Prioritizing Tuition (Split from School Closing)

↑ amother ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:14 pm

I was not quoting you Chava. Someone else used this phrase. But I am a member of the STL community that is asked time and again to support the ones who can not pay. And I will forever be frustrated by this issue of family size in the frum community. It's one thing to lose your job or have issues that mean you can no longer pay for food, tuition, etc for the x amt of kids you already have. But I 100% hold by my opinion that it is an unfair burden to others in one's community to increase your family size when already in such a position and just ask for more assistance.
The $11K it costs to educate a child annually is a huge amount. If you can not afford that, it is another $11K fundraised from people like us, or another $11K in debt for the school. Why is this not a factor in family planning?

↑ Atali ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:17 pm

amother wrote:

Many people hold that it isn't halachicly permissible to limit family size for financial reasons. It is unfair to expect families not to keep halacha according to what their rav paskens in order to pay full tuition. For many people it is as non-optional as keeping shabbos or kashrus.

↑ chavamom ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:19 pm

amother wrote:

Gee, I wonder who posted this Rolling Eyes

Not to get personal or anything.

Again, there is a communal obligation to support the schools. Are you demanding your property tax back since you send your son to a private school? You know, all the money from people like you going to support other's children.

Dh's says "we believe in G-d and torah". In talmudic times, a system of "public schools" was instituted, it became a communal obligation to fund the schools. That you have tainas on the fundraising done to fulfill that obligation has no bearing on another person's "family planning".

Last edited by chavamom on Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:34 pm; edited 2 times in total

↑ yummymummy ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:19 pm

Atali wrote:

yummymummy wrote:

Atali wrote:

The answer is that each individual needs to do his or her best to support him or herself to the best of one's ability. This includes planning for how one will support oneself, getting the education or training needed to do so, and reducing expenses as needed. Even with this, many people will end up needing assistance, but hopefully if enough people do this we can build a sustainable model.

I completely agree and believe this is exactly what saw50st8 is saying (50 correct me if I'm wrong) . Of course, the community should support those who despite their best effort are not able to make ends meet or pay full tuition, the problem is when people don't even bother making that effort.

And I have to say, at first I thought we were back in Marina's "argue the other side of your position" thread when I first read your post. It was so precisely what we've been say that it through me for a loop. LOL

Go back and read my other posts. I never contradicted that. My issue was more with the "don't have more kids than you can afford" concept as well as the attitude that seemed to be expressed that if a person made mistakes when they were younger (like not getting job training, etc.) then they shouldn't be supported since they brought the problem on themselves.

As I mentioned earlier I did not read the entire thread from beginning to end. As long as the individual is trying their best not to have to rely on public assistance I have no tainas to them. Of course this does not mean using excuses like "I did not get an education when I was younger". And as to the bolded part, that just brings us right back to the "house of cards" society I described earlier.

↑ yummymummy ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:25 pm

Atali wrote:

amother wrote:

Those who hold this way need to work out a sustainable tuition model (I believe some chasidush poasters mentioned earlier on that this is the case in their communities). Until they do, they can expect their schools to continue to close and their teachers to be paid months late due to lack of funding and for those who are asked to subsidize their lifestyles to expect them in return to limit all their luxuries and make every effort to raise their earnings potential to help cover the costs.

↑ yummymummy ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:29 pm

chavamom wrote:

amother wrote:

Gee, I wonder who posted this Rolling Eyes

I'm not the amother above but - Of course I want my property taxes back! I support politicians who are pro school vouchers, and firmly believe that every yeshivah should take full advantage of every resource states currently offer private schools (text books, therapists, etc.) Unfortunatley those pesky teachers unions keep getting in the way of any meaningful change to the current school system. but this is another thread entirely!

↑ MommyZ ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:40 pm

yummymummy wrote:

chavamom wrote:

amother wrote:

Gee, I wonder who posted this Rolling Eyes

ITA

Tax breaks for all Smile

hycup

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:42 pm

chavamom wrote:

saw50st8, I ran your whole premise of those who have no plan to pay full tuition and yet - *gasp* - keep having kids by my husband and the "being a drain on society". His comment was that you are relying on a totally non-Jewish concept. Much as secular society taxes everyone to provide for schools regardless of if they are using them, the Jewish community has an obligation to provide schools to educate Jewish children in a torahdik fashion. Not everyone has the wherewithal to pay full tuition for "x" number of children - and even if they did, tuition wouldn't cover the expenses of the school. We as a community have an obligation to support the schools (something the chassidish communities seem to be doing a much better job at). Notions of being a "leech" or a "drain on society" not to mention saying "oh, we'd love to have more kids, but we can't afford full tuition" are just......non jewish. Seriously, has anyone asked a rav if this is a valid reason not to have more children? If there are no other factors involved?

I couldn't have said it better.

And just to stir the pot a little more...

amother wrote:

To all those of you who are arguing what is in bold, I presume then that you do not donate to ATIME, Bonei Olam, Ephrat, or Zir Chemed, since if the couples undergoing IVF can't afford their treatments, then they shouldn't be an "unfair" burden on their brothers. After all, Hashem didn't give them children for a reason, and after all so many families who can have children naturally are not having anymore, since they can't afford them so why bring more jewish children into the world that the community can't afford... it is a completely goyeshe concept not to have more children for financial reasons. There is no Jewish concept for this, not in the Torah, gemera, rambam, shulchan aruch... no where!

↑ Atali ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:45 pm

chavamom wrote:

Actually, I think it's that pesky constitution that keeps getting in the way...

The issue isn't clear one way or the other.

I do support vouchers because I think that they will benefit society as a whole by giving public schools competition, etc. However, I think that they will only help the yeshiva system a little bit and not reduce tuition. Because tuition does not cover all of the expenses of the school, tuition would likely stay the same and the voucher money will cover some of the other expenses, like all of the excess administrators.

Call me a cynic, but I don't think vouchers will solve the tuition crisis.

↑ MommyZ

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:55 pm

chavamom wrote:

I'd love for vouchers to be constitutional, in theory, but I have a hard time making that argument. I also think there is a very good chance they could bankrupt entire school districts like the one I live in where a huge number of children are in private schools, either Jewish, Catholic or private prep school

Maybe if public schools had to work to earn the money they were given and show results we'd all be better off as a country. Maybe then more parents would send their kids there.

↑ saw50st8 ↓

Sun, Nov 07 2010, 12:57 pm

If we really believed that schools were a communal responsibility, then we would implement a "tax" on the schools.

We also are required to make sure kids have a Jewish education, not that they are in private schools all day long.

We really should be evaluating the model of how we have schools. Schools near here have implemented a no scholarships for pre-school policy because really, does a kid that age need a Jewish program? NO.

We may want to start focusing on what can the community afford, not what do we wish we could provide.