Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“This is morally wrong but he’s a businessman and makes business decisions. Had he approved all of the claims that were denied the company would either have gone out of business or had to raise premiums much higher than the competition and then gone out of business the next year. It’s wrong, I agree- but that’s how it needs to be in order for it to work.”
YES!!!!!
Though where we differ is if it is “morally wrong” as you agree then lets change it.
It doesnt “need to be” this way. Youve been tricked. It could and should be different.You say it is a business. Yes I get that I don’t blame him. But I think it SHOULDN’T Be a business that is PRECISLEY my point. As I’ve been saying from the beginning. Business leads to morally wrong decisions and outcomes (as you agree). Healthcare as a business doesn’t work.
The way you feel about the Physician who is doing his job same as the CEO. IS how I feel about both of them. Both of them are doing their jobs. Their job is to deny healthcare to people who need it .
“As I mentioned earlier, they cannot raise premiums at their whim and 80% or 85% of premiums must go to providers, any additional premiums collected are returned.”
Percentage alone isnt everything
The Ceo’s and Presidents of insurance companies get paid multiple millions of dollars At one Point Mark Bertoloni received almost 28 million dollars in one year. while running a company that denies claims that could have saved lives. That year I had spent months trying to get a CT scan approved for a patient wit ha suspicious lesion. Renal cell carcinoma is essentially curable if caught early enough before it spreads. by the time it was approved it had spread. (Admittedly there is no way to know for sure if it spread during that delay). The patient is dead now. the few thousand dollars his company should have spent in timely error is a rounding error in his salary. This is but one story I have dozens my colleagues have more.
The truth is I don’t fault him or the company. that is their job they profit by denying healthcare that is there entire business model. I fault the business model.
“As far as the story you mentioned is concerned- I hope that’s the exception and not the norm”
Thanks for reading it.
What I was most outraged about whas the physician who just rubber stamps what nurse had previously denied. what is the poitn of having a physician reviewer if he isnt actually reviewing it?You say you hope its the exception . It is a lot of exceptions close enough to being the norm . It is their business model . Yes they have t pay 85% that still leaves millions and million and millions for their top executives .
DrP
I’d like to apologize for accusing you of lying I did not mean to.
allow me to explain what I meant by backtracking.
With a lot of these “hot button” issues I think the main neukdas hamachlokes gets ignored in favor of more emotinal “fluff” points.
A great example of this is abortion. People get up in extreme cases of incest rape life in danger etc etc. The MAIN question is is fetus a life. Once that is settled most other points fall into place . Yet that point is often ignored, and peopel tend to jump to the extreme cases to make their point.wit hhealthcare the MAIN question in my opinion is what is the government’s role. Once that is settled we can discusss ways to make sure noone takes advantage. but the startign point is there. T ostart with a n extrem example of forcing Mr A to pay for Mr B is silly, Partly becasue that isnt a suggestion anyone is making and because it avoids the main question.
THAT was my point. (I get that you were intentionally starting with an extreme situation and planning to move it towards your specific situation.I didn’t want to leave yo uhanging so I answered your question that no MR A should not be forced to pay for MR B . you then asked abotu a thusand MR A’s paying for a Thousand Mr B’s
To which I replied (using my starting point) that I think EVERYBODY should pay for EVERYBODY. Even if it means raising taxes. Though a 10,000 tax increase was never going to happen.You said it did happen. But this was misleading. I did not call you a liar, but when yo usaid he did “exactly that” this was a mischaracterization The government under Obamacare DID NOT take over healthcare. They did not adopt what I think they should , a “Medicare for all plan” I have no interest in defending Obamacare. I realize that you were caught up on your specific point (which was about Mr. A and B) , and perhaps I was not clear. for that I apologize.
Before going though, please do read the stroy “UnitedHealthcare Tried to Deny Coverage to a Chronically Ill Patient. He Fought Back, Exposing the Insurer’s Inner Workings”
Its not just that it highlights “a few bad apples” it exposes as the title suggests the inner workings of one of the largest healthinsurance companies. Comlete with audio clips, depostions of the Medical directors who are in charge of denieg care (in this case for one, but generally for hundreds a week!!!)DrP
The only point I said wasn’t true was this
““no politiican would dream of raising taxes that much (for the average worker who didnt get a 10 fold increase in salary .”
Do you recall a former President named Barak Hussein Obama? He did exactly that…”That wasn’t true. He didnt Do “EXACTLY THAT”
As you acknowledged in your post. I didnt say you were a liar, becasue you knew what you were saying, I would characterize it as misleading more than lying. I pointed out that what you were saying was “not true” it wasnt and isnt” from my point of view this thread has run its course”
Yep along time ago“I didn’t read the story you mentioned but I’ll agree with you that there can be some bad apples out there just like there is in any industry, that doesn’t mean that the insurance industry is rotten to the core”
you should read it.
I deal with insurance companies multiple times weekly (more often as a provider) . rotten to the core is an understatement“My point was specifically regarding the catastrophic consequences on hard working families caused by the ACA and I explicitly mentioned that.”
Yes I know. I understand that is your point.
“If you were referring to a different point can I respectfully suggest that you mention that ”
Sure! in one of my first comments to you
here it is:
“To be clear I’m not arguing. I think reasonable people can disagree. Your examples though are designed to bias and not really to inform.
If you maintain that it isn’t the Government’s job to get involved whether you worked out and saved (Mr A.) or didn’t (Mr. B) I understand that. I disagree (as to most people Even Trump running as a Republican promised to provide “the best healthcare plan” and Medicare is wildly popular )
But again I think people can disagree as to the role of government…”I am not talking about ACA specifically
rather about general role of govt.“I feel bad for you, it’s definitely not a good situation, but it seems like this issue is caused by your employer and providers,”
Yep, not just me thats the way it is in this country. My employer chooses my plan #Freedom! And I guess I have high premiums, no its not a frum place. Is there anything I can do about it. Again, not really.
AAQ
“Competition is the “thing” that typically stops suppliers from raising prices. Econ 101.”
Problem is after Econ 101 you need to take more advanced courses.
Many basic tenets of Econ 101 do not apply to healthcare.
Take the most basic tenet, that of supply and demand . In Econ 101 you are taught if strawberries are too expensive then people will stop eating strawberries and buy blueberries forcing the price of Strawberries to come down.
If stents become expensive its not like the demand for them (ie Heart attacks) will go down. Furthermore if someone is having a heart attack they can’t exactly shop around for the cheapest care.
Even if it ISN’t an emergency shopping around is almost impossible,. This experiment has been done. One of the most frequent reasons people go to a hospital is for childbirth. OF course there are occasionally complications, but generlaly the stay is pretty routine and predictable. Furthermore you have a 9 month headstart to plan where to give birth. You would think finding he cheapest place is straightforward. Yet it is near impossible. There was an attempt to chaneg this with the Hospital Price Transparency Law signed by President Trump, but it is still near impossible to find this information.
Furthermore there is a Knowledge discrepancy between you and the healthcare system, underming basic economic principals (which assume a level playing field). Yo ucan easily dewtermine the difference between strawberries and blueberries. IT is much harder to determine the difference between getting a few stents vs bypass surgery
DRp
“Again- you’re purposely totally missing the point.”
no, I’m mising YOUR point. yo uare trying to make this about Obamacare and your specific circumstance (not that I blame you)
reread my comments, I am not discussing Obamacare.“Complain to your employer if they keep switching insurers or complain to your doctor if he / she isn’t in enough networks…”
I did but they don’t care. and there is not much I cna do about it other than quit. and a system where you have to quit to keep your doctor is even crzier than finding a new doctor in my opinion.
“Yes, that would get me on board.”
Great We agree then!
Medicare for all!!! Huzzah“If you can’t afford a chasunah, you should not be in shidduchim.”
It is impossible to beleive that a ben Avraham V’Yitzchak could say something so insane..
To say you shouldnt have a chasuna ie just get married in shul with a minyan is one thing (it would be wrong but not crazy) .
But not to be involved in shiddduchim ??? impossible that a frum Jew could suggest such a thing“but my health insurance costs skyrocketed by around $10,000 a year.”
Yes health insurance companies are greedy. I hate them too. Not sure why you blame that on Obama.
If you dont mind my asking what was the change in benefits? Why dd it go up so much?
“Do you recall a former President named Barak Hussein Obama? He did exactly that. It may not have been in income tax or sales tax but it was a forced tax on the hard working makers to pay the premiums for the lazy takers and yes, my salary remained relatively the same but my health insurance costs skyrocketed by around $10,000 a year.”
This is not true
The increase in tax was $695 that is ti . And it ONLY applied if you dindnt have health insurance .“Once you don’t get insurance through your employer you’re not in that same group anymore.”
right , a complelty insane system. so if I change jobs I may need a new doctor. If my employer gets a better deal I and chanegs companies I may need a new doctor it is crazy.
what on Earth does my insirance have to do with my employer“I’ll mention again what I’ve been writing all along. The government should be involved in health care … Not for lazy people who want society to do everything for them.”
Yes youve said that the problem is it isnt the just the “lazy” who get cancer . Read the recent Propublica story “UnitedHealthcare Tried to Deny Coverage to a Chronically Ill Patient. He Fought Back, Exposing the Insurer’s Inner Workings.” The fellow involved doesnt sound lazy.“Again, this will not work until people start taking responsibility for themselves and the ratio of avoidable medical expenses to unavoidable expenses gets flipped.”
and Again if it got you on board, Id support increased oversight on halthier diet/excerices increased regulations on smoking etc“There’s got to be a line drawn here as well. …Where do you draw the line?”
oh fur sure theres a line.
Though probably more of a percentage than a real number. MEaning
If a person makes 100,000 one year then 1,000,000 then next year yes his taxes should go up by > 100,000.you say “How about $10,000 – Possibly. How about $100,000 Definitely not…”
no politiican would dream of raising taxes that much (for the average worker who didnt get a 10 fold increase in salary .However as I mentioned before there is an easy solution
I pay > 11K in premiums my boss pays the same
My boss pays me that money I sto ppaing private company. My taxes go up by 20K I pocket the remaining `3 K win win winAgain. I f you dont think the government should be involved in health care this comment is crazy. As I said that is the starting point
…”the money needs to come from somewhere and we seem to disagree on where it should come from”
Exactly s Ive been saying I think it should be government run with the money coming from taxes, think of an expanded medicare
DrP
“Next question- could the government collect to the extent that a hard working family would lose their house?”
I have a pending answer
to be clear, this isn’t limited to Healthcare
The Government can raise taxes for los of things that fall into their purview. If the government feels they need to raise taxes to better arm Ukraine, even if I don’t care about Ukraine they can do that.
Same thing here IF (big IF, as I said this is THE key to all the other questions) it is the governments role to fund healthcare for all. then they can raise taxes even if an overextended few may lose their houses“Next question- could the government collect to the extent that a hard working family would lose their house?”
No
Though taxes will go up if as a result of that Their mortgage is too expensive then I guess yes.
Of course some would argue that Having gotten a mortgage that leaves Them so vulnerable to a tax increase is irresponsible behavior what we would expect from Mr. B not A. nonetheless even though some would call him irresponsible I still think he should have access to affordable health careDrP
Glad to hear things are doing better
To answer your question
Yes without question We should collect from the A’s (and the B’s) to fund the healthcare of the B’s (and the A’s).The reason for this is I don’t think there is any realistic way to ensure the B’s behave. Nor is there a real way to sepperate health costs based on “irresponsible choices” vs “bad luck” That said, As I mentioned I could be convinced to have more government oversight on behavior to ensure the B’s “behave” perhaps some financial penalty for smoking, not excercising , eating too much meat etc etc .
I cant say I love it, but if this would get you on board I’m in. Is that your suggestion?
DrP
first I’m sorry to hear about your hardship. ACA ws a while go, I hope things have improved .
I still think you are approaching this backwards. As I think the more FUNDAMENTAL question is one on the role of government. But Of course you can approach it the other way as well.
to answer your question, no, no one specific person whould be forced to support another specific person.
What was the next question going to be?
DRP
“..to admit that there are times when the govermnent shouldn’t step in (i.e. when Mr. A and his family would suffer the loss of their house and savings due to the shear utter irresponsibility of Mr. B).”
I don’t think anyone here has ever suggested anything like that. that you needed them to “admit” they wouldn’t support that. T ohave one neighbor “chosen” to sponsor his neighbor ? Thats a made up thing that doesnt happen in any socity and I dont think has ever ben seriously suggested to happen
UJM
Azoi vi di Rebbe hut geteichet: Ut bin ich greit!
DP
“I agree that the government is supposed to help the population”
Great so we fundamentally agree.
We can hammer out nitty gritty details another day, if you want the Government to deter people from smoking, deter people who don’t exercise or eat too much red meat, I can get behind that. It makes me a bit squeamish (I love government oversight but even I have my limits) but if that ‘s what it takes to get you on board, I can get behind increased government oversight on diet/exercise etcUJM
The post is what can be learnt from THIS scenario
“Huh? The child was already safe and sound with the mother before she called Shomrim and the police.”
Exactly thus my bringing up a what if is silly.
And in this case the accused abuser was already set free. Thus your bringing up the “what if..” is equally silly. IT was a crowded room there were witnesses. The system worked.
Again, does it always work? perhaps not. But THIS is a case where it did. This post is lessons learnt from THIS case. Not the collected musings of the artist formerly known as Joseph. THIS case is one that highlights going to the police first is the safest approach. Again is there another case that shows the opposite ? Probably but not this oneAnd what’s this business about you deciding not to ask a Rov since “the Rav didnt care”? You do things, in general, without asking since you don’t trust Rabbonim?”
If I don’t have a question of course! Why not?
AAQ
Happy to help
Explain to your kid that society needs certain things to function. roads is an easy example that he can see. We all need roads, to get to school, work fun places. Even someone how doesn’t have a car needs roads for the bus that he takes.
Even someone who says I’ll never take busses still needs roads for deliveries to his local store, and of course for emergencies like fire department.so how should we pay for roads? We can’t just hope everyone will on their own understand this. Many have trouble with this simple concept. so we have the government in charge they collect taxes from everybody and use that money to pay for things that we all need including roads.
S oalthough it feels free to use roads, they do in fact cost money, this is a cost that is paid by all of us
where it gets a little trickier is what “jobs” fall into the governments purview.
Many believe healthcare is such a thing. Just like we all pay taxes to be used for roads that we as a society need, regardless of how much you personally use the road. Same thing for healthcare we all pay taxes to fund healthcare that we as a society need.now before you get nervous that this would cause taxes to go up by a lot, keep in mind we already pay a ton for healthcare it isn’t “free” I pay 11,000 in premiums my employer (boss) pays the same for me. My taxes could go up by a bit over 20,000 dollars and I’d still end up ahead
hope this helps, Once your kid gets it have him explain it to you.
“I’m not sure if you’ve read any of our conversations before but our opinions are diametrically opposed. I was hoping to start a conversation on common ground”
I did read the conversation but you are approaching the conversation exactly backwards.
THe starting point is a question of role of government. Nitty gritty as to what to do about free loaders who take advantage is important but secondary, since if the goverment has no buisness helping Mr A of course they shouldnt help Mr B. If you think they should help MR A, THEN we can discuss what about Mr B.
The first question ishould be , Is it the role of government to help Mr. A. The model citizen who behaves has his insurance.
I have no interest in trying to change your opinion and outlook. If you think it isnt the govermne’t job, then thats what you think . IT isn’t objectively wrong.
To be clear I’m not arguing
I think reasonable people can disagree.
Your examples though are designed to bias and not really to inform.
If you maintain that it isn’t the Government’s job to get involved whether you worked out and saved (Mr A.) or didn’t (Mr. B) I understand that. I disagree (as to most people Even Trump running as a Republican promised to provide “the best healthcare plan” and Medicare is wildly popular )
But again I think people can disagree as to the role of government.so make your case. no need to make it seem as if Mr B “deserves” it. that is entirely irrelevant. If Mr. B did work out , and never smoked and his insurance won’t cover because xyz. STILL not the governments job to provide
“my question was if the government can take money from one person to pay the medical bills of another person.”
Yes I got that.
I think the answer is obviously yes. (though not from “one person” rather from society).My point is that you set up the question to bias agaisnt Mr B, as if its all his fault and if only he never smoked and worked out more, he would not have had Lung cancer. while Mr A is a hero. Of course that was an question for you to answer.
The reaility though is not like that. S that is my question to you. Should the government have society step in to help Mr A when is insurance doesnt come through (or force his insurance to come through) ?
Dr Peper
While on vacation ponder these not-hypothetical situations:
Use your same Family A and B only instead of Family B getting sick
Mr A suffered a heart attack. Ambulance took rushed him to the hospital a stent was placed and he did well beiung discharged 3 days later. Unfortunately the hospital was out of network. His Three day hospital stay now costs him 250,000. (His fault for not chckign with his insurance while having his heart attack, I mena how lazy can he be!?)
Does the government have the right to put a $250,000 lien on Mr. B’s house and seize the $10 he has in savings in order to save Mr. A?
Or
Mr A. gets diagnosed with Colon Cancer. It is operable but needs to be done quickly. His insurance company denies the claim because they looked bakc at hsi application and he wrote no medical condions yet as a child he had asthma (“grew out of it” and wsn;t on meds for years when filled out form)
Does the government have the right to put a $3000,000 lien on Mr. B’s house and seize the $10 he has in savings in order to save Mr. A?
(spoiler alert they didn’t, and by the time he got insurance company to agree to pay the tumor had spread and was no longer operable)We could go on. but the point is , Health problems are more driven by “bad luck” than by how prepared you are (thats not to say living a healthier life style doesnt play a role)
So it has to work both ways if Mr B should help Mr A then the reverse is true.
Now you could argue no in those cases too bad on Mr A. It’s each man for himself. Consistency is keyUJM
“then this completely innocent Yid could very well still …”
Again “if …could”
And if he did abuse the kid and the mother delayed and asked a shailah and the Rav didnt care then he could abuse others.
My point is “what if’s” are silly. We can always create all sorts of what ifs to satisfy any preconceived opinion. THIS case shows the criminal system worked. does it always work? maybe not. But this case shows if you are concerned for a child’s safety notify the authorities
UJM
“We once again learn, the hard way r’l, the valuable lesson against Mesira. An innocent Yid was falsely accused and reported to the goyim. …”
how did we learn that?
don’t we see the opposite?
He was falsely accused and walked home free that same day? You say “Something that could have potentially …” yeah but it didn’t. how do you see the opposite? IF anythign we see the system works. If concerned for a child’s wellfare report first. If in fact he was innocent he’ll walk that same day.“What saddens me isn’t just that people think that the YWN Coffeeroom is a place for a Halachic discussion ,”
The exact opposite saddens me.
Every silly topic is fair conversation. But chas veshalom some Torah should be discussed all of a sudden “well meaning” people come running No no No Torah allowed!don’t worry no torah here just dreidel
If you are genuinly worried about the “overwhelming Am Haaratzus” share, contribute correct the mistakes
Avira
As far as I’m aware the first amendment protects you from government compelled speech not employer
Whitecar
its a bad assuption an employee can make almost anything hhe/she wants a requirement. unless it discriminates based on a “protected ” group so cant have you profess belief in yoshke that would discriminate based on religion(same for gender etc. Unless you argued that putting in pronouns was against your religion.whitecar
“If any employer makes you, I think you have grounds to sue.”
under what grounds?
Avira
youre dodging a bit on JO.
Yes not everything was run by the moetzes, I said that. But future moetzes members worte for it. the Novominsker, Rav Elya Svei.“It could be the question never dawned on them to ask.”
you are probably right, I don;t think anyone had a hava amina that there was somethign wrong with picturs of Tznius women (there once was a complaint for a picture deemed non-tznius was a small picture in piece of dress from around the world ).
You discuss the growth of Torah Judaim, which is great but not the subject at hand.The subject is kedusa
“Most frum jews had a TV when the JO was at its peak; they were seeing women, and untznius women, everyday. Not to mention the mixed kiddushin, etc..”
So yes our generation has greater kedusha than theirs (less exposed to TV etc). thats fair
thanks for the replyIf you dont mind I asked a third question above
(labeled third question)Avira
“The simple answer…” But that isnt what Rav Acha said. Rav Acha said that he had no hirhurim whatsoever from it. Or put another way she didnt make a roshem it was like holding a beam, he didnt notice her
If I understand your correctly NOT having a yetzer haraah, ie viewing a kallah as a beam is LOWER than havign a yetzer harah. It means less kedusha. Im’ asking on his “beam” response not on his action. If he said “I have a huge yetzer hara for her – bigger than yours! but bmkom mitzvah its muttar” or somehting like that , I’d hear. but that wasnt his reply.Avira
Second question
you say “The holier one is, the more sensitive he is to all matters of kedushah and shmiras aynayim.”
The Jewish Observer had pictures of Women, as you must know it was published under the auspices of Agudas Yisroel. I doubt the moetzes was too involved in the month to month publishing, but it is hard to imagine they opposed the practice.
Not to mention many Rabbanim did regulalry contribute .Was Torah True Judaism tm on a lower level of kedusha then than today?
Avira
Third question
Most people have zero yetzer harah when they see pictures of men. If someone does, does that mean he is on a higher level of kedusha?
I’m guessing you’ll say “No that isn’t a normal yetzer harah” (I’m sorry if that isnt what you would say I don;t mean to put words in your mouth just seems like an obvious distinction – in which case ignore rest of post and if you could provide your own answer please )
Then though that means that a yetzer harah for 10 year old girls is normal (otherwise your story with the chofetz chai is weird)
So it really just comes down to what is and isnt considered normal
Is it normal to have yetzer harah when see pinky?
Sure if a person looks intending to get hannah of course thats assur, but stam azaoi there is no issur. So is it a higher level to be the type of person who gets hanaah from pinkys ? That seems a bit pathologic. Of course if that IS a person’s yetzer harah he needs to deal with it. but if it isnt to say he has a lower level of kedusha seems funny .So this ends up being the fellow who draws targets then shoots arrows.
Whatever you dont want to exclude is an abnormal yetzer harah and NOT a sign of kedusha if you struggle with it and whatever you want to ban anyone who doesnt struggle with it is less kadosh.
There is no objective standard men? children? babies? Old women? pinkys? you just get to decide what is and isnt normalAvira
Rav Acha would carry Kallah on his shoulders, when talmidim asked if they could do it he replied if she seemd to them “like a beam” (Kesubos 17a) Was he on a lower level of kedusha than they ?
Halevia
I’m not big on telling people what to dobut I have to say I winced at your calling tzedaka a “a money receptacle.”
And while his view is a few steps away from Communism. yours is close to “eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die”As an aside ‘v heard the OP’s idea from Rabbi Resiman many times. I’ve also heard him say that Eretz Yisroel is Artzeinu hakedosha, not a place to go on a vacation
Vyesh leyashev
I love learnig new things!
The Hellenists tried to benefit tzsedaka?
RE
Pashut Pshat is he was told “Don’t ask me such highly-invasive personal questions.”
YO
2 points
1) You open with “Why do I ask this [Most Important Issue of 2022] for many threads?”
This question is not smart, you ask it alot even though it has been pointed out to you that the question isnt smart.
IF you choose to ask it again and again you should expect put downs2) “the Loshon hora, the judging.”
You are pretty bad at this. For example on the kashrus thread you lied and claimed “50% of the decisions, operations and Hashkafa of most hashgachas have nothing to do with Halacha.”
when you were called out on your lie you backed it up with two claims, one which wasn’t against halacha, and another which isn’t true. when this was pointed out you ignored iter
for sure its terrible that many Republicans ignore Trump’s outrageous actions.
I didn’t mean to dismiss thatI’m expressing shock that 40% of Democrats support/unsure of Trumps’ meeting.
I don’t think there is ANY other thing Trump did that would have 40% of Democrats’s supportTHIS is where they say, maybe he’s right, or at least I’m unsure.
Of the 2 I find that the more shocking statistic
I had the opposite reaction on the poll
It says a bit more about Trump than antisemitism.
It is no secret Trump is a polarizing figure. As Trump said “I could shoot a person on 5th avenue and I wouldn’t lose any voters” There is no doubt that this is true (“any” is an exaggeration he wouldn’t lose many voters) Not becasue Republicans support murder, but becasue they like Trump.
The 73% of republicans who support or are unsure about the visit aren’t anti-Semitic per se, they are so blinded by the cult of Trump that they come up with excuses, he didnt know etc etc .
not that this is good, obviously a cult of personality isnt healthy, but I’m not sure it is anti-Semitic per se.What is shocking is 40% !!! of Democrats who generally oppose anything Trump says or does. on THIS they support or are unsure ?!!!??
that is wild!Avira
appreciation takes different formsI didn’t understand the question so much as referring to the being alone part (perhaps I misunderstood it). More to the self value. As you mentioned “A single man can join a learning program or get himself involved in community activities” While no doubt hard, a single man can earn a name for himself as the baal koreh, he can give a shiur, daven, get a “position” as a gabai. There are a lot of ways to “make a name for himself” of course not everybody is capable of those, these are but a few examples. my point is there are more ways readily available to contribute to the community for men than there are for women
Though the being alone part too is a little easier for men since by going to shul/shiurim they can develop a community, which of course lends itself to meals
ujm
“ubiq: What would be YOUR answer/solution to that unanswered question you quoted?”
I’m not sure that’s why its a hard question.. The rest of the questions I could have answered thats why I didnt list them as hard ones
Avira
“Why ask a question which is a pasuk? Hashem says to the serisim and the akarah that if they keep shabbos, they will have a yad veshem in My house.”
Its absolutely fantastic that you feel accomplished by keeping Shabbos. that is great and we are all very proud of you, and impressed by your tzidkus
Sadly some people arent on your high level, or they take keeping shabbos as a given, or they are content with the yad vashem they will leave, but feel like they are not appreciated NOW .“The question sounds like it’s implying that we should change hashkofa to suit singles.”
maybe that’s the answer (see why its hard). That wasn’t the way I understood it at all
I thought there was one but it was ignored.
The question was (paraphrasing) “Given that so much emphasis in our community is placed on getting married/building a family, how can older single women be given a sense of belonging”
To be clear the question was a two part question the first part was on the shidduch crises, the second part was the above the answered the first part not the second. I’m not suggesting that it was an intentional omission/bypass
Sholomd
I reread your comment
You wrote it as a reply to me, but I’m not sure where/how it relates to what I said.I never suggested every body would agree.
I never suggested that there arent those that might want to change Rashi’s postition as the peshat (that is literally whathe kol koreh says) how does saying they are yerushalmi yidden/satmar change that?In fact in one of their repleis the authors claimed the title “pershuto shel mikra” was NOT their title but the publisher changed it ….
AAQ
“Did Rashi mean to foreclose our thinking about Chumash?”
Interesting thought experiment. Though it doesn’t matter what Rashi wanted what matters, is “our mesora as handed down by our rebbeim”“Another option..”
Sure! by all means that is another option. by all means go for it. Hopefully you can acknowledge their right to hold by their option
Sholomd
“Yup, sure sounds suspicious….Glad you caught on something that their own community missed!!”I have no idea what you are saying.
It am not arguing on your notion is something/someone behind the ban that may have ulterior motives. nor am I arguing that the banners are correct.“The letter seems to be intentionally inexplicable.”
If you found it inexplicable, it may not have been meant for you.
Growing up with a similar mindset, I understood it completely.
As a kid chumash Rashi were drilled into up. In second grade we learnt Chumash Rashi till Sheini, third grade till Shlishi etcTo this day I pretty much remember most Rashis at least until Chamihsi having learnt them again year after year (excluding the “summer parshiyos”)
After getting married I lived in a small out of town community for a few years. This was my first real exposure to, “non-black hat” groups. One fellow gave a Chumash shiur before Shcharis on Shabos, that I sometimes attended. He asked a question “Why does Yaakov seemingly brag to Eisav that he has Oxen, donkeys, sheep slaves, wouldn’t that upset Eisav more (This wasnt actually the question, I’m using an example from this week’s parsha) Different people gave their own answers and interpretations.
I was a bit puzzled, when he asked me for my thoughts I said, a bit perplexed, “I don’t understand the question, Rashi explains it” he replied, “I know Rashi has a peshat, what do you say” To which I replied “It doesn’t matter what I say, Rashi already commented”now, I’m not convinced that his way is wrong per se. but the authors of the kol koreh certainly do, THAT is the community they are coming from
5782 was also Dec 4
I’m not sure why we should ignore old postnoM
“I’m not getting your differentiation.”
i’m not sure what you mean by “differentiation”
all I am saying is before commenting on something (especially before arguing with it “This ban is honestly ridiculous”) it is important to understand itjackk quoted from the kol koreh:
“And their intention is clear with the aim of replacing Rashi’s interpretation – which has always been the foundation of education and Judaism , and especially for the young people of the flock”
(I believe this is his translation but I read the original, and it is a fair translation.)What the Kol Koreh protests is “replacing Rashi’s interpretation” – particularly as peshat. NOT using other interpretations. Of course there are other Rishonim that offer different peshatim not to mention different levels of interpretation. The kol koreh says those haven’t been accepted by “our mesora” as the way to learn chumashi
Thus it is insulting to say “Rabbeinu bachya writes… Ibn ezra writes… . Ramban in last weeks parsha says …. Seforno says… Daas zekeinim mebaalei hatosfos write…”
Yes they know* they maintain that Rashi IS PESHAT and no other Rishon/pirush should supersede that as peshatNot that it shouldn’t be learnt** rather it shouldn’t be viewed as peshat. thus saying “So if that is true, then other pashtanim are not allowed to be studied?” Shows a progound lack of understanding of the issue at hand.
OF course they can be learnt but not as peshat .
Yes one hundred percent if you were to start a cheder and suggest teaching children chumash with Rambn/Ibn Ezra/ Rashbam etc instead of Rashi. Yes absolutly they would oppose that .
That is not the same as saying “other pashtanim are not allowed to be studied”You say “Rashi’s intention does not seem to have been pshat”
B’seder so you disagree with the kol koreh (I do too) and say Rashi isnt really peshat. don’t worry Rishonim say this too.
but understand the position before you disagree wit hit* I ask you do you really think they don’t know.? They never realized that Rishonim wrote differently than Rashi? That chumashim are available with other Rishonim?
** They also mention that there are some misinterpreations of rishonim, but that is debatable, and ok so correct them
“So if that is true, then other pashtanim are not allowed to be studied?”
No. nobody suggested that. Drash is great, so is remez. by all means go for it.
Just don’t confuse Derash with PEshat.
The argument is that Rashi IS peshat. Rashbam, Kli Yakar , Seforno, Rabbi Frand on the Parsha all great! but don’t call them Peshat“Did you read the kol korei??”
I did, I don’t think you did.
do you think the signatories haven’t seen a mikraos gedolos chumash, and aren’t aware that there are other pirushim available? do you think they meant they should all be thrown out.Its one thing to think they are wrong, it is quite another to think they are stupid.
They are aware that there are chumashim out there with non-Rashi explanations , they are aware that Rishonim give different explantions than Rashi at times
The Kol Koreh is against bringing other perushim, keneged Rashi AS PESHAThope that helps
red sock
I don’t understand. why are you repeating the same point over and over.
It was silly the first time it is still silly.NOBODY said all explanations other than Rashi should be “ripped out”
This is a silly strawman that you made up, as was pointed out to you