Comments on: Two Visits

By: P. Konstam

P. Konstam — Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:37:20 +0000

In what way is this different than all allocation dilemmas - why spend money on the sick who will evenutally pass rather than on the young with a life ahead of them, why spend money on the hopeless poor rather than on those who can develop a trade, why spend money on old age homes rather than kirov rechokim?

By: David Brand

David Brand — Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:53:50 +0000

I’m not sure I buy into the “scarcity of resourses” idea. In some cases, community growth and the growth of institutions is the answer, rather than the problem. Take the case of a large midwestern community that was stagnant for years. Add one kollel, that people complained would drain “scarce” resources away from chinuch. The result was that very different than the naysayers’ predictions. The growth of the kollel enhanced the entire community and stimulated even more growth. By bringing more people in, the community and its resources both expanded. My point here is that I don’t think that people should look at a new institution as a competetor which could potentially reduce income. Quite the opposite. Growth is good for everyone.

As to the issue of why day schools are somehow lost in the shuffle of other tzedakos that appear more “glitzy”, I take issue with Dr. Shick’s assertion that chinuch is a “consumer product”. Everyone knows that there are families who have tuition charges alone that are way above their ENTIRE income, and that it would be unrealistic to equate full price for tuition to full price for food. Therefore, there are substantial differences between tuition and other consumer products. However, there is a ring of truth to the notion that day schools are somehow less “cool”, particularly for younger donors who do not yet pay tuition of their own, but are ready to step into one of the many new “young leadership” roles prepared for them by many non-chinuch charities. I guess I would question the day schools themselves (and I have) about why they don’t have a young leadership division. I would also ask why they don’t focus on alumni the way high schools do. The difference, as has been pointed out, is in how these mosdos think about their marketing program. Inasmuch as we have a community chiuv to support day schools, the schools themselves have a responsibility to market themselves to potential donors the same way other charities do.

Not every day school is in the same situation. At my Alma Mater, Torah Academy in Minneapolis, the fund raising is led by my capable friend, JB Bornstein. His creativity is evident by the amount of community involvement that he gets, even when those involved do not send their children to the school. It is possible to be successful at getting people involved. We just have to try harder.

By: P. Konstam

P. Konstam — Thu, 17 Feb 2005 02:18:17 +0000

The special ed child may become a ‘goy gomur’, a tragedy, and separately, a tragedy on top of a tragedy for the parents.
The Day School child will suffer in peripheral programs - also a terrible outcome, but on a different scale.

By: Moishe Potemkin

Moishe Potemkin — Wed, 16 Feb 2005 22:10:51 +0000

Two quick points:

1) I’m not sure that the chesed/chinuch dichotomy is accurate. When the gemara notes that R’ Papa repeated his lessons 400 times, it uses that as a point about teaching, not about being nice.

2) Part of this equation, as Joel Rich suggests, hinges on the scarcity of resources. Perhaps we should contemplate whether individuals’ mesiras nefesh automatically implies an appropriate level of sacrificing the resources of the klal. This is obviously an easier point to make regarding Borsalinos or massive houses than regarding kollel, but the question stands for both.

By: 1rabbi

1rabbi — Wed, 16 Feb 2005 21:52:36 +0000

I can appreciate the dilemma. As one who has taught both special needs students in day school and congregational religious school, I have found the exprerineces rewarding and have enjoyed waatching the children grow physically, emotionally and spiritually. I encourage you to find a way to include the speical needs students.

By: Eliezer Barzilai

Eliezer Barzilai — Wed, 16 Feb 2005 20:49:52 +0000

If individuals set aside their tzedakah budget for the year and sat down to allocate it ahl pi seichel and ahl pi halacha and ahl pi hadrachas Chachamim, the issue you raise would be more exigent. When I see people giving for tsunami relief because their hearts hurt to see the suffering, and none of their funds go to hungry Jews who need help, I must say that seichel and halacha are not big factors. Schools closing for lack of funds is tragic, but says more about effective fund raising than improper allocation. One Rov builds a edifice that occupies a square block, while another, the tzadik and talmid chochom, who lacks people skills, grumbles in his dingy, shabby shtiebel. It’s all marketing and PR.

By: joel rich

joel rich — Wed, 16 Feb 2005 16:53:51 +0000

Economics is often defined as the study of the allocation of scarce resources to unlimited demsnds. Some societies do this via government fiat, others by the free market. The interesting question is how does HKB”H want us to do this? Is there only one way or are there equally acceptable approaches(shikul hadaat.) How we have answered this question in the past and will answer it in the future says a lot about our priorities and how we as individuals and as a clal prioritize them.
KT
Joel Rich