Prioritizing Tuition (Split from School Closing)

Chayalle ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 7:21 am

Mama Bear wrote:

I love how the bugaboo is the be all and end all of all arguments... ladies, no one in the frum community pushes a bugaboo for the name of it, just because it's the most comfortable stroller ever. easy to push, lasts and lasts and lasts. Heck, I'm starting to put money into a petty cash envelope now, I'm not even pregnant, but I want to save up some money that when I have another baby, I can fargin myself a bugaboo, because it's way easier to push than a graco or maclaren. and easier to shlep up a flight of stairs.

there are more expensive strollers than bugaboo, it's not even the most expensive stroller.

if a grandparent makes a 1-time payment to her grandchild's yeshiva of $700,that'll cover, what - 1 month? 2? and the new baby will still go around in an old wobbly stroller.

I really dont understand how a couple owning a bugaboo is such an end-of-the-world thing.

hey, we dont have a car. or a house. or plans to buy one. But yes, I want the most comfortable, easy to push stroller, since I'll be walking everywhere.

It's all a matter of orientation. I found the bugaboo (tried out my neighbors) to be cumbersome, clumsy, and doesn't wheel well at all. I guess I'm not used to pushing such a big awkward thing, because I'm accustomed to lightweight.

Whatever. I think there's a big difference between taking a discount in tuition because you have more kids, then because you need to have the best most comfortable most high class of everything. You can get a decent carriage, for example, that is of high quality and wheels well and will last and last and is comfortable (like a Maclaren - mine was used for three kids and then was stollen) without spending upwards of $600. I have nothing against people buying luxury items if they are also paying tuition, but I do think this is an area where priorities are mixed up.

When I had to shell out $$$ in order to have my 3rd child, I didn't think what right do I have to spend my $$ on what modern medicine has to offer me, when that money should go to my children's school as tuition dollars. But I haven't taken a vacation since Shana Rishona (and that was a simple one at that). When my brother got married overseas, I was the only one to go to the wedding, without DH and my children, because we could not afford it and I wouldn't put off paying tuition in order to take the whole family.

↑ Chayalle ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 7:25 am

saw50st8 wrote:

chavamom wrote:

chaimsmom wrote:

chavamom wrote:

Raise your hand if there is someone saw50st8 hasn't offended yet.

raising my hand

Yes, well your neighborhood leech will remember that. I think it's highly problematic to call anyone who can't afford $10K/kid to educate their kid a "leech". But hey chaimsmom, nice to see you around.

Not quite.

If you can't afford tuition, and don't come up with a plan to be able to, that's called being a leech.

I don't think Yeshiva education is only for the rich. But I do think if you can't afford full price, you should be placing as much money as possible into tuition. Or coming up with a cheaper alternative.

Remember, the concept of full time yeshiva education for the entire Jewish population is relatively new.

So is the concept of running water, indoor plumbing, electricity, and so on. So maybe you should head down to your nearest reservoir and save on your water bill, in order to save $$ for tuition.

Since it's the norm in most communities today to give your children a Yeshiva education, IMVHO it's a fixed expense that you have to do your best to deal with much as you have to feed your family. It's a basic need. Yes, live in a community where it's a bit cheaper, but you can't just do away with it. And it's not just for the rich. And I don't think rich people have a bigger right to more children than do their less wealthy counterparts.

↑ the world's best mom

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 7:27 am

TwinsMommy wrote:

Count me in as someone who had kids when we would have been able to pay full tuition, but after we had the kids, my husband lost his job. He's employed now, but not making what he was making. So..... we've got our kids in public school for the next few years (they need special ed anyway). If we're able to mainstream them into dayschool down the road, at this point it looks like we won't be able to pay full tuition, so we're done having kids. We'll ask nicely for a tuition break--- if we can't get one, we're not going to rant and rave about it. Public school has been good to us so far. I hope things change, we're able to pay full tuition for our 2 kids, and have more, but at this point it doesn't look likely.

"there are many valid reasons to have fewer children but saying you can't afford them is not one of them". I disagree. Because we will likely be leeches come tuition time, it's not our right to have more children at this time. Those who are paying full tuition and are self supporting can have all the kids they want.

If you think it's wrong to have more kids than you can pay tuition for, then when your kids are ready for dayschool, maybe you should put them up for adoption. After all, it would be terrible for you to have to join the leech society.

Oh, and make sure that their adoptive parents have enough money set aside to pay for the adoption, and tuition for the rest of their school years. Because any kids who cause their parents to need a scholarship should not exist. They are Assur.

Don't bother telling me that I'm being ridiculous. I'm only echoing your feelings, so it must be true.

↑ Chayalle ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 7:29 am

HappyHome wrote:

HY, I don't have an answer, I hear you...I shouldn't judge anybody, but I thought this thread was about lack of priorities in tuition, I would argue, that if someone is walking around pushing a bugaboo and driving a 2 year old car and is not paying tuition that somewhere the priorities are not right. And like I said before, someone living this kind of lifestyle and getting a tuition break, should be ashamed to tell anyone that they have a break, it's something they should keep to themselves. A friend of mine once told me that her close friend doesn't pay tuition and spent over 300 dollars on upsherin pictures for her son, does that make sense? Of course, I shouldn't be judging...

ITA.

It's not a matter of judging...but if we are talking priorities, then if your child's education is important to you and you are not paying the amount of tuition you should, then spending on luxury items indicates where your priorities lie.

kitov ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 7:33 am

Dear GOD,

Clearly, the posters on imamothers have it all figured out. Good educations and degrees and family planning are all one needs to be prosperous and successful these days, and afford a good yeshivah education. So please don't be mad at me for enrolling my kids in public school, where there's no tuition, and accept my reasoning for buying treif, it's a lot cheaper.

Bez"h, if You will help me do Your will, I will start college, earn a degree, find a good job, and will then start my kids' jewish education and keep kosher.

For now, I don't want to be a leech.

Thanks for understanding,

Kitov

↑ Chayalle ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 7:40 am

kitov wrote:

↑ Ruchel ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 7:42 am

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

That. But go tell them... they're adamant it is so.

It's also a lot of a mentality thing. Those who think every child needs his own bike/tv/x box/room and at least one out of school activity may be right that they should not have more if they think it's almost abuse not to do it...

↑ amother ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 7:59 am

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

Saw -- who are you to say that they aren't trying to pay as much as possible? Not everyone is paying bare minimum tuition. I don't know about many schools, but my son's school and my hometown's schools look at your financial situation and give a tuition judgement based on that. If you can pay more than someone else, you're asked to.

Happy -- yes, priorities are messed up, but not all grandparents are of the same hashkafah as their children's home...but also, a bugaboo is a one time expense that will last a lot of children (say a Graco lasts 2 kids, tops... and say someone has 8 kids. 4*150 == 600. A Bugaboo for 650 which pushes easier and will last all the kids might be a sound investment. Not that I go for one, but I can hear the logic.) The car at the end of the lease might have been the best option for obtaining a vehicle. Either way, you can't judge gifts.
Or anything for that matter.

Do you really think that someone that would go out today and buy a Bugaboo (the "Best" carriage out there now) will still be using that Bugaboo after 8 more kids (let's assume 10 years from now)? I'm guessing by then they would want to buy the $1000 Shmugaboo that is the much newer and improved Bugaboo. 10 years ago the Perrego was considered a great carriage, this is how life goes.

↑ Hashem_Yaazor ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 8:03 am

Bugaboo is not the "best" carriage out there now. Either way, some will, some won't.

YES, if they are the type to have the fanciest shmanciest trends, they are prioritzing wrong.
My point is that you can't come as an outsider and see someone has something "trendy" or expensive and decide their priorities are wrong, because maybe, just maybe, it was the decision that was right for them or got it through some other means.
Let's say someone drives a Honda because it's their only vehicle and they cannot be stuck without a car if they got a cheaper brand that would inevitably spend more time in the shop or because the seating options were what they needed for their family. Should they not get a tuition break? They bought their Honda, not because it was more shpitzy, but because it was more practical. That means in 10 years, they'll be driving their Honda even though it has gone through 2-3 design changes and people will know it's an old car. But they won't care.

shlomitsmum

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 8:34 am

amother wrote:

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

OMG Shmugaboo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rolling Laughter

↑ Barbara ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 9:00 am

chavamom wrote:

HappyHome wrote:

I'm sure those parents want their grandchildren in yeshiva, where are their priorities? I guess in this case I would question the grandparents priorities, I'm not sure...

Uh, that's a really HUGE assumption.

We don't get tuition assistance, but I think my dad would pay us to take DS OUT of day school. At my nephew's bar mitzvah a few years back, I was harangued about day school by my whole family. The only person supporting me was my SIL's sister ... who sent all of HER kids to Catholic school! (AND, of course, is Catholic.)

↑ amother ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 9:21 am

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

And they need a new house because it will need less repairs than an older house, doesn't end.

↑ Barbara

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 9:51 am

chocolate moose wrote:

We all pay taxes which help support the public school system. If that money went to our yeshivas, I'm sure that our kids would benefit on several levesl, not the lease of which is that they would get a better English education - the schools would be forced to teach at a certain standard.

Besides the fact that our teachers would finally be paid !!!

Our children are all entitled to attend public school. The fact that we choose that they not do so is not the government's problem.

In any case, let's not forget that tax dollars do support our schools. The public pays for a large chunk of the costs of secular textbooks for our schools; that's why we have to fill out those forms every year. Tax dollars also pay for therapies our kids receive and, in NY, for transportation.

In any case, remember, if Jewish schools get money, EVERY religious school will be entitled as well.

↑ MommyZ ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 10:34 am

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

I have three and if by the time financial circumstances change it's too late for me to have more so be it. I don't think it's my obligation to have more then I have already as I have a heter for birth control that is open ended. If I have another one at some point that's fine and if I don't that's fine too.

↑ MommyZ ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 10:37 am

Ruchel wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

Ruchel dear I don't believe any of that. I have 3 kids in a smallish two bedroom one bathroom apartment. We don't have any luxuries or go on vacations. I still can't afford another baby now nor do I have the time or energy for another baby. Just because I could have a baby every 2-3 years naturally doesn't mean that I should or that I need to.

↑ Mirabelle ↓

Fri, Nov 05 2010, 10:40 am

MommyZ wrote:

Raisin wrote:

I think it is absolutely terrible that people feel they can't afford more then 2 kids. Sad

who knows, financial circumstances could change and by then it could be too late to have kids.

MommyZ, we will most probably be limiting the amount of kids we will be having davkah because of money, mostly for day school tuition. If we didn't need to worry about day school, we would be just fine.
I'm not nearly as at peace with this as you are. It's something that DH andI talk about daily. I find it quite sad (for us) that if money wasn't an issue we know that we would want more kids.