same kind of wedding.

I've heard it mentioned on many blogs that wedding costs would go down and weddings would become less elaborate if only a g'vir would first make a simpler wedding so we would all follow them. Nonsense. Wedding costs will go down when people who can't afford what the Joneses can stop trying to pretend that they can. Costs will go down when people spend only what is in their pockets. Costs will go down when we stop applying totally artificial "standards" to things like weddings. There is no "right" way to make a wedding and no "wrong" way either.

Many years ago I had lunch at a friend's house on Shabbos. There were 6 couples at the table. The hostess served what I can only describe as the most awful side salad every to have the misfortune to be served. The ingredients and tastes in that salad were never intended by nature to be married in one dish. Being friendly enough with the hostess I asked her later why she served that particular salad. She sheepishly admitted that she was in a hurry when shopping, bought the wrong dressing and only realized erev Shabbos that she didn't have all the ingredients. She needed to serve something so she improvised. She also admitted to having filed the leftover salad--and there was plenty left over--in the garbage. What is the end of this story? The hostess in question is quite wealthy. She isn't really looking to be a style leader but people tend to look at what she buys and decide that that item is a "must have" for them. That miserable salad became something of a neighborhood "sensation" as people passed the recipe around. No one liked it, it didn't taste good and it got thrown away every where. It cost a lot to prepare and it was real "thrown out money." But if someone with money made that salad then everyone else was entitled to it as well. Jones-ism carried out to the -nth degree.

So yes, if things cost more than we can afford the answer lies with us--don't spend what you don't have. I'll be just a little bit fair here to those who overspend; it's one thing for those on a lower rung financially to be playing the game of Keeping Up With the Joneses; it's quite another thing when the Joneses insist that you play the game. There are among us those who relish the role of "trend setter." They not only enjoy spending their money lavishly but they also enjoy telling others how what they do is the "right" thing to do, the way things "should be" or "have to be" done. Please don't tell me that they don't know that there are other people with less money than they have--they didn't get rich by being that dumb. These people need to soft pedal their public pronouncements. These people really love to play Keeping up with the Joneses, because they are the Joneses and they always win. They are thankfully few, but they are very visible and very vocal.

So, a very simple solution to the financial "crisis" that afflicts many families: stop looking at what everyone else has and buy only what you have money for. If you want more, earn more. Making choices about what to spend on may be hard but that doesn't mean we don't have to do it. Recognize that there always have been and probably always will be Joneses out there with more money than you have no matter what you will do--that is their chalek in life. Getting rid of the Joneses is not the answer. Sameach b'chelko is not just words on paper. There's another saying that applies as well: "Cut your suit to suit your cloth." You can't get a 46 long suit out of a piece of cloth that will only provide for a 34 short.

You Have to See This to Believe It

Okay, we sometimes think that frum Jews have gone way overboard in the way that they entertain. We think we play keeping up with the Joneses too much. And then I saw something for entertaining that stopped me speechless. Click on the link below if you want to see this latest "must have" addition to our world. Gives new meaning to calling something "out of this world."



http://www.dinnerinthesky.com/

Sleep Away Camps--To Be or Not to Be

Years back sleep away camps were viewed as a way to get big city, urban-raised children out of the heat and pollution of the cities and into more beneficial places for the summer. Years back, when a lot more people lived in apartment buildings without any grass or play areas, camps were the answer to a healthy, safe environment. Years back, when disease ran rampant in crowded areas, and children were the most vulnerable, camp was seen as a first line defense. Years back, when air conditioning in private homes was the exception not the rule, camps provided a breath of fresh air. Granted, there were wealthier parents who also liked the idea of sleep away camp. It allowed for all types of sports activities, crafts and supervised living so the parents could have some time off while their kids had a good time.

But what is the reasoning behind those sleep away camps in a time period where many people live in homes with yards? Where apartment complexes routinely build play areas? Where community centers have facilities for swimming and sports? What is the reason and rationale behind sleep away camps when day camps have also proliferated? And what is the rationale for when families go up to a bungalow colony for the summer but send their "older" (read 9 and up) children to a sleep away camp?

And where is the reasoning when camp can cost $3000 to $6000 per camper in these sleep away camps? One "typical" somewhat smaller family of "only" 3-5 children could conceivably be paying from a low of $9000 per summer, without tips to the councilors, up to $30,000 per summer, again without tips. And that is not counting the cost of canteen for the kids or the additional clothing that needs to be purchased because mom is not doing the laundry and more is needed. That is not counting the extra charges for camp excursions. Even subtracting the amount of money spent to feed those children if they were at home, it would come nowhere near what the camps charge.

I tried to figure out if my husband and I had ever spent $3000 each on any vacation we had ever taken. Nope. Not even on our trips to Israel with airfare costing what it does. We certainly have never spent $10,000 on such a vacation. Yet, today parents are asked to spend that much and more for each of their children to have an 8-week vacation.

There is also this: going to sleep away camp has become a "must do" rather than a "want to do" for many families. Schools put pressure on parents to give children the "right" experience and environment for the summer. They want an environment that is closer to school while still putting on a "summer" face. One administrator put it very bluntly: "Children at home run hefker. They lose much of the precious learning we have given them during the school year. Learning should not stop for two months. Parents just can't give their children what a good camp can." I'll spare you my reaction to that statement, but I'm sure you can fill in the blanks.

My children's experiences with sleep away camp have been a real mixed bag. We first sent our oldest when she was past 11 and she hated it sufficiently that she lasted a grand total of two weeks. We registered her in the local shul day camp instead and she had a decidedly better time then she did in the sleep away camp. Our other daughter was much more of a "happy camper" and spent a few summers going. She genuinely liked it, until she was no longer interested. When she said "no more" that was the end of camp. Our son was a case where yeshiva/peer pressure came to bear somewhat. The school suggested that sleep away camp was preferred to day camp for the boys. Suddenly our son's friends were all going to be away in camp for the summer as were our nephews. Our son asked to go to camp so he could be with his friends. We, however, picked the camp, not the school. He was 9-1/2 when he first went. He was 16 when he called it quits, and he got no argument from us. They went to camp only if they wanted to go and they stopped going when they no longer wanted to. We are also not talking about the prices that camps charge today.

Our shule Youth Department runs a very well organized day camp every summer. They also have a teen program as part of it. The teen program takes the campers on trips all over. They have organized sports--and places to play them--and they provide opportunities for swimming. They have arts and crafts. They have learning. What they have is a cost for the teens of under $1000, including the trips, for eight weeks. It's less for the younger campers. The Jewish Community Center here also runs a camping program in the summer. So does one of the yeshivot.

Why are we still assuming that "every" child should be in sleep away camp? And would it be so terrible if they went for only one month instead of two? If ever there was a place to cut down on the budget, sleep away camp is the place. (Note: day camp will work out just as well for working mothers as sleep away camp does.)

Wants, Needs and Prioritizing Both

We use the words "want" and "need" on an almost daily basis. Sometimes we use them correctly and sometimes not. Sometimes we say we "want" something when what we really mean is that we "need" it; other times we say we "need" something when what we really mean is that we "want" it. What is the difference?

A need is something without which we cannot live. Basic needs are food, clothing and shelter. We might also consider money as a need to pay for those items. There are also secondary needs depending on our lifestyles. A frum Jew needs a shul, needs a mikveh, needs yeshivot for his/her children.

Wants are those things that we desire but whose absence will not cause a destruction of life. We need food--we may want pizza or roast beef or sushi. We need clothing--we may want today's styles, designer togs and fancy footwear. We need shelter--we may want a large home in an upscale area.

There is nothing wrong per se with having wants. Some wants contribute to our "happiness factor." Oatmeal may feed us so we are not hungry, but we don't want to eat it three times a day--we want variety. Fine, no argument from me.

But what do we do when wants and needs collide? What do we do when societal factors interfere with our personal desires? What do we do when we cannot provide so that we can have everything we need and everything we want?

It's rare for people to sit down and actually analyze what their needs and wants really are. They work on the assumption that they already know this. And then along comes a financial crunch and they don't know how they are going to make it. This is the time to sit down, take a pencil and paper or a computer and start making lists. Yup, things are going to boil down to money.

First, how much money do you actually have? Put that total at the top of the page. Next, make two columns: one for needs and one for wants. Fill in the needs column first, with the amount per year that the need is costing you. Then do the same for the things you want. Now total up both columns. Now things get a little stickier. Make another page for the year coming up. Prices are going up on all basic services and products. If you spent X amount on gas last year, given the raise in prices of gas, what is gas liable to cost you for the year coming up? How about milk? Bread? Eating out? A movie? A vacation? (Keep in mind that airfares have gone up also.)

Now compare your two sheets. If you are like most people, the cost of your wants and needs is going to be higher for the year coming up but the amount of money available to pay for them is not going to change.

And now to the hard part. What are you willing/able to cut down on in order to meet your needs? Go back to last year's sheet and check that needs column again. Check out what you spent on food and then check on what kind of food you were buying. Is everything in your food bills really a need, or are there some wants that are in there also? I've posted on pizza recently--are you including it with your food bills in the need column? Yes, clothing is a need. Are 6 pairs of new shoes last year really a need or is there a lot of want in those purchases? Is the latest type of music player a want or a need? Is your old one still working fine? Do you really need a new cell phone that does everything but mop the kitchen floor?

You want to have pizza every week? Fine. Now what are you willing to give up in trade so you can have that pizza every week? You want to have your latte coffee every day? Fine. What can come off your list so you can afford that coffee indulgence? You "need" that bigger car? Fine. What are you going to give up in the want column to pay for the higher charges for gas for that car?

There is also the question of time involved here. How much time and personal effort are you willing to put in in order to balance your wants and needs against how much money you have to pay for them? Are you willing/able to spend time perusing the ads to see where you can buy what you want/need for cheaper? Are you willing/able to do with less while still buying some? Are you willing to change brands in order to buy a type of thing?

In short, it's time to ask the hard questions. How much of what we spend our money on is really something that we need? How much are we spending on things that we want? Every person is going to place items differently in those want and need columns. That's fine. For me, personally, books are a higher priority item then clothes are. I don't personally have to change my wardrobe every season. I don't care what color the fashion police have declared is "in" this season. That's my personal preference; it could be different for others. But whatever our personal choices, the bottom line of expenditures cannot be more than the amount of money we have to spend.

Perhaps that old Yiddish saying is applicable here: "Alles in einem is nisht du ba keinem"--everything in one place and time is not present for anyone. Given today's economic climate we really can't have it all. It's time to revise what "all" is going to be.

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Pizza

Correction/Addendum: Thanks to D for the heads up. Mendelsohn Pizza was one of the pizza stores rumored to have raised prices to $4.00 per slice. The Nachum Siegel interview with Mr. Mendelsohn brought out that he has indeed raised prices but to "only" $3.00 per slice. A huge sigh of relief. After all, that means that pizza is "only" $24.00 a pie in Mendelsohn's shop.

That, by the way, is the equivalent of 3-1/2 to 4 large raw chickens, or 4 pounds of high-end chopped meat or 40 pounds of potatoes, not on sale. It is the equivalent of 12 bags of cut lettuce mix or 24 bags of cut cabbage mix, usually on sale somewhere. It is the equivalent of about 12 half-gallons of milk. At 3 for $5.00 (Shoprite), that is 15 large bags of frozen vegetables. At $4.00 for the large box, that is 6 boxes of cereal, not on sale. Even at 50 cents a piece, that is 48 grapefruits.

If pizza is considered a snack, as D says it is for him, then ponder this. That pizza pie is the equivalent of 24-27 bottles of Coke or Pepsi on sale. At $2.99 for an 84 ounce container of pretzels, that pie is equal to 8 x 84 ounces of pretzels. On sale yesterday were Duncan Hines cake mixes at 2 for $5.00--that is 10 cakes for one pizza pie. Kedem tea biscuits were on sale at 3 for 99 cents--that is 72 packages of cookies for one pizza pie.

Frozen kosher pizza in the supermarkets goes from a low of $10.99 to $16.00 for a full-sized pie. Frozen pizza dough under hashgocha was regular priced at $5.19 for a package big enough to make one extra large pie or two small ones. Kosher pizza cheese was regular priced at $4.29. A can of tomato sauce was 50 cents, not on sale. Spices are in your kitchen, but even add in 25 cents for how much you will use. Cost of making your own pizza? About $10.00. Making your own dough will cut the price by about $3.00 to $4.00. Even adding in the cost of gas for your oven for long enough to bake the pizza makes your home baked or completely home made pizza well less than half of the cost of the pizza in the stores. The cost of a pizza baking pan? $8.00 to 10.00, unlimited future usage.

Also consider this--For a regular car, that pizza is 2/3 of a tank of gas; even for an SUV, that is a bit more than 1/3 of a tank of gas.

And let's also consider this: Show me the adult who eats only one slice of pizza for a dinner or lunch meal. Unless we are talking very small children who can't finish more than one slice of pizza, we are talking two slices per person. That means that one pie feeds only 4 adults or adults and older children. (And should you limit everyone to only one slice of pizza, the meal will require a lot of side dishes to make it a filling meal--additional cost.) Now, what if you are feeding 6 people? That is 12 slices, or 1-1/2 pizza pies for $36.00. Now figure the equivalents to the other things you eat. Now add in the other things you need to make this pizza a complete meal (pizza by itself is hardly a nutritional power house).

At even "only" $24.00 a pie in a pizza shop, pizza is hardly a bargain, no matter which way you look at it.

Sameach B'Chelkoh

A comment on the posting "A Word About Real Life" got me to thinking. What is it about the two words "real life" that seem to set people's teeth on edge? In that posting I made the point that the holidays are a part of real life, not separate from it. Perhaps we should also look at how "Just you wait" correlates to "real life."

Children are always being told that everything they learn now is first going to be of benefit to them when they get to "real life," as if they are not now alive and living. We tell them "Just you wait." Singles seem to be told by their young married friends and by their "elders" that they are not yet living a "real life." Balderdash!

Just you wait for what? From first breath to last, we are all alive, and therefore we are all living a "real life." Are our lives identical at every point? No. We go through stages. But each stage is "real life." And one stage is really not more privileged than another. For those who are in a different stage to mock--gently or otherwise--those who are not yet at that stage is a patent absurdity.

The pasuk asks: Aizeh oshir? The answer is "sameach b'chelkoh." Who is rich? The person who is happy with their portion. We can, of course, interpret the posuk literally, and assume that it is talking about money and possessions. But there is another equally as valid application of the posuk. We can talk about our portion of life, that part that we are living now, that level we are at. Who is the rich person? The one who lives life to the fullest, who appreciates all the aspects of the level of life they are at. The one who explores all the ins and outs of the level, who takes advantage of all the opportunities of that level, who doesn't waste time in talking about the "what ifs" of the future, but who acts on the opportunities present now. The "oshir" is rich in the possession of experiences. The "oshir" understands that another level of life will come along later, but he doesn't waste the time he "owns" now.

While it is true that we change levels in life over our lifetimes, we take the "possessions" we have collected along with us. What we have learned in one level is useful to us as we move through other levels. No knowledge is every truly wasted, for it enriched us at the point when we acquired that knowledge, and it is there for us to use if we need it later on. To pass through a level of life and to do nothing during it, that is not to be "oshir." To find no beauty, no purpose to a level we are living in is to be an "evyon." To look only at what others have but not see what could be ours now, that is to be an "evyon." And yes, to look at what we have now and then at what others who have not yet experienced our level and station in life have, and to pass judgement that their level is less valid, less good, less worthwhile, that too is to become an "evyon," for we lack the riches of understanding what life really is.

We are all dreamers at one time or another. We think ahead to what might be in the future. But to live as if today doesn't count is foolishness. If today were to be the last day of life alloted to us, whatever stage or level we are on, what would our "cheshbon" consist of? Would we be able to say that we took advantage of every minute and did all that presented itself? Or would we say that we did very little while we were waiting for "real life" to begin?

I Saw It and I Still Don't Believe It

I have complained that there is just too much available for Pesach. Some people have agreed and some have disagreed. Fine by me. But yesterday in Brooklyn I saw the ultimate item available for Pesach, with multiple hechsherim of course.

Go ahead, think of the strangest thing you can that could be made kosher for Pesach. Way stranger then toilet paper with a hechsher. Give up?

Ready prepared, available now, in a jar--------salt water. Yup, salt water!

I do not care how busy you are in the days leading up to Pesach, how exhausted, how stressed for time. I do not care what chumras you hold and how careful you are in what you make and buy for Pesach. There is no one whose life is so complicated that they cannot make saltwater for Pesach. The cost of this "convenience" item? More than double the cost of a large container of salt.

Yup, "az muh lebt, derlebtmin."

A Little Word About Deprivation

Way back in the dark ages shopping for Pesach was a lot simpler then it is now. Pesach was basically about matzahs, eggs, potatoes, fish, meat, fruits and vegetables and the few items needed to turn these into food to be eaten. Okay, it was not quite that spartan but close enough. And what do we have today? Everything and anything that our heart's desire. And we seem to desire a lot.

99 varieties of cheese, just in case Yankel should feel deprived for the one week that Pesach lasts. And Pesach O's cereal just in case little Frumi should go into a deep funk at being deprived of Cheerios. Then there is the cappuccino in 14 flavors, the BBQ sauces in 12 varieties and the cake mixes and frostings in every flavor ever imagined and some that should have stayed in their creator's mind. And my favorite: the non-gebrokts packaged passover pasta products, with a taste and consistency somewhere between rancid wallpaper paste and baked Elmer's glue.

A neighbor bakes matza meal-based rolls because otherwise what would you make a sandwich with. Recipe books galore are printed with thousands of recipes to spice up Pesach with, all requiring that their sometimes exotic ingredients be readily available.

Have we gone nuts? Are we seriously going to go into a decline if we don't have a mochachino coffee for a week? Are we so enamored of pickled palm hearts that a week without will cause grave medical problems? Are 177 varieties of candy really what you think of first when you think of Pesach? Anyone here who truly thinks that they cannot live without the shape of Cheerios in front of them for a week?

Why are all these items made kosher for Pesach? One obvious answer is the "If you build it they will come" form of consumerism. If the companies make it kosher for Pesach we will flock like sheep to buy what they are selling. Another answer is competitiveness. You know the type--"I made the most divine shitake mushroom saute served over baby greens in a light balsamic dressing. What did you make for dinner last night?"

The third answer is the one that concerns me. The third answer is "Why should I deprive myself of anything that I want when I want it?" Our world is very much into instant gratification, and waiting for anything no longer seems to be in our makeup. We talk as if a week is a lifetime. We demand that our chometzdike kitchens be duplicated with all the ingredients for Pesach.

You know, making Pesach and shopping for Pesach would be a lot easier if there was less to shop for. The fact that there is more can be laid at our own doorsteps.

The Great Pesach Hotel Debate

Wolfish Musings had a posting on Is Going to a Hotel for Pesach Bad. I'd like to expand on my comment on that posting.

Where you are for Pesach is strictly your own business. The rest of us have no right to point fingers and make comments. Every husband and wife has the right to make decisions for themselves without the rest of us shaking our heads. Pesach is family business, not community business.

Having said that, let me also say this. There are some good reasons that people give for going to a hotel or family for Pesach. There are also some good reasons for staying home.

Going to a Hotel:

1. My home is not big enough to have all my married children come for Pesach at the same time along with my parents. In a hotel we can all be together for yom tov. Siblings can have time together and their children can forge close relationships. Everyone gets to spend time with their grandparents.

2. Both my husband and I work 40 hour jobs plus commuting and we simply cannot do all the preparations necessary to have Pesach at home. Going to a hotel is our only alternative to not having Pesach at all or certainly not having it correctly.

3. My husband and I get limited vacation days from our jobs. We have to take many of those days for yomim tovim. There are few if any days left for us to really have a vacation and go somewhere with our family. Going to a hotel for Pesach is really our only vacation a whole year. We still celebrate yom tov this way but also get vacation time with our children.

4. Making Pesach at home is not an inexpensive undertaking either. We pay a little bit more and actually get to enjoy yom tov instead of constantly having to prepare and cook and clean.

5. On Pesach we say "avodim ho'yinu." Trying to make Pesach while busy with other things makes us avodim again. Going to a hotel makes us "free men."

6. I'm just plain getting too old to put in the work to make Pesach in my own home.

Staying at Home:

1. Making Pesach at home is cheaper then the cheapest place available in a hotel. Even if we hired cleaning help every day for four weeks and add in the food items purchased we still would spend more if we went to a hotel.


2. If cooking everything from scratch is a problem because of time constraints there are take home food stores just about everywhere. Some things can be purchased ready made to save some time.

3. The convenience of sleeping in our own beds and eating at our own convenience can't be understated. In a hotel you work on the caterer's clock, not your own.

4. In our own home we can keep the focus strictly on yom tov. There are no competing activities like beaches and shows and spas.

5. I'm just plain too old to start developing a whole set of new minhagim regarding Pesach.

Now I'd like to put in my own two cents worth. I work hard to make Pesach, a severe understatement. I also work outside of my home. Despite that, neither my husband nor I have ever once considered Pesach at a hotel. It's not a question of money. I won't give up all the things that are part of my yom tov.

I want to bentch lecht in my own lachter. I want the k'orah on the table that is ours. It was a 25th wedding anniversary gift to my husband and I want the pleasure of seeing him use it in the home we have built together. I want the bechers that are ours, each with their own story. I want our hagaddahs, the ones with the "hinenis" in them. I want the children's Pesach machberot that have been put away for so many years and lovingly get taken out and reminisced over. I want the afikomen holder made by one of the children years ago and still in use. I want the pillow covers my mother embroidered to be used at the sedorim.

I want the smell of Pesach to be what I remember from my childhood and that my children remember from theirs. I want to smile when people come in the door erev Pesach yelling "something smells fantastic!" I want the foods that spell yom tov to me. And yes, I want, selfishly, to hear my husband say, as he does every year, that no one but no one makes lokshen like I do. I want the feeling of connectedness that comes over me when I unpack the pots from the attic and the first one out of the box is that strange white and red enamel pot that my mother brought with her from Europe. I like the fact that my daughters argue over who will eventually get that pot when I can no longer make Pesach. I want the niggunim at my seder that have come down through the generations of my husband's and my family. I want yom tov to be ours, not something shared with hundreds of strangers.

I want the stories that are triggered by what is seen on my table. I want the remembrances of family members no longer living but whose presence is felt through the legacies they left us, the memories we share. I want the "Do you remembers" to come fast and thick. I want our seder to last as long as we need it to last, not hurried forward by a waiter tapping a foot impatiently. I want to weave yet another thread into the tapestry of life in our home that is the most important yerushah of all that I can leave my children.

This is just some of why we don't go away to a hotel for Pesach. In the best sense we are flaming sentimentalists and for us Pesach spells home. I won't tell you you are wrong to go to a hotel for Pesach. But for me and mine being at home is the only way that seems right.

When is Enough Enough?

Readers of this blog can be in no doubt that I do not consider shopping a hobby. Shopping is something that has to be done on occasion, so I approach it like a stealth bomber--you get in and you get out as quickly as possible. (I'm not including regular grocery shopping in this.)

Last week I finally got the time to look for a particular piece of furniture that we needed. I had in mind what I wanted, the price range I would consider, and the color and type. I grabbed my daughter and off we went. Total time, including traveling and parking, was one hour and 19 minutes, covering three stores, in a two block area. They're delivering the piece tomorrow.

A lot of my friends and my sister simply do not understand shopping like that. "What if you would have found something you would have liked better if you would have gone to more stores?" is what they all ask me. They miss the point: I like this one. I don't need to have my choice validated by looking at every piece of furniture in the tri-state area.

Comparison shopping can be an excellent idea, particularly if you don't have any idea of what is out there to buy in the item you are looking for, or how much the price of the item might be. But when does it cease to be comparison shopping and start to edge up on obsession? How many stores are enough stores to look in? Why should buying tomatoes or underwear take almost as much time as buying a house or a car?

Let's take a pair of black shoes to wear to work. You need them to be comfortable and sturdy and professional looking, whatever that is today. You have an idea of what you are willing to pay, or what is in the budget for those shoes. And if you are honest, you will admit that you are going to wear those shoes to death. This is not a purchase that is going to or has to last for a lifetime. There are thirteen shoe stores in your general vicinity. What are the chances that you won't find those black shoes in one of those stores? What are the chances that you won't find those black shoes somewhere in the first few stores you visit?

People who shop as I do are for sure going to find those shoes somewhere in the first few stores. One reason that happens is that I don't go to the stores that I know sell their products at a zillion times what I'm willing to pay, on the off chance that they are having the sale of the century and their prices will suddenly come into my range. Another is that I refuse to spend precious hours and hours on something so unimportant as one pair of shoes.

Some of my friends? They will not only hit all thirteen stores around here, but will look in New Jersey and Brooklyn and Manhattan. At the end of all their shopping they will still not have a pair of shoes but will vaguely remember the stores that had something that appealed to them and was in their price range, and they start the rigamarole all over with those stores. Eventually they will buy a pair of shoes.

Finding a place to shop in a vast metropolitan area like ours is absolutely no problem--and that is the problem. Shopping smart is not only about knowing what you can spend and knowing what the prince range for a particular object is. It's also about spending time wisely. It's about deciding how much importance an item has in the broad scheme of things, and devoting time based on that importance. It's about learning to make a decision.

Shopping begins before you ever leave your house. It should be a thinking process before it becomes a physical process. Sometimes there is research to be done. Nothing like sitting in a warm cuddly robe and fuzzy slippers with a cup of coffee in one hand and a computer mouse in the other and letting my fingers do the walking.

You think I'm over exaggerating? Let's give you four hours on a Sunday. If you're like a lot of people I know those four hours are going to turn into six and you may not actually come home with anything. Now what if planning ahead turned that four hours into 90 minutes? What could you do for yourself, for your family, with the 2-1/2 hours you saved? I know what I'm going to do. Went shopping for a gift today and found it in about half an hour. I quickly dropped by a local book store and got myself the latest book by an author I enjoy reading. And I've got the time to read that book because I didn't " spend" all my available time obsessing over finding the perfect sweatshirt for my hubby to wear out in the yard working.

It's Penny Ante But...

I once told a friend who teaches elementary school about what my husband did when our children were very young. He established home "checking accounts" for each child. We gave them an allowance that was to cover certain expenditures that they had. He taught them how to write checks. When they wanted money from their allowance funds they had to write a check to get it--and balance the checkbook afterwards. He taught them to check their balances before making a "purchase." And our kids also learned that they couldn't buy what they didn't have the money for. They learned about delayed gratification and how to save up for the "big ticket" items.

This same elementary school teacher decided to borrow our system to teach her students about the value of money and how to manage it. She set up a system whereby each student in her class would receive one nickel in "salary" each week. How or if they spent it would be up to them.

She created a catalog of items that appeal to younger children and this was her students' shopping catalog. Included were things like bubble gum and jelly beans and candy bars and apples, as well as "cool" pencils and markers and small toys. Mid range items were things like books. In the luxury part of the catalog she included some small electronic games that cost in the $5 to $10 dollar range.

When students at first complained that a nickel wasn't very much to earn that opened the way to a discussion about minimum wage jobs and what you could earn if all you had was a high school degree. The teacher then added in a way that the students could get a "raise" in salary. Completing certain projects could get them a raise. Passing the term tests in the required subjects could get them a raise, the raise depending on the mark earned on the test. Working "overtime" by doing extra book reports and such could get them more money in the week they worked it. In short, getting an education and working hard could earn them more money.

She told me that some students seemed not to be able to get out of the here and now mode of spending. Every week they spent their allowance completely. They bought a small piece of candy or a crayon. Some were satisfied with these small purchases and never complained. Others complained that all they ever seemed to be able to buy was a little thing when they really wanted something more expensive from the shopping catalog. Some children, when they got a raise in salary, spent it all each week by buying a more expensive piece of candy. A few listened to the teacher's advice and put the raise in salary into their "savings accounts."

Midway through the year there was a real dichotomy in the students' accounts. A lot of students were living paycheck to paycheck. They had nothing in savings. A few had a little bit in their savings accounts. And even fewer had a lot in their savings accounts.

The teacher felt her students were too young to fully understand the idea of credit and borrowing so she made a rule that you could not spend what you didn't have; no going into debt.

Interestingly, a few of her students figured out the value of joint purchases. If a nickel got you a piece of gum but fifteen cents got you a candy bar, some students would get together in groups of threes and buy a candy bar. Their reasoning was that even 1/3 of a candy bar each was better than just one piece of gum. Two students who were in the "saver" group still had not gotten enough saved to buy one of the electronic toys, but together they had enough, so they bought the toy and shared it. (Think of it this way--why should two next door neighbors both spend $500 each on a snow blower which is used seldomly when they could pool their money and each pay only $250?)

The teacher had one student who refused to spend anything. He worked hard for the raises and saw his salary go up but he spent nothing. He told the other children that his mother had told him it was important to "save for a rainy day." In December their area got a real gully washer of a storm and it poured for three straight days. All the other children told him that the time had come to spend--it was clearly a rainy day.

At the end of the school year the children had learned a lot about spending and saving and how to budget so you can have a little something now and a lot of something later. A few kids ended the year with nothing in their accounts. A few had a bit of savings. A few had a lot of savings. A very few never got beyond their original salary. Most had gotten a few raises. A very few were real go-getters and had raised their salaries tremendously.

One student with a lot of money saved wanted to lend some of it to a fellow student who very much wanted to make a big ticket purchase and didn't have the money. The teacher refused to allow the loan. She explained as best as she could to such young kids that the cost of borrowing money made the price of the item way more than they thought. Was it really worth it to go into debt for a toy? The two kids decided that it wasn't.

If you are a parent or planning on being one, you might want to think about using this system with your children. Our kids never found having to write a check as a problem and they learned a lot in the process. The teacher's students learned some really valuable lessons about savings and work. The time to begin is when kids are young. It's a lot harder to rein in a twenty-year-old with bad financial habits.

Keeping Up With the Joneses

Part of the problem in all the budget postings is our tendency to want to "Keep up with the Schwartzes." In the outside world that is keeping up with the Joneses. For a light hearted look at what that entails browse below. Pictures not duplicated on this blog because of copywright considerations.

http://www.cartoonstock.com/directory/k/keeping_up_with_the_joneses.asp

Particularly apt is the cartoon which says: "'Keeping up with the Joneses would be insane. The Joneses filed for bankruptcy last week!'